
<?phpxml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" 
xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
>
<channel>
<title>Haaze.com / dadujw / All</title>
<link>http://www.haaze.com</link>
<description>Test Web 2.0 Content Management System</description>
<pubDate>Tue, 10 May 2011 07:10:05 +0000</pubDate>
<language>en</language>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[Google Image Search now lets you sort by subject]]></title>
<link>http://www.haaze.com/story.php?title=google-image-search-now-lets-you-sort-by-subject</link>
<comments>http://www.haaze.com/story.php?title=google-image-search-now-lets-you-sort-by-subject</comments>
<pubDate>Tue, 10 May 2011 07:10:05 +0000</pubDate>
<dc:creator>dadujw</dc:creator>
<category>Mobile &amp; Electronics</category>
<guid>http://www.haaze.com/story.php?title=google-image-search-now-lets-you-sort-by-subject</guid>
<description><![CDATA[Google Image Search now lets you sort by subject.(Credit:Google)Those people who use Google's Image Search to find photos and graphics should now have an easier time zeroing in on just the right ones.Unveiled yesterday, a new feature in Google Image Search now lets you sort your images by subject. So instead of seeing just a random, haphazard gallery of images, you can organize them so that each row displays images specific to a certain topic or area.As Google's official blog points out, the new feature can come in handy especially when you're struggling to find the right words or phrase to describe the image you're seeking. By choosing to sort images by subject, you can use a general word or term in your query, and then let Google suggest the right images from among a list of topics.For example, let's say you run an image search for the world &quot;apple.&quot; Without the sorting feature, you'll see just a scattered collection of images, including real apples, apple pies, the Apple corporate logo, and even pictures of iPhones and iPads. But if you select the option to sort by subject, which you'll find in the upper right corner, you'll instead see each row devoted to a specific topic related to apples. One row may show photos of red apples, another clipart of cartoon apples, another Apple's corporate logo, and another photos of aMac computer.If one particular subject strikes your fancy, you can click on the &quot;more like this&quot; link that appears in the top right corner of the row to display even more images devoted to that subject.Google also suggests using the sort-by-subject feature to explore different categories or varieties of a general topic. So, searching for the word &quot;dog&quot; displays photos of different breeds of dogs in each row, including collies, dachshunds, beagles, and Great Danes.The sort-by-subject feature not only helps you narrow your search, but it presents the image results in a cleaner, more organized display, potentially making it easier to more quickly find just the right image.Google says the new feature will gradually make its way around the world to every language over the next week.<br/><br/>0 Vote(s) ]]></description>
</item>

<item>
<title><![CDATA[Amazon's Bezos, VCs back nuclear fusion start-up]]></title>
<link>http://www.haaze.com/story.php?title=amazons-bezos-vcs-back-nuclear-fusion-start-up</link>
<comments>http://www.haaze.com/story.php?title=amazons-bezos-vcs-back-nuclear-fusion-start-up</comments>
<pubDate>Thu, 05 May 2011 07:10:44 +0000</pubDate>
<dc:creator>dadujw</dc:creator>
<category>Eco</category>
<guid>http://www.haaze.com/story.php?title=amazons-bezos-vcs-back-nuclear-fusion-start-up</guid>
<description><![CDATA[When it comes to energy technology, nuclear fusion is the ultimate &quot;swing for the fences.&quot; Now at least one fusion venture is getting serious attention from start-up investors.British Columbia-based General Fusion said today that it received US$19.5 million in a series B funding from venture capital and Canadian government funds. Among them was Bezos Expeditions, the personal investment fund of Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos.A sketch of the nuclear fusion generator being designed by start-up General Fusion.(Credit:General Fusion)The funding, spotted by Toronto-based journalist Tyler Hamilton, will give General Fusion the money to complete the first phase of its planned development program. The company's target is to commercialize its &quot;magnetized target fusion&quot; technology within the decade, CEO Doug Richardson said in a statement.Today's nuclear power plants use nuclear fission, or splitting atoms to release energy in the form of heat. Nuclear fusion, which occurs on the sun, is when two hydrogen atoms are heated to the point where they can fuse to form helium, a process which releases huge amounts of energy. In theory, that energy can be converted into electricity.Research on nuclear fusion has been going on for decades and many people consider any practical use of fusion decades away. General Fusion's approach is a combination of existing methods, which it says will allow it to create a generator that will harness the heat from fusion to make electricity as power plants do today using cheaper methods than existing fusion research efforts.According to a technical description on the company's Web site, General Fusion's process creates plasma, a state of matter where electrons move freely from the rest of atoms, of certain forms of hydrogen. That plasma, which is similar to a gas, is then heated in a magnetic field to 1 million degrees using a bank of capacitors, which produces a form of plasma in the shape of a doughnut.That plasma is then compressed from a shock wave using pneumatic pistons surrounding a central sphere, causing the fusion reaction. The company also has a process for capturing the heat from the reaction. Given a significant amount of energy is needed to run the operation, General Fusion's Web site notes that one of the main technical challenges of nuclear fusion in general, once a reaction can be repeated, is creating a net output of energy.Even with these long-standing technical issues and doubts over fusion's commercial viability, the investment is a sign of confidence in the company still at the early stages of product design. Other investors included Cenovus Energy and existing investors Chrysalix Energy Venture Capital, GrowthWorks, Braemar Energy Ventures, Entrepreneurs Fund, Business Development Bank of Canada (BDC), and SET Venture Partners.<br/><br/>0 Vote(s) ]]></description>
</item>

<item>
<title><![CDATA[Apple's Jobs to rivals: You're nerds, we're not]]></title>
<link>http://www.haaze.com/story.php?title=apples-jobs-to-rivals-youre-nerds-were-not</link>
<comments>http://www.haaze.com/story.php?title=apples-jobs-to-rivals-youre-nerds-were-not</comments>
<pubDate>Wed, 02 Mar 2011 08:10:34 +0000</pubDate>
<dc:creator>dadujw</dc:creator>
<category>Mobile &amp; Electronics</category>
<guid>http://www.haaze.com/story.php?title=apples-jobs-to-rivals-youre-nerds-were-not</guid>
<description><![CDATA[What was most significant about today'siPad 2 launchWas it that Apple put the spec into spectacular Was it that Steve Jobs appeared onstage, dressed as always, in order to emphasize and sell the importance of the launchOr was the most significant element of all not about the thinness of the iPad 2, but about Apple's view about the essential denseness of its competitionJobs put it in these words: &quot;It's in Apple's DNA that technology alone is not enough. It's technology married with liberal arts, humanities, that yields us the result that makes our heart sing. And nowhere is that more true than in these post-PC devices. And a lot of folks in thistablet market are rushing in and looking at this as the next PC.&quot;For those involved in the creation, production, and development of tech products, it's so easy to let the mind fall into the chasms that please the most: the numbers, the power, the speed, the essential gadgetry of the machine.(Credit:James Martin/CNET)Apple, though, believes, and with some justification, that it simply isn't in the gadget business. It sees its competitors precisely as the nerds, the geeks, but not the romantics. It sees them as more prepared to play with their gadgets for the gadgets' sake, rather than to enhance their experience of life somewhere out there. These are not the guys who will get the girl.At the same time, it sees its own business as bringing people closer to a better life experience, whatever that might mean for them. The Garage Band demonstration, for example, brought many nearer to the idea that they can create music, even if they can't read a note.The contrast couldn't be clearer between Jobs' presentation of the iPad 2 and the recent Verizon ad for the Motorola Xoom. While the former emphasized lightness, music, and movies, the latter talked gyroscopes.At yesterday's TED conference, The New York Times' David Brooks offered his views about how even those who create social policy forget that what defines humans simply isn't terribly rational.He said: &quot;We have inherited a view of human nature based on the idea that reason is separate from emotions...that society progresses to the extent that reason is separate from passion.&quot;So while many will sit and dissect whether an iPad that is 15 percent less heavy is a vast selling point, Apple will be far more concerned with whether what it showed inspired people to feel something more.Some enjoy calling Apple's approach &quot;marketing,&quot; as if it is a curious and false manipulation of innocent, dumb, technologically unenlightened customers.But what the company proves again and again is that &quot;marketing&quot; means taking technological talent and insisting that it create things that inspire an irrational soul. The customer has to feel something more than he or she currently does.That was Steve Jobs' most significant message today. And one wonders how the human beings who are his competitors believe (in their heart and soul) they can either prove him wrong or beat him.<br/><br/>0 Vote(s) ]]></description>
</item>

<item>
<title><![CDATA[FBI: We're not demanding encryption back doors]]></title>
<link>http://www.haaze.com/story.php?title=fbi-were-not-demanding-encryption-back-doors</link>
<comments>http://www.haaze.com/story.php?title=fbi-were-not-demanding-encryption-back-doors</comments>
<pubDate>Thu, 17 Feb 2011 08:10:36 +0000</pubDate>
<dc:creator>dadujw</dc:creator>
<category>Technology</category>
<guid>http://www.haaze.com/story.php?title=fbi-were-not-demanding-encryption-back-doors</guid>
<description><![CDATA[The FBI said today that it's not calling for restrictions on encryption without back doors for law enforcement.FBI general counsel Valerie Caproni told a congressional committee that the bureau's push for expanded Internet wiretapping authority doesn't mean giving law enforcement a master key to encrypted communications, an apparent retreat from her position last fall.&quot;No one's suggesting that Congress should re-enter the encryption battles of the late 1990s,&quot; Caproni said. There's no need to &quot;talk about encryption keys, escrowed keys, and the like--that's not what this is all about.&quot;Instead, she said, discussions should focus on requiring that communication providers and Web sites have legally mandated procedures to divulge unencrypted data in their possession.As CNET was the first to report yesterday, the FBI says that because of the rise of Web-based e-mail and social networks, it's &quot;increasingly unable&quot; to conduct certain types of surveillance that would be possible on cellular and traditional telephones. Any solution, it says, should include a way for police armed with wiretap orders to conduct surveillance of &quot;Web-based e-mail, social-networking sites, and peer-to-peer communications technology.&quot;Caproni tried to distance the FBI from its stance a decade ago, when it was in the forefront of trying to ban secure encryption products that are, in theory, unbreakable by police or intelligence agencies.&quot;We are very concerned, as this committee is, about the encryption situation, particularly as it relates to fighting crime and fighting terrorism,&quot; then FBI director Louis Freeh told the Senate Judiciary committee in September 1998. &quot;Not just bin Laden, but many other people who work against us in the area of terrorism, are becoming sophisticated enough to equip themselves with encryption devices.&quot;In response to lobbying from the FBI, a House committee in 1997 approved a bill that would have banned the manufacture, distribution, or import of any encryption product that did not include a back door for the federal government. The full House never voted on that measure. (See related transcript.)Even after today's hearing ended, it wasn't immediately clear whether the members of the House Judiciary crime subcommittee would seek to expand wiretapping laws as a result. Rep. Bobby Scott, D-Va., said that the panel's members received a secret briefing last week from the FBI, but that the bureau should make its arguments in public. &quot;It is critical that we discuss this issue in as public a matter as possible,&quot; he said. It's &quot;ironic to tell the American people that their privacy rights may be jeopardized because of discussions held in secret.&quot;Rep. John Conyers, D-Mich., said &quot;to me this is a question of building back doors into systems...I believe that legislatively forcing telecommunications providers into building back doors into systems will actually make us less safe and less secure.&quot;That was echoed by Susan Landau, a computer scientist at Harvard University's Radcliffe Institute for Advanced Study, who said &quot;there aren't concrete suggestions on the table...I don't quite understand what the FBI is pushing for.&quot;Caproni said her appearance before the panel was designed to highlight the problems, not call for specific legislation. But, she added, &quot;it's something that's being actively discussed in the administration.&quot;Under a 1994 federal law called the Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act, or CALEA, telecommunications carriers are required to build in back doors into their networks to assist police with authorized interception of conversations and &quot;call-identifying information.&quot; As CNET was the first to report in 2003, representatives of the FBI's Electronic Surveillance Technology Section in Chantilly, Va., began quietly lobbying the FCC to force broadband providers to provide more-efficient, standardized surveillance facilities. The Federal Communications Commission approved that requirement a year later, sweeping in Internet phone companies that tie into the existing telecommunications system. It was upheld in 2006 by a federal appeals court.But the FCC never granted the FBI's request to rewrite CALEA to cover instant messaging and VoIP programs that are not &quot;managed&quot;--meaning peer-to-peer programs like Apple's Facetime, iChat/AIM, Gmail's video chat, andXbox Live's in-game chat that do not use the public telephone network.Also not covered by CALEA are e-mail services or social-networking sites, although they must comply with a wiretap order like any other business or face criminal charges. The difference is that those companies don't have to engineer their systems in advance to make them easily wiretappable.<br/><br/>0 Vote(s) ]]></description>
</item>

</channel>
</rss>
