Wireless 'Internet of Things' go battery-free with experimental communication technique

Using 'ambient backscatter', these devices can interact with users
 and communicate with each other without using batteries. They exchange
 information by reflecting or absorbing pre-existing radio signals.

As reported by the University of Washington: We might be one step closer to an Internet-of-things reality.

University of Washington engineers have created a new wireless communication system that allows devices to interact with each other without relying on batteries or wires for power.

The new communication technique, which the researchers call “ambient backscatter,” takes advantage of the TV and cellular transmissions that already surround us around the clock. Two devices communicate with each other by reflecting the existing signals to exchange information. The researchers built small, battery-free devices with antennas that can detect, harness and reflect a UHF TV signal, which then is picked up by other similar devices.

The technology could enable a network of devices and sensors to communicate with no power source or human attention needed.

A block diagram of a simple backscatter device.  Note that
the power comes through the RF antenna.

“We can re-purpose wireless signals that are already around us into both a source of power and a communication medium,” said lead researcher Shyam Gollakota, a UW assistant professor of computer science and engineering. “It’s hopefully going to have applications in a number of areas including wearable computing, smart homes and self-sustaining sensor networks.”

The researchers published their results at the Association for Computing Machinery’s Special Interest Group on Data Communication 2013 conference in Hong Kong, which began Aug. 13. They have received the conference’s best-paper award for their research.

“Our devices form a network out of thin air,” said co-author Joshua Smith, a UW associate professor of computer science and engineering and of electrical engineering. “You can reflect these signals slightly to create a Morse code of communication between battery-free devices.”

Smart sensors could be built and placed permanently inside nearly any structure, then set to communicate with each other. For example, sensors placed in a bridge could monitor the health of the concrete and steel, then send an alert if one of the sensors picks up a hairline crack. The technology can also be used for communication – text messages and emails, for example – in wearable devices, without requiring battery consumption.

Everyday objects could be enabled with battery-free tags to
communicate with each other. A couch could use ambient backscatter
to let the user know where his keys were left.

The researchers tested the ambient backscatter technique with credit card-sized prototype devices placed within several feet of each other. For each device the researchers built antennas into ordinary circuit boards that flash an LED light when receiving a communication signal from another device.

Groups of the devices were tested in a variety of settings in the Seattle area, including inside an apartment building, on a street corner and on the top level of a parking garage. These locations ranged from less than half a mile away from a TV tower to about 6.5 miles away.

They found that the devices were able to communicate with each other, even the ones farthest from a TV tower. The receiving devices picked up a signal from their transmitting counterparts at a rate of 1 kilobit per second when up to 2.5 feet apart outdoors and 1.5 feet apart indoors. This is enough to send information such as a sensor reading, text messages and contact information.

It’s also feasible to build this technology into devices that do rely on batteries, such as smartphones. It could be configured so that when the battery dies, the phone could still send text messages by leveraging power from an ambient TV signal.

The 'Internet of Things', is slowly becoming a reality, but
providing power to everything we'd like to communicate
with is a challenge.  'Ambient backscatter 'could be a key
technology needed to bring the idea to fruition.

The applications are endless, the researchers say, and they plan to continue advancing the capacity and range of the ambient backscatter communication network.

The other researchers involved are David Wetherall, a UW professor of computer science and engineering, Vincent Liu, a doctoral student in computer science and engineering, and Aaron Parks and Vamsi Talla, both doctoral students in electrical engineering.

The research was funded by the University of Washington through a Google Faculty Research Award and by the National Science Foundation’s Research Center for Sensorimotor Neural Engineering at the UW.

GPS/Location and Mashup Analytics: The Future Of Big Data

Mashup analytics can reflect human behavior, in real-time
and by location; and it can track people changing their behavior.  Powerful
tools in the age of Big Data.

As reported by Information Week: When it comes to big data, most CIOs find themselves in the same boat as Bill Chalmers, the beleaguered main character of the novel 'The Diagnosis'. Chalmers' work involves an ever-expanding swamp of data. He uses every trick available to master it. He can't keep up. No one in his office can. In a cunning plot element, when he suffers a mysterious ailment, no amount of information seems to help the doctors diagnose him.

Chalmers' world provides an apt metaphor for today's, where information expands exponentially, straining our capability for understanding. Now we've got unstructured data pouring in from sensors, mobile apps, GPS and other real-world, real-time sources. Must we suffer like Chalmers and his hated boss, Stumm, who secretly brings his wife in at night to help him try to catch up?

Perhaps not. Chalmers didn't have Mashup Analytics.

What's Mashup Analytics? It's part technology, part statistical process; that enables real-time business intelligence regarding events or changes occurring in the marketplace - and which can be applied to almost any industry or market, given the right context. An example comes from the Brooklyn Nets basketball team. The Nets rolled out their AchieveMint Challenge, a health-related marketing app in May.  Fans could sign up for the Brooklyn Nets app and feed data to it from apps like FitBit, RunKeeper, Twitter and FourSquare. Fans who signed up and then posted earned points, which could be redeemed for Nets merchandise. Grand prize was a Nets party on draft day, June 27.

The app did well -- more than 1,600 fans signed up in one week. Those fans interacted with the Nets more than 100,000 times in the three weeks of the promotion, checking in regularly from an average of three apps.

What makes this Mashup Analytics? For one, the Nets didn't gather the data, or even initiate the campaign. The Nets had the brand, and the customer base. The team worked with Van Wagner, a sports marketing firm (it pioneered rotational ad signage at sporting events). Van Wagner's client is French pharmaceutical Sanofi, which had the marketing budget. Sanofi knew about AchieveMint, a startup that aggregates social media and health apps. AchieveMint provided the technology, the analytics and, in effect, the IT.

Activity trackers are the latest trend in fitness tracking over
the Internet - combined in some cases with smartphone
applications.  Mashups of fitness data, GPS/GNSS location
information including speed, altitude, and other telematic
data such as temperature and humidity will be critical data
sources in the future of health care IT systems and analytics.

A mere 100,000 data points doesn't sound like the kind of thing that would trouble Bill Chalmers, or any self-respecting CIO. But this is not ordinary data. It's drawn from apps that don't talk to each other. It reflects human behavior, in real-time and on location. And it reflects something hard to do: people changing their behaviors, in response to what was in effect a hands-off marketing campaign.

Mashup IT like this will matter most immediately to CIOs in pharmaceutical and health benefits companies. In markets like the U.S., where the entire health care model is switching away from paying for treatment to paying for outcomes, apps like AchieveMint yield behavioral data that will become crucial to healthcare. Nearly a quarter billion health and fitness apps will be downloaded by 2017, up from 156 million today, predicts iSuppli (recently acquired by IHS Inc). Separately, sales of sports and fitness monitors, like heart-rate monitors and pedometers; most with with integrated GPS/GNSS, will reach 56.2 million units in 2017. Many of these will be on mobile phones, and they will increasingly connect to the Internet.

Fitness apps and devices represent a remarkably splintered market (iSuppli tracks the top 20 vendors). AchieveMint may not become the 'Huffington Post' of fitness apps, but it's clear that aggregation is coming to this new kind of content: consumer behavioral data.

Such data does exist now, says Joseph Stetson, VP at Van Wagner Sports, "it's just hard to get to it."
He's excited about Mashup Analytics because it's going to get a lot easier to get that data, something he thinks will change the game for any company that interacts with consumers.

CIOs need to recognize that no one company will be able to create such powerful data by itself. That demands Mashup IT. Questions it creates include ones like these: Since pedometer readings aren't like claims data, how should a health care company meld claims data with individuals' self-reported exercise and diet behavior? How can companies begin to understand what links behavior and risk? Is it best for the CIO to devise the algorithms and structures to do the processing? Or to let third parties do the work, be they an AchieveMint or a consultant?

The answers aren't clear yet, says Mikki Nasch, AchieveMint's CEO and co-founder. She thinks it will take at least six months to devise analytics models that can take these new kinds of data, merge them with existing data, and say something useful about them. "Right now, we don't know what correlates. If I go to Whole Foods and I run every day, what kind of person am I?" she asks.

There are plenty more questions to ask, but a smart CIO can get a head start on diagnosing what it means for his or her company by starting now.

The Hyperloop revealed

One of the world’s most visionary entrepreneurs, Elon Musk, says he wants
 to revolutionize the way we travel. On Monday he unveiled a new design
 for a transportation system that would move up to 700 miles per hour
 on a magnetic levitation system.

As reported by NBC News: Electromagnetic acceleration: That's the high technology behind the high-speed transit concept that billionaire Elon Musk calls the Hyperloop.

Musk — who already plays leading roles in the SpaceX rocket venture, the Tesla electric car company and the SolarCity solar-energy company — unveiled his vision of the Hyperloop on Monday.

The plan is aimed at cutting the travel time between San Francisco and Los Angeles to 35 minutes, at a price of $20 for a one-way trip.

"It would actually feel a lot like being on an airplane," Musk said.

Musk said the Hyperloop arrangement could be implemented between any pair of cities situated up to, say, 900 miles (1,500 kilometers) apart. For longer distances, air travel would probably be more efficient, he said.

A cutaway shows passengers inside a Hyperloop
passenger capsule.

In a blog posting and a 57-page PDF file about the Hyperloop, Musk said he came up with the plan out of frustration with the shortcomings of California's $68 billion high-speed rail project, which is just getting started. Musk estimated that about a dozen engineers from SpaceX and Tesla worked on the Hyperloop concept over the past year or so as a "background task."

How the Hyperloop would work
The Hyperloop would send travelers through low-pressure steel tubes in specialized pods that zoom at high subsonic speeds, reaching about 760 mph (1,220 kilometers per hour). That compares with typical speeds of 110 mph (for U.S. systems) to 300 mph (in China) for high-speed rail travel.

Musk's plan would rev up the pods from their stations using magnetic linear accelerators — and once they're in the main travel tubes, they'd be given periodic boosts by a linear induction motor built into the tube and the pods. "The moving motor element (rotor) will be located on the vehicle for weight savings and power requirements, while the tube will incorporate the stationary motor element (stator) which powers the vehicle," Musk wrote.

An illustration from Elon Musk's technical paper shows the proposed
 geometry for the Hyperloop passenger capsule, housing several distinct
 systems within the outer mold line.

The pods would have electric compressor fans mounted on their noses to transfer high-pressure air from the front to the rear, getting around an aerodynamic limitation that would otherwise stymie near-supersonic travel in a tube. "We can make it work" with the current technology for electric motors and batteries, as implemented in the Tesla Model S sedan, Musk said.

The journey would be nearly frictionless, thanks to a cushion of compressed air between the cars and the tube's inner surface. Musk said the system could be scaled up to hold three full-size automobiles per pod, with passengers inside.

The whole system would be powered by solar panels installed onto the tubes. "By placing solar panels on top of the tube, the Hyperloop can generate far in excess of the energy needed to operate," Musk wrote.

A cutaway view shows the Hyperloop passenger capsule in a
transit tube, mounted on pylons with solar arrays attached on top.

The tubes would be elevated on pylons, and generally follow Interstate 5 between San Francisco and L.A. Musk said that would cut down on the cost of land acquisition and rights of way. He estimated that the whole system would cost around $6 billion to build. "Even several billion is a low number when compared with several tens of billion proposed for the track of the California rail project," he wrote.

This combination of technologies is what led Musk to describe the Hyperloop last month as a "cross between a Concorde, a rail gun and an air hockey table." The hints that he dropped along the way sparked a flurry of speculation, about schemes ranging from "Jetsons"-like people-movers to underground vacuum tunnels.

One of the closest guesses came from a self-described "tinker" named John Gardi, who laid out a plan for a turbine-driven pneumatic system. Gardi said Musk's system was even better. "Beautiful, elegant, efficient!" Gardi wrote in a Twitter update after Monday's big reveal. "The aerodynamic solution is brilliant, brings me to tears ... I can see why I missed it."

Artist's conceptions show off the aerodynamic look
of Hyperloop pods.

Who'll build the Hyperloop?
Musk has said he wouldn't be able to build the Hyperloop himself, due to his duties at SpaceX and Tesla. But he changed his tune slightly on Monday, during a news conference to discuss the idea. "I'm somewhat tempted to at least make a demonstration prototype," he told reporters. "I've sort of come around a little bit on my thinking here, that maybe I should do the beginning bit, create a subscale version that's operating, and then hand it over to somebody else."

However, Musk cautioned that such a demonstration wouldn't be immediate, and that it would serve as a technological test bed rather than a practical transit system. He compared the project to a rocket demonstration on SpaceX's test range in Texas.

Musk estimated that it could take seven to 10 years to build a working Hyperloop between San Francisco and Los Angeles.

The Hyperloop could be held back by technical as well as political and economic issues. Transportation policy experts say that high-speed transit in the United States has been stymied not so much by technological challenges as by the challenges of acquiring rights of way and getting enough money to build the required infrastructure. Despite the hurdles, high-speed transit projects are beginning to gain traction. California, for example, is continuing with its next-generation rail system, and other states are proceeding with their own high-speed rail initiatives.

Musk said he thought the California project should be put on hold, considering that the construction cost could balloon well past the current $68 billion estimate, and is likely to result in a rail system that's slower than taking an airplane. "That just doesn't seem wise for a state that was facing bankruptcy not that long ago," he said.

Emil Frankel, a former transportation official who is now a visiting scholar at the Bipartisan Policy Center, said he didn't know enough about Musk's freshly revealed concept to comment on its pluses and minuses. But he said anything that gave a boost to the debate over the future of transportation was a good thing.

"I think that the best way for us to spend our money on infrastructure, given scarce resources, is with incremental improvements, restoration of our existing systems and appropriate expansions," he told NBC News. "The analyses that have been done suggest that these kinds of incremental improvements to the efficiency and reliability of our existing systems provide the best benefits."

A Rail Industry Perspective on GPS/GNSS

European rail wants an equal footing with the United States

As reported by InsideGNSS: I was sitting on a train recently and a guy said to me, “What does GPS have to do with trains? Trains run on tracks, don’t they? How can they get lost or go the wrong way?”

The fact is trains have all kinds of things to do with GPS/GNSS. Most important are safety-related applications, including satellite navigation as a means of precisely determining train position. Being able to anticipate approaching curves and bends is important for tilting trains, for example.

New applications are improving safety not on trains as such but at railway crossings, or ensuring the safety of workers during maintenance operations. There are also non-safety-related applications, such as passenger-information systems and the timing and synchronization of on-board equipment.

So, GNSS has business opportunities — and more and more of it — in railroads.

That’s no secret to Francesco Rispoli. He’s vice-president of Satellite Projects and Rail Telecommunications, Innovation and Competitivity Unit at Italy’s Ansaldo-STS. A Finmeccanica company, Ansaldo is a leading technology provider, listed on the Milan stock exchange and employing some 3,900 people. In 2012, Ansaldo reported €1.2 billion (US$1.73 billion) in revenues.

A global operator, the company delivers, among other things, transportation solutions and services, including railway and mass transit signaling systems. It also acts as lead contractor and turnkey provider on major projects worldwide. One of those projects involving GNSS is currently getting under way “down under.”

Crikey!
“The signaling solution offered by Ansaldo STS in Australia is technically significant for the global rail industry,” says Rispoli, “because it involves centralized routing and automatic train protection [ATP] with satellite positioning, ensuring accuracy and integrity performance at Safety Integrity Level 4.”

One of the more useful applications for GNSS in rail transport, it would seem, is cost-effective train localization and safety assurance over long stretches of semi-deserted areas, such as those seen in parts of the United States and South America, and much of Russia, China, and Australia.

The “integrity” to which Rispoli refers is essentially a guarantee that the probability of a positioning error beyond a specified confidence range will be less than 10-9 per hour — a pretty small risk. So small, indeed, says Rispoli, “It sets a benchmark for satellite locating systems compared to those developed for the aeronautical sector.”

Ansaldo’s contract to deliver the first two phases of a staged signaling and communications system for the heavy-haul rail line in Western Australia’s Pilbara region is worth €118 million.

Ansaldo isn’t the only European rail company cashing in down in kangaroo country. Australian operator RailCorp awarded several contracts worth $65 million for its new rail signaling system in 2011, with France’s Alstom winning the right to deliver an ATP system tailored specifically to the requirements of Sydney's CityRail network, based on Level 1 of the European Train Control System (ETCS).

Part of a major upgrade, the Alstom system provides an additional layer of security for Sydney's rail network, using radio transceivers placed at regular intervals along the track that communicate directly with compatible trains.

In total, 160 trains will be fitted with the equipment, covering over 600 kilometers (372 miles) of track. A nine-year maintenance contract is also part of the agreement, as is a pilot system based on ETCS Level 2. It will be installed on the Cronulla Branch Line and will allow more trains to run per hour with improved safety and reliability.

What’s the Rub?
Back in the GNSS sector, what concerns Rispoli is only what should concern any responsible industry man — keeping ahead of, or at least even with, the competition. American legislation, he believes, is giving U.S. companies a significant boost in international markets.

“PTC [Positive Train Control] is a U.S. Federal law that affects all freight and passenger railroads in the USA,” he explains. “The technology must be installed on all main-line tracks where intercity passenger railroads and commuter railroads operate, as well as on lines carrying toxic-by-inhalation hazardous materials.

“America’s government-backed PTC initiative has pushed forward the development and adoption of satellite-navigation technology with the introduction of continuous GPS-based location and speed-tracking systems and more sophisticated on-board wireless technologies.”

The benefit for U.S. industry is real, he says. The cost of implementing the PTC program has been estimated at several billion dollars, and such a huge investment has incentivized the U.S.-based development of new satellite navigation and wireless telecom technologies.

“These technologies allow you to optimize the life-cycle costs of railway signaling systems, making investment more attractive without sacrificing safety,” Rispoli says.

The Ansaldo VP points out that about $50 million in Railroad Safety Technology Program grants, handed out by the Federal Railways Administration, have been set aside for industry to help develop essential PTC technologies. Moreover, some technologies developed for the US defense sector are also becoming available for rail applications.

As in America, Why Not in Europe?
Rispoli says Europe was a pioneer in the early 2000s in the study and development of satellite localization solutions for train control systems. “Most of this effort was driven by the interest of the space community in making EGNOS and Galileo available for the rail sector.”

But the rail community at that time was focused on the fledgling European Rail Traffic Management System (ERTMS) for high-speed lines. “Satellite technologies were not considered a priority,” he says.

That is to say Europe fell behind. Sound familiar? But wait, all may not be lost.

“Now, the situation has changed,” Rispoli says, “mainly as a result of increasing international market pressure.” European railway stakeholders have finally recognized that EGNOS and Galileo could play a key role in increasing the reliability and reducing the cost of the ERTMS platform, and that would be good for business.

This better-late-than-never recognition is spelled out in the New ERTMS Memorandum of Understanding “concerning the strengthening of cooperation for speeding up the deployment of ERTMS,” signed by the European Commission and the European Railway Associations in March 2012.

Rispoli is just getting started: “Europe has developed the ERTMS system that is de facto a world standard and meanwhile is investing more than €6 billion for deploying the Galileo system. The rail sector could become the first user of the safety-of-life satellite navigation services in Europe, because of the potential demand related to the modernization of local and regional lines, which represent 50 percent of the overall rail network and transport 20 times more passengers than airplanes.”

But, he cautions, the adoption of GNSS for safety-related applications in the rail domain cannot be left to market forces alone. For one thing, manufacturers need to comply with standards to enable full interoperability among satellite assets, such as on board localizer and augmentation networks, and the ERTMS platform. This means regulations are needed. Government needs to step in.

Also, adoption of GNSS as a key component in the modernization of local and regional European lines will require a smooth transition from today’s operational, but costly, ground-based technologies to more efficient GNSS-based systems.

“The two technologies will have to coexist for a certain period of time,” Rispoli says, “to allow train operators, who have to equip the trains, and railway administrators, who are responsible for train circulation, to implement the new systems.”

For his part, Rispoli says the European Commission has to act as a catalyst for promoting and accelerating this process, since ERTMS and Galileo are key assets of the European industrial policy. Government needs to step in! The most urgent action needed?

“The setting up of a roadmap for the adoption of GNSS within the ERTMS platform,” suggests Rispoli. Which would, logically, lead to new funding initiatives, and go a long way towards incentivizing new GNSS-for-rail technology development in Europe, much as the PTC legislation has done in America.

A Global Market
But competition isn’t just coming from the United States. Europe’s other international competitors are moving right along, as usual.

Russian Railways RZD is headquartered in Moscow.

In Russia, for example, RZD, the state-owned train operator, has already recognized GNSS as one of the breakthrough technologies in their strategic plan for railway infrastructure renewal.

The need for interoperability along EU-Russia rail corridors remains an impetus for a common standard for Galileo and GLONASS in train control systems.

“In China, some rail lines are already operating with a GPS localization system,” says Rispoli. “And following our discussions with representatives of the BeiDou system, we believe the entry into operation of BeiDou will contribute to the wider-scale deployment of such solutions, and not only in the Chinese market.”

Will Europe act in time? Or will it stand by watching as its slice of the pie gets thinner and thinner? Rispoli believes now is not the time for pessimism.

“From the rail industry perspective, we have to face the facts — our market competitors, mainly in the USA, are already using GNSS for rail applications, thanks to the PTC initiative. The EU has to recognize that the adoption of GNSS in rail control systems cannot be left to the initiative of individual companies.” Ansaldo-STS is already investing in satellite technologies to make our core products more competitive on the market, he says, but a full migration to a satellite-based train control system, such the ERTMS Level 3, will require a joint effort between both rail and satellite stakeholders.

“The rail industry in Europe may not be seen historically as a first adopter of satellite technologies, but these technologies are now mature and the time has come for an innovation step-change in the rail sector,” Rispolie says. (And we don’t want to miss that train.)

Europe, with its ERTMS, is still leading in the high-speed rail control system market. But with the adoption of GNSS, Rispoli argues, the ERTMS could become that much more attractive for other rail market segments, such as local, regional, and heavy-haul freight lines.

Since the signature of the new ERTMS MOU, the Union Industry of Signaling (UNISIG) group, an industrial consortium created to develop ERTMS/ETCS technical specifications, has set up a working group for the adoption of satellite localization. Cooperation between this UNISIG working group and the European GNSS Agency (GSA) has been established recently, and Rispoli says he is confident that the European rail community will be able to work with the satellite community.

Rispoli’s message, as we read it, seems clear. Like many forward-thinking hommes d’affairs, he does not like to see Europe having to be dragged kicking and screaming into the future, not when there are contracts to be won and money to be made.

The GSA and the European Commission have the wherewithal to step up and provide support for GNSS in the rail transport sector. Many are now hoping they also have the will.

The Once Dominant BlackBerry Explores Possible Sale

Thorsten Heins, the new CEO of Blackberry giving a
presentation on the BlackBerry 10.

As reported by Forbes: New CEO. Check. New name. Check. A new owner?

Call it BlackBerry Reboot, version 3.0. BlackBerry, the one-time tech giant battered by the shift to newer mobile-phone models, has formed a special committee to examine strategic alternatives. In other words, the beleaguered handset maker will try to sell itself or figure out some other last-ditch effort to save the business.

The committee will review possible joint ventures, partnerships or an outright sale of the company. Any option chosen should quicken the development of BlackBerry’s new software, the BlackBerry 10, says the Waterloo, Canada-based company. “During the past year, management and the Board have been focused on launching the BlackBerry 10 platform and BES 10, establishing a strong financial position, and evaluating the best approach to delivering long-term value for customers and shareholders,” says director Timothy Dattels, who’ll chair the special committee. “Given the importance and strength of our technology, and the evolving industry and competitive landscape, we believe that now is the right time to explore strategic alternatives.”

Blackberry, formerly RIM,  has been focusing on the release of
the Blackberry 10 and BES 10 prior to it's recent consideration.

Shares of  BlackBerry immediately rose yesterday 6.7% to $10.51 in pre-market trading, after the company momentarily paused training.

The decision to find a new escape route follows five years in which BlackBerry’s phones gave up their industry-leading position to Google‘s Android phones and Apple‘s iPhone. BlackBerry, which changed its name from Research in Motion earlier this year in a different bid to restyle the ailing company, experienced a 93% drop in share price during the past five years. And the company fell deeply into the red in 2012, posting a $646 million loss, in contrast to earning $3.5 billion just two years earlier.

A new name wasn't the only thing that BlackBerry tried. The two men who founded the company, former billionaires Mike Lazaridis and Jim Balsillie, both left their roles with the company within the past two years. Balsillie and Lazaridis, who had shared the CEO role, turned over  turned over control to current chief Thorsten Heins in 2012. Soon after, Balsillie stepped down as a director, and Lazaridis did likewise a few months later.

Excitement and increased expectations for the BlackBerry 10 operating system allowed Heins to orchestrate a rally in BlackBerry shares earlier this year. That was eventually quelled by lackluster reviews of the new phones, a dismal point for the company that first made email available in your pocket.

Putting itself up for sale has forced one director to step down. Prem Watsa, CEO of Fairfax Financial, resigned because he feared potential conflicts. Watsa’s Toronto-based Fairfax owns about 10% of BlackBerry, but his time on the board was a only a short stint. He became a director following the 2012 shakeup that propelled Heins to the top job. Watsa, whose investing letter is as closely examined as the annual address from Warren Buffett, is known as a skilled value investor and stockpicker.

Advising BlackBerry in the process are JPMorgan and legal firms Skadden, Arps and Torys.

US Lawmakers attempting to protect consumers privacy rights regarding black box recorders in cars

Event Data Recorders (EDRs) are already operating in most
newer vehicles.

Are reported by Computerworld: Privacy issues are bubbling up in Congress, where lawmakers have filed bipartisan legislation that would give car owners control over data collected in black box-style recorders that may be required in all cars as soon as next year.

Most new cars already have black boxes, known as event data recorders (EDRs), but manufacturers aren't required to inform vehicle owners about their existence or the data they collect, according to the lawmakers.

"For me, this is a basic issue of privacy," Rep. Mike Capuano (D-MA) said in a statement. "Consumers should have control over the information collected by event data recorders in their own vehicles and they should be able to exercise control over the recording function. Many consumers aren't even aware that this technology is already in most vehicles."

Last year, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) proposed a new standard that would require all light passenger vehicles (weighing 8,500 lbs or less) and motorcycles built on or after Sept. 1, 2014, to have EDRs. The recorders, while similar in function to black boxes in airplanes, record far less information.

In response to the proposed new rules, Capuano and Rep. Jim Sensenbrenner (R-WI) filed the "Black Box Privacy Protection Act" to give vehicle owners more control over the information collected through a car or motorcycle EDR. The legislation requires manufacturers to notify consumers if an EDR is installed in their vehicle, to disclose its data collection capabilities, and provide information on how data collected may be used.

The bill also gives vehicle owners control over the data. All data collected by an EDR becomes the property of the vehicle owner under this legislation. The bill would make it illegal for anyone other than the vehicle owner to download or retrieve information without owner consent or a court order.

The legislation also requires manufacturers to give consumers the option of controlling the recording function in future vehicles equipped with event data recorders.

"As a strong supporter of the Fourth Amendment and privacy rights, I believe vehicle owners should have ultimate control over information collected by their vehicle's black box, including what data is recorded and who has access to it," Sensenbrenner said.

According to the NHTSA, however, EDRs do not collect any personal identifying information or record conversations and do not run continuously. What they would record is:

• Vehicle speed;
• Whether the brakes were activated just before a crash;
• Crash forces at the moment of impact;
• Information about the state of the engine throttle;
• Air bag deployment timing and air bag readiness prior to the crash;
• Whether the vehicle occupant's seat belt was buckled.

"EDRs provide critical safety information that might not otherwise be available to NHTSA to evaluate what happened during a crash -- and what future steps could be taken to save lives and prevent injuries," said NHTSA Administrator David Strickland. "A broader EDR requirement would ensure the agency has the safety-related information it needs to determine what factors may contribute to crashes across all vehicle manufacturers."

But lawmakers said many consumers are not aware that this data could be used against them in civil or criminal proceedings, or by their insurer to increase rates.

No federal law exists to clarify the rights of a vehicle owner with respect to this recorded data, according to Capuano.

Tracking devices hidden in London's recycling bins are stalking your smartphone - anonymously

Smartphones are being tracked by recycling bins in
downtown London using Wi-Fi signals.

As reported by the Wire UK: The unique identifying numbers of over half a million smartphones have been recorded by a network of recycling bins in central London.

Hundreds of thousands of pedestrians walking past 12 locations unknowingly had the unique MAC address of their smartphones recorded by Renew London.

Data including the "movement, type, direction, and speed of unique devices" was recorded from smartphones that had their Wi-Fi on.

First reported by Quartz, the data gathering appears to be a Minority Report-esque proof-of-concept project, demonstrating the possibility for targeted personal advertising.

"It provides an unparalleled insight into the past behavior of unique devices -- entry/exit points, dwell times, places of work, places of interest, and affinity to other devices -- and should provide a compelling reach data base for predictive analytics (likely places to eat, drink, personal habits etc.)," reads a blog post on the company's site.

In tests running between 21-24 May and 2-9 June, over four million events were captured, with over 530,000 unique devices captured. Further testing is taking place at sites including Liverpool Street Station.

Renew operates around 100 recycling bins around London, primarily in the City of London, which double up as digital advertising boards. Twelve of those bins, were fitted with tracking devices.

The project is the first use of a piece of technology called Presence Orb. Launched by Presence Aware in March of this year, Presence Orb is described as "a cookie for the real world", in reference to web cookies that track your online behavior across sites.

People wishing to opt out should visit the Presence Orb website, which has instructions on how to prevent your phone's MAC address being picked up by their technology.

A map of London where the experimental systems are
tracking unique MAC's using Wi-Fi

The use of personal data in the UK is governed by the Data Protection Act. It is unclear whether the collection of MAC addresses would fall under this act. If it was successfully argued that it was "personal data", perhaps because individual phones are being specifically tracked, then it would fall under the act. If the data was adequately 'anonymised', it could be argued that it isn't personal data.

In a comment to Quartz, Renew London CEO Kaveh Memari said, "London is the most heavily surveillanced city in the world… As long as we don't add a name and home address, it's legal."

"[We collect anonymised and aggregated MAC data -- we don't track individuals or individual MACs. The ORBs aggregate all footfall around a pod for three minutes and send back one anonymised aggregated report from each site so the idea that we are tracking individuals again is more style than substance," says Memari in an email. "There are applications in the future which Quartz focused on but during the trial period we are only looking at anonymised and aggregated MAC data."

He adds, "as some of the technology we will be testing will be on the boundaries of what is regulated and discussed it is our intention to discuss it publicly and especially collaborate with privacy groups like EFF to make sure we lead the charge on [adding necessary protections] as we are with the implementation of the technology."