Daily Archives: February 12, 2020

A Map of Every Object in Our Solar System

Posted on by

View the high resolution version of this incredible map by clicking here

In this stunning visualization, biologist Eleanor Lutz painstakingly mapped out every known object in Earth’s solar system (>10km in diameter), hopefully helping you on your next journey through space.

Data-Driven Solar System

This particular visualization combines five different data sets from NASA:

Objects in solar system

Source: Tabletop Whale

From this data, Lutz mapped all the orbits of over 18,000 asteroids in the solar system, including 10,000 that were at least 10km in diameter, and about 8,000 objects of unknown size.

This map shows each asteroid’s position on New Year’s Eve 1999.

The Pull of Gravity

When plotting the objects, Lutz observed that the solar system is not arranged in linear distances. Rather, it is logarithmic, with exponentially more objects situated close to the sun. Lutz made use of this observation to space out their various orbits of the 18,000 objects in her map.

What she is visualizing is the pull of the sun, as the majority of objects tend to gravitate towards the inner part of the solar system. This is the same observation Sir Isaac Newton used to develop the concept of gravity, positing that heavier objects produce a bigger gravitational pull than lighter ones. Since the sun is the largest object in our solar system, it has the strongest gravitational pull.

If the sun is continually pulling at the planets, why don’t they all fall into the sun? It’s because the planets are moving sideways at the same time.

orbiting around the sun

Without that sideways motion, the objects would fall to the center – and without the pull toward the center, it would go flying off in a straight line.

This explains the clustering of patterns in solar systems, and why the farther you travel through the solar system, the bigger the distance and the fewer the objects.

The Top Ten Non-Planets in the Solar System

We all know that the sun and the planets are the largest objects in our corner of the universe, but there are many noteworthy objects as well.

Rank Name Diameter Notes
1 Ganymede 3,273 mi (5,268 km) Jupiter’s largest moon
2 Titan 3,200 mi (5,151 km) Saturn’s largest moon
3 Callisto 2,996 mi (4,821 km) Jupiter’s second largest moon
4 Io 2,264 mi (3,643 km) Moon orbiting Jupiter
5 Moon 2,159 mi (3,474 km) Earth’s only moon
6 Europa 1,940 mi (3,122 km) Moon orbiting Jupiter
7 Triton 1,680 mi (2,710 km) Neptune’s largest moon
8 Pluto 1,476 mi (2,376 km) Dwarf planet
9 Eris 1,473 mi (2,372 km) Dwarf planet
10 Titania 981 mi (1,578 km) Uranus’ largest moon

Source: Ourplnt.com

While the map only shows objects greater than 10 kilometers in diameter, there are plenty of smaller objects to watch out for as well.

An Atlas of Space

This map is one among many of Lutz’s space related visualizations. She is also in the process of creating an Atlas of Space to showcase her work.

As we reach further and further beyond the boundaries of earth, her work may come in handy the next time you make a wrong turn at Mars and find yourself lost in an asteroid belt.

Source: A Map of Every Object in Our Solar System – Visual Capitalist

FTC finally wakes up: American watchdog to probe decade of Big Tech takeovers

Posted on by

An American biz watchdog has stepped up its probe into possible market abuse by Big Tech – Amazon, Apple, Facebook, Google and Microsoft – by demanding information on all acquisitions not reported to antitrust authorities in the past decade.

The FTC issued “special orders” to the big five on Tuesday requesting “the terms, scope, structure, and purpose of transactions that each company consummated between January 1, 2010 and December 31, 2019.” That will amount to information on hundreds of deals, the FTC said during a press conference.

If the federal regulator finds a pattern of wrongdoing or abuse of market dominance, it will use its full range of enforcement actions, from a warning all the way up to a “full divestiture of assets” i.e. breaking a company up, FTC chair Joe Simons warned.

The watchdog is adopting a “very broad definition” of the term acquisition including minority investments in companies, licensing transactions, rights to appoint someone to a board. Notably it will also treat data “as an asset that could have competitive effects.”

The goal behind the request is to help the FTC “deepen its understanding of large technology firms’ acquisition activity,” the regulator explained. But Simons was at pains to note that the information is not related to law enforcement actions and will not be shared with other agencies.

That’s relevant because the Department of Justice and a large number of state attorneys general are currently suing the same tech giants over anti-competitive behavior; the FTC data will not be shareable with them under the “unique” authority that the FTC is invoking, it stated.

However, Simons noted, if the FTC does find activity it feels is anti-competitive it will use it as a start point for further investigation; something that could result in the “unwinding” of deals made in the past decade.

Snuffing out competition

There have been numerous reports in the past 10 years of big tech giants buying out competitors that threaten their market and then shuttering them in order to maintain effective monopolies in specific markets.

Simons said the impetus behind today’s order was a series of hearings the FTC held at the tail-end of 2018 where a number of panelists warned large tech platforms were buying up “nascent” companies in order to shut them down.

He painted the special orders as a “follow-up” to those hearings. “We heard at the hearings that there were a lot of transactions by major tech platforms that are not reportable,” Simons said. “What we want to know is why they were not reportable and whether there is anything we should do about it.”

Under the Hart-Scott-Rodino Antitrust Improvements Act (HSR Act), companies are required to report acquisitions of other companies if the size of that acquisition is greater than $94m (the exact figure has changed over time; in 2010 it was $60m). There are, however, exemptions that tech giants may have used to make larger acquisitions without reporting them.

As a result, dozens and possibly hundreds of market-altering purchases have never been made public – and that’s how the tech giants like it. They will often refuse to even acknowledge if they have bought a company. Many of the deals come with a non-compete clause, Simons noted, pointing to possible market interference.

[…]

The investigation could result in a change to the current rules on reporting acquisitions, the regulator noted – something that would not require Congressional authority. It also dismissed concerns that the tech giants could question the FTC’s authority to even issue such orders – something that AT&T successfully did during a five-year legal battle over misleading consumers – saying that it “does not expect any meaningful challenge” to the orders.

The regulator even suggested that if it finds anti-competitive behavior as a result of its information requests it could issue an order in future that would require tech giants to provide full details of any and all future acquisitions.

Judging by the impact of the announcement on the companies’ stock prices, the FTC investigation is only expected to impact Facebook – no doubt because the agency made it clear that it now views user data as a competitive asset.

Source: Oh good, the FTC has discovered acqui-hires… American watchdog to probe decade of Big Tech takeovers • The Register

Aftermarket $998,- Self-Driving Tech vs. Tesla Auto­pilot, Cadillac Super Cruise

Posted on by

Thanks to recent software updates, the most sophisticated systems—Cadillac‘s Super Cruise and Tesla‘s Autopilot—are more capable today than they were initially. This report on those systems includes a lesser known third player. For $998, upstart Comma.ai sells an aftermarket dash cam and wiring harness that taps into and overrides the factory-installed assistance systems in many Honda and Toyo­ta models as well as some Chrysler, Kia, and Lexus vehicles, among others. When activated, Comma.ai’s Openpilot software assumes control over the steering, brakes, and throttle, and it reduces the frequent reminders to keep your hands on the wheel. As you might imagine, automakers do not endorse this hack.

[…this bit is where they discuss the Chrysler and Tesla systems in the article…]

Comma.ai’s control is based almost exclusively on a single windshield-mounted camera. A model-specific wiring harness plugs into the vehicle’s stock front camera behind the rearview mirror. That’s where it taps into the car’s communication network, which is used for everything from the power windows to the wheel-speed sensors. There it inserts new messages to actuate the steering, throttle, and brakes on its command while blocking the factory communication. However, certain safety systems, such as forward-collision alert, remain functional. There are no warning lights to indicate that the vehicle senses anything is amiss. And if you start the car with the Comma.ai unit unplugged, everything reverts back to stock. There is no sophisticated calibration procedure. Just stick the supplied GoPro mount somewhere roughly in the middle of the windshield and pop in the Eon camera display. After doing nothing more than driving for a few minutes, the system announces it’s ready.

Given its lack of sensors, we were shocked at the sophisticated control of the system and its ability to center the car in its lane, both on and off the highway. Importantly, Comma.ai collects the data from the 2500 units currently in use in order to learn from errors and make the system smarter. Compared with the others, Openpilot wasn’t quite as locked on its lane, and its control on two-lane roads wasn’t as solid as Autopilot’s, but its performance didn’t degrade perceptibly at night as Super Cruise’s did. However, the following distance, which isn’t adjustable, is roughly double that of Autopilot and Super Cruise in their closest settings, making us feel as though we were endlessly holding up traffic.

Like Super Cruise, the Comma.ai system employs a driver-facing camera to monitor engagement and doesn’t require regular steering inputs. Unlike Super Cruise, it lacks infrared lighting to enable nighttime vision. That will be part of the next hardware update, Hotz says.

Obviously, the system is reliant on the donor vehicle’s hardware, including the car’s steering-torque limitations. So our Honda Passport couldn’t keep up with the sharpest corners and would regularly flash warning messages to the driver, even when the system handled the maneuver appropriately. Hotz promises the next release will dial back the too-frequent warning messages.

Hotz says he has had conversations with car companies about selling his tech, but he doesn’t see the top-down approach as the way to win. Instead, he envisions Comma.ai as a dealer-installed add-on. But that will be difficult, as both Honda and Toyota are against the installation of the system in their vehicles. Toyota has gone so far as to say it will void the factory warranty. This seems shortsighted, though, as the carmakers could learn a lot from what Comma.ai has accomplished.

Source: Aftermarket Self-Driving Tech vs. Tesla Auto­pilot, Cadillac Super Cruise

Hotz is indeed a very big name and it’s very very cool to see that he’s managed to get this working for under only $1000,-

Pretty amazing to see that he can go toe to toe with the giants and sit on an even keel technically, for way way less money.

Deterrence in the Age of Thinking Machines – they escalate a whole lot quicker than people

Posted on by

The greater use of artificial intelligence (AI) and autonomous systems by the militaries of the world has the potential to affect deterrence strategies and escalation dynamics in crises and conflicts. Up until now, deterrence has involved humans trying to dissuade other humans from taking particular courses of action. What happens when the thinking and decision processes involved are no longer purely human? How might dynamics change when decisions and actions can be taken at machine speeds? How might AI and autonomy affect the ways that countries have developed to signal one another about the potential use of force? What are potential areas for miscalculation and unintended consequences, and unwanted escalation in particular?

This exploratory report provides an initial examination of how AI and autonomous systems could affect deterrence and escalation in conventional crises and conflicts. Findings suggest that the machine decisionmaking can result in inadvertent escalation or altered deterrence dynamics, due to the speed of machine decisionmaking, the ways in which it differs from human understanding, the willingness of many countries to use autonomous systems, our relative inexperience with them, and continued developments of these capabilities. Current planning and development efforts have not kept pace with how to handle the potentially destabilizing or escalatory issues associated with these new technologies, and it is essential that planners and decisionmakers begin to think about these issues before fielded systems are engaged in conflict.

Key Findings

Insights from a wargame involving AI and autonomous systems

  • Manned systems may be better for deterrence than unmanned ones.
  • Replacing manned systems with unmanned ones may not be seen as a reduced security commitment.
  • Players put their systems on different autonomous settings to signal resolve and commitment during the conflict.
  • The speed of autonomous systems did lead to inadvertent escalation in the wargame.

Implications for deterrence

  • Autonomous and unmanned systems could affect extended deterrence and our ability to assure our allies of U.S. commitment.
  • Widespread AI and autonomous systems could lead to inadvertent escalation and crisis instability.
  • Different mixes of human and artificial agents could affect the escalatory dynamics between two sides.
  • Machines will likely be worse at understanding the human signaling involved deterrence, especially deescalation.
  • Whereas traditional deterrence has largely been about humans attempting to understand other humans, deterrence in this new age involves understanding along a number of additional pathways.
  • Past cases of inadvertent engagement of friendly or civilian targets by autonomous systems may offer insights about the technical accidents or failures involving more-advanced systems.

Source: Deterrence in the Age of Thinking Machines | RAND