In Nagasaki, Japan, a new hotel called the Henn-na just opened up. It’s nicknamed “Strange Hotel” for a reason. This hotel is run by robots!
That’s not a sarcastic catch phrase or put down, that’s the truth. A lady robot will check you in and bow to you, literally. A dinosaur robot will serve as your concierge and entertain the kids. Robots will handle your bags and give you travel suggestions. You don’t even use a room key. You use facial recognition technology. Don’t expect a hotel bar, restaurant, diner, or continental breakfast or even an in-room refrigerator, microwave, or coffee maker at Henn-na. You get snacks from a vending machine. The goal of this technology on steroids is to cut cost, save energy, and give customers an experience they’ve never have before. Though the hotel owner admits it was expensive to get the robotic system set up, he believes it will be much cheaper than human labor cost. Rooms at Strange Hotel start at around $80 a night.
Keep in mind Japan is obsessed with robot culture. They’re robots that serve as store greeters, psychiatrists, even as companions. But an all robot hotel is creepy on all levels, even for Japan. What if there is a robot malfunction? What if something goes wrong? Who are you going to report to? I know humans can be difficult to deal with at times. So I can see the appeal of an all robot hotel from that perspective. I just don’t share that perspective. According to a JD Poll, most American and Canadian travelers don’t. Most of us prefer a human being checking us in. We prefer our microwaves, refrigerators, and continental breakfasts. And what about jobs? The hotel/hospitality industry accounts for millions of jobs around the world, from minimum wage to executive jobs. How are you just going to toss all these working people out on the ground just to save the CEO money? Good luck explaining that one. And it’s still $80 a night. With the exception a handful of cities, I can still find a nice human run hotel for that much or less. Would you stay at a robot hotel?
Tell me if this makes sense. Your hottest product sells tens of millions of copies. Your profit margins this quarter alone is over $10 billion. But yet your stock market points fell over six percent in one day.
That’s what happened to Apple yesterday. Despite selling over 47 million iPhones in the last quarter alone, and despite 35% increase in sales from last year, Apple stock prices fell six percent yesterday. To Apple stockholders, it’s not the past they’re concerned about. It’s the future. There’s uncertainty for the next quarter, and analysts aren’t too excited about the iWatch. Those two things are what brought stocks down. The iPhone has been critical in Apple’s success. But investors are depending on the iWatch to carry that success to the next level. Apple CEO Tim Cook knows it. Cook said sales didn’t exceed their expectations, while sales did increase somewhat from April to May and from May to June. Cook didn’t give too many numbers or details because he doesn’t want smartwatch competitors to see this and take advantage. Apple did get a boost from China. Despite their recent economic turmoil, China is responsible for 25% of the company’s revenue. Their sales have doubled from more than a year ago. Keep in mind Apple is releasing new services as well, like Apple Pay and streaming music services.
I need to get a few elephants out of the room. Competitors have been pretty aggressive with their smartwatches. But Apple tries to keep hush about their iPhone numbers. Could smartwatch competition be a factor? Look at China’s struggling economy. Just a couple of weeks ago, their stock market lost 30% of their entire value. And this is the nation that attributes a quarter of their sales. Could the turbulent world economy be a factor? Plus, Apple has several new projects, like iWatch, Apple Pay and streaming services. Is Apple doing too much too fast? Is that another reason why stocks fell?
Transportation service Uber is one of the fastest growing companies today. And that is ticking a lot of people off, from cabbies to local governments.
Around the world, protesters have claimed Uber uses shady practices and loosely regulated tactics to steal jobs and business. While taxi regulations are extremely strict, virtually anyone over 21 with a valid drivers licence and a good car can become an Uber driver. ?Uber claims they’re simply providing services to people who can’t find good service otherwise and providing jobs. But a showdown is taking place in New York City. Uber put out a scathing commercial about New York City taxi drivers. The commercial portrayed them as drivers who would only pick up certain people in certain neighborhoods, suggesting people in minority neighborhoods have little chance in even catching a cab. Then there’s NYC major Bill DeBlasio, who accepted taxi donations, tried to block Uber’s progress in his city. Not all political leaders take such a hard line against Uber. On the campaign trail, Uber is about almost as big as a subject as the economy and Iran. Jeb Bush uses Uber on the campaign trail. Marco Rubio also embraces Uber. Hilary Clinton talked about Uber’s influence, and how it raises questions about future job and workplace issues. Uber isn’t going away.
On one hand, I see Uber’s point. As a minority, there was one time when I tried to hail a cab. He rode right past me and picked up a white passenger.And I’ve dealt with cabbies who weren’t nice. I’m not throwing the whole industry under the bus. That’s not my intention. I’ve had great and pleasant experiences with the vast majority of taxis. ?But this is the United States of America. This nation and it’s economy was founded on a free market enterprise system. On the other hand, I’m worried about Uber’s relaxed requirements of who becomes a driver. It almost seems like any sociopath can become an Uber driver. Who knows? Maybe Uber is the scare taxi companies need to treat their drivers better. Maybe Uber is the scare drivers need to treat their passengers better. Who do you side with? Uber or the world?
The 2016 games in Rio de Janeiro are just months away. And they’re two cable companies who’ve already made preparations for future Olympics. In fact, they don’t even know where they’re having the 2024 games yet, but we already know who has the right to them.
In Europe, Discovery Communications and Eurosport have European rights to broadcast the upcoming Olympic games in 2018, 2020, 2022, and 2024. This landmark deal made with the IOC [International Olympic Committee] will give Discovery, major cred in the sports coverage world. It could definitely make Eurosport the premier sports network in Europe, if it isn’t already. This deal is valued at over $1.44 billion dollars; that’s 1.3 billion Euros. But that’s just the beginning. Come Olympic time, they’ll have exclusive rights to free TV, pay-per view, and even computer/mobile Olympic events. As tremendous is this feat is, there are limits. This deal doesn’t cover Russia. Nor does it cover Great Britain and France between 2018 and 2020. That honor belongs to the BBC and France Televisions. It’s been said Eurosport is a bigger sports network than our ESPN, or any American cable network. Maybe that’s because the US population is 315 million. The European population is over twice as much, reaching twice as many more people.
That’s one of the reasons we here at Computer Geeks don’t like this idea. Two cable companies have full, exclusive Olympic rights over 54 countries and 137 million households. Think about that. If that’s not monopoly, I don’t know what is. And the IOC approves this. I’m just glad British, French and Russian media intervened, even if it’s just over a couple of years. Couldn’t they have shared with German, Dutch, Italian, and other networks instead of taking the whole pot? The Olympics cover hundreds of sports over days. Couldn’t they have split the events? I know what you’re going to say. “But in America, you don’t see NBC splitting the events.” Do you see NBC hogging up the Olympics in 54 countries?
Microsoft and NASA are collaborating to make life easier for astronauts in space and on the ground. This project is called Project Sidekick. Sidekick will use new computer technology innovations to reach out to astronauts at ISS. For those of us who’ll never blast off, that means International Space Station.
Assisting in Project Sidekick is Microsoft’s technology called HoloLens. These lenses will give virtual aid to those working off and for the Earth. It’s expected HoloLens will be used on Space X’s next resupply mission to ISS on June 28. NASA leaders believe HoloLens will provide new capabilities for those conducting research science on the ISS. Microsoft and NASA tested Project Sidekick, which goes hand in hand with HoloLens, on the Weightless Wonder C9 jet. Project Sidekick’s first mode is Remote Expert Mode. With Skype and these lenses, the ground crew can see exactly what the space crew sees. As of right now, they can only communicate this verbally and orally. The second mode is Procedure Mode. This would lessen training time for astronauts and be critical for missions deep into the solar system, and better help communications through difficult operations. Project Sidekick will have it’s first real test starting July 21. That’s when NASA’s NEEMO [NASA Extre Environment Mission Operations] begins. That’s when a team of astronauts and engineers will spend two weeks underground in an underwater research station called Aquarius. Isn’t space and sea exploration the exact opposite? Microsoft and NASA believe oceanic exploration is a good test for space exploration.
This is just one of Microsoft’s coming innovations. I don’t know if this will work or not, but there is a huge interest in space exploration these days. They’re even people willing to spend big money setting up permanent space colonies on the moon and Mars. So Microsoft’s interest is timely. Will Project Sidekick and succeed?
Okay, who doesn’t love social media these days? But next time you’re on it at work, please know and obey their social media use policy. But right here in Computer Geeks’s hometown of Boston, MA one baseball star had to learn the hard way.
Boston Red Sox third baseman Pablo Sandoval was benched Wednesday for liking photos of women on Instagram. Sandoval did this in the middle of a baseball game in which his team faced the Atlanta Braves. A Red Sox blogger noticed the likes. With Instagram, the activity time tells when you liked a picture. One of Sandoval’s followers called him out on it saying, “Not to blow up the dude’s spot, but uh…is Pablo Sandoval on Instagram during the game?” Using social media during baseball games is a violation of Boston Red Sox rules and Major League Baseball rules. This includes the restroom, where Sandoval was when he logged on Instagram. Though the Red Sox benched him for that game, he could face further discipline from MLB. Sandoval issued a public apology for this action. In case you’re wondering, the Red Sox lost that game, 5-2. That’s one of their eight losses in the last 10 games. The Red Sox are currently last in their American League East division and second to last in the American League. I say all that to prove Sandoval’s mistake is the last thing the Red Sox need right now.
So let this be a lesson to us all. First of all, know the social media policy wherever you are. Keep in mind social media often tells on you. Obviously it tells people what you said, and that can’t be taken back. But it often tells when you said it and sometimes where you said it. Sandoval tried to be slick and Instagram in the restroom, but even that backfired. Do you have any stories of getting caught using social media when or?where you shouldn’t have?
