Writing: The Research Project Booklet
1. The Topic
Write a research paper of about 2,500 words on the following topic:
What Is Today’s Technology Doing for Us?
Study the articles that follow. Consult other sources to look for more information. Base
your paper on what you read and how you understand the problem. Follow the academic
procedures when writing.
Your research paper should be typed on A4 size paper and at least consist of the
following parts:
1) Title Page, including
• the topic
• your name, student number and group
• name of the course (Writing)
• your supervisor’s name (Professor Shi Baohui)
• the date of submission
2) Abstract;
3) The Paper;
4) Notes (if any);
5) References.
2. Submission
The deadline for the submission of this paper is Friday, January 12, 2007. Late
submissions will be penalized with a lower grade.
3. Readings
1
1) A serious contest
May 6th 2004
From The Economist print edition
Can Microsoft’s clever strategy level the playing field with Sony?
LIKE the combatants in a beat-’em-up video game, the makers of video-games
consoles do battle in orderly rounds, one of which occurs every five or six years. The
current round began in 2000, when Sony launched PlayStation 2. In 2001 Nintendo,
the firm that once ruled the industry, launched the GameCube, and Microsoft made its
first foray into the cut-throat market with the Xbox. Four years on, Sony is the clear
winner, with sales of 70m consoles, followed by Microsoft with 14m and Nintendo
with 13m.
Next week, the industry’s biggest trade show, E3, which takes place in Los
Angeles, will provide the first glimpses of the next round. It is expected to be a brutal
two-way fight. For, after a difficult start, Microsoft has now established itself as
Sony’s main rival, and is gaining momentum. Most important, it has won the crucial
support of games publishers, says Nick Gibson of Games Investor, a consultancy.
That means Microsoft will “pretty much be neck and neck with Sony” in the next
round. Nintendo, by contrast, has been less successful at keeping publishers on board,
and has survived thanks only to the strength of its in-house software business.
Xbox Live, Microsoft’s subscription-based online-gaming service, has also been
well received. It provides features, such as global player rankings, that Sony cannot
match. And although online gaming is still a minority sport, it is expected to be far
more significant in the next round, as broadband connections and wireless home
networks become more widespread. By signing up customers for Xbox Live now,
Microsoft hopes to retain their loyalty into the next round.
But perhaps cleverest of all is Microsoft’s new software-development platform for
games, called XNA, a set of software tools that can be used to write games for PCs,
Xbox and the forthcoming Xbox 2. According to Robbie Bach, Microsoft’s “chief
Xbox officer”, insulating programmers from the underlying complexity of the console
hardware “creates huge cost efficiency and flexibility.” While Microsoft will probably
not unveil the Xbox 2 at E3, says P.J. McNealy, an analyst at American Technology
Research, the XNA tools will enable the firm to demonstrate the kind of things that
will be possible on Xbox 2 when it appears.
The contrast with Sony is striking. While Microsoft is focusing on software, Sony
is emphasising hardware innovation for its PlayStation 3. Its plan, which it has yet to
describe fully, is to use a new kind of chip, called Cell, as the basis for both the
PlayStation 3 and its consumer-electronics devices, such as DVD players. With
multiple Cell chips working in parallel, the PlayStation 3 will be a powerful machine.
2
But its radical new architecture will require games programmers to start from scratch.
In the meantime, Sony is trying to keep developers focused on the PlayStation 2.
Microsoft senses an opportunity. It is widely expected to steal a march on Sony by
launching the Xbox 2 towards the end of next year, kicking off the next round before
Sony is ready. “Microsoft has taken the gloves off,” says Mr McNealy. The
PlayStation 3 is not expected until early 2006, and even then only in Japan; analysts
do not expect the worldwide launch until late 2006. (Nintendo’s successor to the
GameCube is also expected in 2006.) Last time around, Sony’s 18-month head start
and Microsoft’s status as the industry’s newcomer meant that the Xbox never had a
chance of catching up with PlayStation 2; it was always going to be just a trial run for
Microsoft. But now Sony and Microsoft look evenly matched—and the battle can
begin in earnest.
2) Flights of fancy
REALLY keen on greener plastics? Then forget about manipulating maize and boiling
bacteria. Look, instead, to a truly “self-sustainable, continuously renewable source of
fibre”. So says Walter Schmidt, who works for America’s Agricultural Research
Service. His wondrous cornucopia is the humble chicken feather, and he has come up
with all sorts of plastic-like materials made from it.
The idea is not as daft as it sounds. Feathers are composed of keratin, a fibrous
protein that has the same sort of strength as synthetic fibres. That, reckons Dr Schmidt,
makes it a plausible substitute for those fibres. And feathers are plentiful and
cheap—basically a waste product—in countries with large, intensive chicken farms.
But making plastics out of feathers is not just a question of pouring them into a vat
and boiling them. For a start, the useful fibres are found only in the barbs (the fluffy
bits that stick out of the central shaft). Separating the barbs from the shaft is tricky,
but Dr Schmidt reckons he has found the right way to apply mechanical stress in order
to do so.
The result, however, is that the shaft disintegrates and the useful fibres have to be
winnowed from the chaff of broken shaft. Working out whether this has been done
satisfactorily is hard when the objects in question are a mere six thousandths of a
millimetre in diameter. That meant recruiting two clever instruments with
long-winded names—a differential scanning calorimeter, which measures the thermal
properties of the mixture as it is sorted, and a nuclear-magnetic resonance
spectrometer, which measures its chemical properties.
Once the result is suitably purified, however, it can be pressed into the desired
material. But even that is not easy. Feathers scorch if you heat them too much, so the
researchers have to keep the temperature and pressure within the narrow range that
3
make feathers malleable without burning them.
Dr Schmidt says that various firms are now testing his feather-based plastics for
use in such things as biodegradable nappies and home insulation. He also sees a bright
future for composite plastics made from a mixture of feathers and other materials.
And he has even taken to beating the fibres into a pulp that makes excellent paper.
Ideal, one presumes, for writing on with quill pens.
The Economist, January 15th - 21st 2000
http://www.economist.co.uk/editorial/freeforall/current/index_st7412.html
3) Holidays in space are on the horizon
09:30 04 September 04
NewScientist.com news service
When SpaceShipOne blazed a contrail into the clear blue sky above the Mojave desert
on 21 June 2004, it became the first privately built crewed craft to reach space.
With that one flight, Burt Rutan’s budget rocket plane broke the government
monopoly on spaceflight – leaving pundits excitedly predicting an era of private
sub-orbital space travel, with orbital travel and space hotels beckoning. But is there
enough consumer demand to support commercial space flight?
Maybe, according to a 2002 study by the management consultancy Futron, of
Bethesda, Maryland, which boldly predicts that no less than 12,000 people a year will
be taking sub-orbital tourist flights by 2020.
Although SpaceShipOne’s flight came well after the study was completed, it does
not change any of its basic assumptions, Futron analyst Janice Starzyk says. “We
made some pretty good assumptions, so we are sticking to these numbers.”
Wealthy and weightless
Futron polled only wealthy Americans who were itching to experience weightlessness
and see the curvature of Earth from space. It assumed that competition would drive
down ticket prices from an initial $100,000 to $50,000 by 2021.
Already, scores of would-be space tourists have put down substantial deposits on
those first flights. The money is going to companies like Rutan’s Scaled Composites
that are competing for the $10 million Ansari X prize, which will be awarded to the
first viable, reusable sub-orbital spacecraft.
One of those hoping for a ride on an early commercial flight is the London-based
Danish investment banker Per Wimmer, to whom space is a logical extension of his
interest in adventure travel.
4
When one of his fellow adventurers told him he could make a reservation for a
sub-orbital flight, he jumped at the chance, even though no commercial sub-orbital
craft then existed.
“It was really exciting to know this might be possible,” Wimmer says. And when
he has made his sub-orbital ride, he would like to take a holiday in orbit.
Some think he will not have to wait too long. Jim Benson, head of SpaceDev,
which built Rutan’s rocket engine, says far more powerful orbital spacecraft will
undoubtedly follow the sub-orbital vehicles, and orbit could be reached by 2008.
Mach 25 capability
Challenges abound: SpaceShipOne got to sub-orbit at a speed of Mach 3. Getting to
orbit will require engines capable of Mach 25. But Benson sees no show-stoppers.
Of course, tourists need accommodation, and Las Vegas hotelier Robert Bigelow
is aiming to supply it. Bigelow made his fortune as the owner of the Budget Suites of
America hotel chain, and he is now launching a $500 million effort to expand his
business off-planet.
Adapted from TransHab, a never-used NASA design for an inflatable space
station, Bigelow’s Nautilus space station module will provide 330 cubic metres of
living space for space tourists or industrial researchers.
The inflatable multilayered polymer hull of the “hab” will be around 30
centimetres thick and will contain layers of Kevlar - as used in bullet-proof vests - to
provide some protection against micrometeorites and space debris.
Bigelow’s engineers are testing the strength of the sandwich of high-tech fabrics
and radiation shielding that will make up Nautilus’s hull by firing high-speed
projectiles at it. They are also testing the hab to destruction by over-inflating the
modules, with the resulting explosions contained in rigid test cages.
Economies of scale
Nautiluses could be flown as independent space stations or connected with a docking
mechanism to make bigger hotels. Bigelow sees economies of scale as one of the keys
to profitability, and plans to sell space hotels to rivals for $100 million each.
It all sounds far-fetched, but like Rutan, Bigelow is approaching his space ideas
methodically, treating the space hotel like any other real-estate project. “We act as a
general contractor,” he says.
He sources materials, tests them to ensure quality, and tries to match the best
materials with the best prices, just as he would on a terrestrial construction project.
“Good is good,” Bigelow says, whether it’s on Earth or in orbit.
If all goes well with orbital tests of one-third-scale test modules to be launched
late next year, Bigelow plans to launch the first habitable Nautilus in 2008, around the
5
time SpaceDev expects the first private orbital flights to be happening.
While Starzyk, for one, does not think commercial orbital vehicles will happen
that soon, space flight has always been fuelled by dreamers daring to expect the
impossible. Time will tell if they are right.
Michael Belfiore
http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99996347
4) Technology: TV Thin Is Definitely In
By N'Gai Croal
Is your TV set ready for the future? The explosive growth in DVD and home-theater
setups, coupled with the slow-but-steady increase in high-definition television
programming, is prompting many couch potatoes to consider trading up to larger TVs
that display crisper images.
THE PROBLEM WITH standard cathode-ray-tube TV sets is that the larger the
screen, the deeper the tube, which makes the back of a typical 32-inch model protrude
like J. Lo in hip-huggers. But if you’ve got a little (OK, more than a little) extra cash
lying around, there are a pair of alternatives: plasma and LCD flat-screen TVs.
While still expensive, flat-screen prices have come down, and a wider audience is
starting to take a look. “These products are a real magnet for consumers,” says Jonas
Tanenbaum, who’s the head of marketing for Samsung’s flat-panel displays. “The sets
are so thin and light, they can fit in places where TVs haven’t gone before.” In fact,
most flat-panel displays end up hung from a wall like a painting. And many of these
sets are built in a rectangular shape that’s perfect for the widescreen images found on
most DVDs, instead of the almost-square shape of traditional TVs. Which of the two
alternatives—plasma or LCD—is right for you?
It pretty much boils down to four criteria: size, price, viewing angles and
flexibility. Currently, the largest LCD screens from companies like Samsung and
Sony top out at about 30 inches, while current plasma TVs go all the way up to 50
inches. So if size matters above all, go with plasma. The downside is cost: they start at
$6,000 (both Sony and Hitachi have 32-inch plasma TVs at that price; Samsung
makes a 42-inch model for the same amount). Samsung will soon offer a 63-inch unit,
which the company claims is the world’s largest, for a whopping $25,000. By
comparison, LCD TVs (short for liquid-crystal display, which is commonly used for
the screens on laptop and handheld computers) go from about $1,500 for a 15-inch
model to $6,000 for a 29-inch unit. Once again, Samsung plans to break the size
barrier later this year with a 40-inch unit for $10,000. Plasma has a wider viewing
angle, but LCD is more versatile, doubling nicely as a computer monitor.
6
Whether LCD or plasma, not all sets are created equal. Some are more appropriately
called monitors, since they don’t come with built-in speakers or tuners because they’re
intended for enthusiasts who prefer to select their own high-end components for
home-theater systems. Pioneer, for example, has two separate plasma-TV lines: one with
two built-in tuners (useful for picture-in-picture, or watching and recording different
stations) and one without. It’s also important to note that at present, any set that comes
with a tuner can receive only conventional TV signals; if you want to use your flat-screen
set for HDTV programming, you’ll need to buy a separate tuner that works with your
cable, satellite or over-the-air provider. Versatility is another point to keep in mind. Both
Sony and Samsung have LCD displays that can be used with PCs as well as DVD players
and game consoles. For college students, New Yorkers and other people trying to
conserve space, these multipurpose displays are a tempting option. And once you go flat,
you’ll never go back.
Source: NEWSWEEK, September 16 issue, 2002
5) Why phones are replacing cars
Apr 29th 2004
From The Economist print edition
And why this is a good thing
“PARKS beautifully”, boasts an advertising hoarding for the XDA II, above a glimpse
of its sleek silver lines. “Responsive to every turn”, declares another poster. Yet these
ads, seen recently in London, are selling not a car, but an advanced kind of mobile
phone. Maybe that should not be a surprise. Using automotive imagery to sell a
handset makes a lot of sense for, in many respects, mobile phones are replacing cars.
Phones are now the dominant technology with which young people, and urban
youth in particular, now define themselves. What sort of phone you carry and how
you customise it says a great deal about you, just as the choice of car did for a
previous generation. In today’s congested cities, you can no longer make a statement
by pulling up outside a bar in a particular kind of car. Instead, you make a similar
statement by displaying your mobile phone, with its carefully chosen ringtone, screen
logo and slip cover. Mobile phones, like cars, are fashion items: in both cases, people
buy new ones far more often than is actually necessary. Both are social technologies
that bring people together; for teenagers, both act as symbols of independence. And
cars and phones alike promote freedom and mobility, with unexpected social
consequences.
The design of both cars and phones started off being defined by something that
7
was no longer there. Cars were originally horseless carriages, and early models looked
suitably carriage-like; only later did car designers realise that cars could be almost any
shape they wanted to make them. Similarly, mobile phones used to look much like the
push-button type of fixed-line phones, only without the wire. But now they come in a
bewildering range of strange shapes and sizes.
Less visibly, as the structure of the mobile-phone industry changes, it increasingly
resembles that of the car industry (see article). Handset-makers, like carmakers, build
some models themselves and outsource the design and manufacturing of others.
Specialist firms supply particular sub-assemblies in both industries. Outwardly
different products are built on a handful of common underlying “platforms” in both
industries, to reduce costs. In each case, branding and design are becoming more
important as the underlying technology becomes increasingly interchangeable. In
phones, as previously happened in cars, established western companies are facing stiff
competition from nimbler Asian firms. Small wonder then that Nokia, the world’s
largest handset-maker, recruited its design chief, Frank Nuovo, from BMW.
That mobile phones are taking on many of the social functions of cars is to be
welcomed. While it is a laudable goal that everyone on earth should someday have a
mobile phone, cars’ ubiquity produces mixed feelings. They are a horribly inefficient
mode of transport—why move a ton of metal around in order to transport a few bags
of groceries?—and they cause pollution, in the form of particulates and nasty gases. A
chirping handset is a much greener form of self-expression than an old banger. It may
irritate but it is safe. In the hands of a drunk driver, a car becomes a deadly weapon.
That is not true of a phone (though terrorists recently rigged mobile phones to trigger
bombs in Madrid). Despite concern that radiation from phones and masts causes
health problems, there is no clear evidence of harm, and similar worries about power
lines and computer screens proved unfounded. Less pollution, less traffic, fewer
alcohol-related deaths and injuries: the switch from cars to phones cannot happen
soon enough.
8