The screws used to hold the satellite speakers’ stands in place are M6-1.0 hex headed machine bolt/screws.

There.

http://www.engadget.com/2012/12/14/french-reporters-infiltrate-zhengzhou-foxconn-iphone-5-factory/

French investigative journalists managed to unveil some disturbing details about the Foxconn’s Zhengzhou iPhone 5 factory. Most notably, completely debunking Apple’s claims that things are fixed.

Meanwhile, regular workers also claimed that much of their upgraded $290 monthly salary was still being absorbed by the company through housing, insurance and food — with one claiming he only had $340 left after a year of toil. While that might be due to corrupt businesses in the area, the journalists found that Foxconn also levied numerous charges against employees, including around $7 for a psychological test that’s supposed to weed out suicidal candidates.

It’s pretty discouraging to see this type of exploitation and seeing a company I (used to) admire on a professional level state the complete opposite. You can’t possibly sustain good human design while causing human suffering.

Strategic investment solves the chicken & the egg problem. It gives you both the chicken & the egg so it doesn’t matter what comes first.

— Pratik Bose Pramanik (@PratikPramanik) October 31, 2012

Image Courtesy: Reuters/Stringer

CITY INTERFACING

Foxconn Cities 2012: Digital Freedom vs. Restricted Reality

Epilogue to City as an Interface by Pratik Pramanik

I wrote about Foxconn back in December 2011, comparing it to a KM3, a hypothetical hyper-designed city. Foxconn’s biggest customer is Apple Inc., a company with more influence than some countries. I wrote my analysis as Apple was becoming the highest valued brand in the world. It was also written before one of my childhood idols (as I grew up in Cupertino), Steve Jobs, died. Since then, my level of contemplation on Apple’s partner has dramatically increased. Much has changed at Apple, but seemingly not much has changed in, the now plural, Foxconn cities.

[PDF Version]

:::

Since my initial writing, Foxconn has expanded to more cities, including Zhengzhou, the key location for Apple iPhone 5 manufacturing, and Chengdu, the key location for Apple iPad manufacturing. Despite the new locations, these manufacturing cities are built around the same framework as Foxconn City in Shenzen.

These new manufacturing cities present a scenario that is foreboding; a city framework that can be exported and be recreated relatively quickly. This city framework restricts reality in order to maintain its manufacturing supremacy. It is a self-sustaining system rife with human ethics violations. These new Foxconn cities were the locations of the riots in September 2012 and rampages earlier in June. These riots are a sign of greater tension between Foxconn and its citizens. What is more interesting is the disparity between corporate and the raw footage. [i]

Foxconn said there were two isolated, small-scale disputes between production line workers and quality assurance personnel … [adding] that they were quickly addressed. It did not specify what issues had caused the disputes but said immediate measures were taken to resolve the problems, including adding production line workers.[ii]

Over two thousand people and five thousand police were involved in the riots. Foxconn sees seven thousand humans as minuscule compared to billions of products shipped from their factories. Seven thousand is a number a great magnitude smaller than what Foxconn normally deals with. In the face of that magnitude, what is one human citizen to the governing body of Foxconn City?

The direction of low-cost manufacturing is towards a restricted reality… and it is unsustainable. Despite being the “the best-paid jobs in electronics manufacturing, it is still struggling to hire enough works to fill its new factories.” [iii] This means, in the interim, Foxconn has to put a perverse amount of pressure on its current workers to maintain output while increasing revenue.

The demand for expansion of output and contraction of build tolerances leads to greater demands on human capital; the citizen of Foxconn. In the process, restrictions are not only placed on the environment of citizens but on their very lives. Zhang Tingzhen is one of these Foxconn citizens having his life restricted by the company he works for. [iv] Zhang was 25 when he had half his brain removed after surviving an electric shock while working. While Zhang does receive coverage for his medical costs, Foxconn uses the complicated compensation laws to restrict his right to life. They are requiring him to make a 70km trip for a medical assessment that would save the company money; a trip he cannot make and will only lead to a negative outcome.

With a limited supply of new traditional employees, these cities find new sources of labor using underhand methods. An investigation by China Labor Watch revealed that Foxconn Yantai (where the Nintendo’s Wii U game consoles are being produced) had around 200 fourteen to sixteen year old underage interns; all of who were found working overtime.[v] All of this was facilitated by teachers (presumably associated with Foxconn) “threaten(ing) [students], saying ‘if you don’t intern, then you won’t get any credit, won’t receive a graduation diploma, or may even be kicked out of school.’” Combined with the forced enlistment in no-suicide pacts[vi], Foxconn’s city framework looks to integrate any and all citizens as predictable working machines. The restricted reality Foxconn creates seems to be designed to dehumanize humans, leaving them with no dignity.

The increased restrictions of higher quality and volume demands have led to these riots. In response Foxconn cities have been even more restrictive of journalistic media, diminishing global awareness of the situation. The Internet presents a huge hurdle to those imposing a restricted reality upon a populace.  It is good news that the citizens of Foxconn are using the Internet to show their reality. The digital freedom allows for them to let the world know about their living conditions. Despite this, not much has taken place to improve their lives in these restricted cities.

A restricted reality is possible when you can control the flow of people and media in the environment. While mainstream news sources haven’t been comprehensively covering the riots due to election coverage and a larger European financial crisis; the Internet has been a source for citizens to reach out. The citizens have no mobility yet the Internet allows them to interface with the rest of the world; including the journalistic media. Chinese public policy has failed and so has the private policies of Foxconn’s customers. Apple has taken grossly ineffective action on the matter since last year, seemingly rewarding Foxconn by increasing order sizes. In spite of the events at Foxconn Yantai, Nintendo has let Foxconn continue as a supplier citing that Foxconn has taken full responsibility[vii]. However, Nintendo’s own Corporate Social Responsibility Procurement Guidelines[viii] were violated, which means Nintendo should stop contracting with Foxconn. Despite this, consumer awareness and action is minimal; iPhone 5 sales are ascending rapidly[ix], new iPad[x] and Wii U preorders[xi] have reached incredibly high levels. Demand for products made with unethical manufacturing will only increase with the introduction of Apple and Nintendo’s newer generation of products.

The primary interface for consumers with people in Foxconn cities is demand for products. In a faster-moving globalized digital world, every device a consumer orders adds another to the queue in a Foxconn manufacturing plant. Consumers now directly affect the lives of people living in a Foxconn city. Demand is not something that is going to diminish. For companies like Foxconn, demand will only increase, as they will serve any company looking for high quality assembly at economical prices. Consumers have the digital freedom to be users of this demand interface. On the other side, citizens of Foxconn cities are further restricted by consumers using that interface. Much like we changed the way we thought about cities as an interface in City as an Interface, thinking about an economic principle in terms of an interface may really augment the thought processes of those looking to change the situation.

In a time when demand is constantly growing, it’s hard to pin down what exactly will change the framework of Foxconn cities which are so profitable and unchangeable. When I wrote my article in 2011, there was hope that the lives of the citizens of Foxconn city would change for the better. A year and a half later, it is worse. It presents the question: Can policy, public or private, affect the nature of global manufacturing?

___________________________________

[i] Los Angeles Times, “Videos purportedly showing Foxconn workers rioting hit the Web” http://articles.latimes.com/2012/sep/24/business/la-fi-tn-apple-foxconn-fight-video-20120924

[ii] USA Today,  “Foxconn denies worker unrest slowed iPhone assembly” http://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/personal/2012/10/06/foxconn-denies-worker-unrest-slows-iphone-assembly/1616853/

[iii] Financial Times, “China: Beyond the conveyor belt” http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/53358d5e-1452-11e2-8cf2-00144feabdc0.html

[iv] Reuters, “Worker’s injury casts harsh new light on Foxconn and China” http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/10/10/us-china-foxconn-worker-idUSBRE8991M620121010

[v] China Labor Watch, Press Release, October 15^th 2012  http://www.chinalaborwatch.org/news/new-438.html

[vi] Stuff New Zealand, The workers dying to meet iPad 2 demand http://www.stuff.co.nz/technology/gadgets/4980830/The-workers-dying-to-meet-iPad-2-demand

[vii] Kotaku, The Result of Nintendo’s Investigation into Underage Foxconn Workers  http://kotaku.com/5954397/the-result-of-nintendos-investigation-into-underage-foxconn-workers

[viii] Nintendo Corporate Social Responsibility Report http://www.nintendo.co.jp/csr/en/pdf/nintendo_csr2012e.pdf

[ix] New York Times, “Apple Profit Rises 24% on Sales of iPhone 5” http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/26/technology/apple-profits-rise-24-on-iphone-5-sales.html?_r=0

[x] The Washington Post, “Apple iPad mini pre-orders go live, white version sells out in minutes” http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/technology/apple-ipad-mini-pre-orders-go-live-white-version-sells-out-in-minutes/2012/10/26/d55a174e-1f71-11e2-ba31-3083ca97c314_story.html

[xi] Computerworld, “Nintendo: Wii U pre-orders strong, shortages likely this year” http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9232877/Nintendo_Wii_U_pre_orders_strong_shortages_likely_this_year?taxonomyId=154

http://arstechnica.com/apple/2012/10/the-ghost-of-jobs-apples-challenge-to-decide-what-would-steve-do/

I think it’s a little bit odd, though expected, that we are talking about this. Apple, like any other company, had its fair share of flops under Jobs’ tenure and this article has a good foundation by jumping off from this point. The article seeks to highlight that Apple has very talented employees and that is why things got done and done well. What this article doesn’t talk about is hiring. Apple’s hiring practices from here on out will dictate their longevity. Apple no longer has the filter that is Steve Jobs testing people’s mustard at every encounter. Good design requires mental fortitude and if you can handle the wrath of a perfectionist with a mind of his own, you can generally design some “cool shit.”

http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2012/06/passport-to-hell-why-thin-client-desktops-must-die/

I think it’s rather dehumanizing to see someone as unworthy of computing. Thin clients as a primary workstation are something we should move away from. The new marketing term “cloud client” also exemplifies the disconnect from corporate thought processes and the realities of human work.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/06/29/google_ms_tablet_strategies_wtf/

A great short article on how companies owning the platform can’t just release a device with no thought put into it; the same as their customers. In the long run, the only thing getting larger is landfills, not the company’s coffers.

It could definitely use a new paint job but I kinda like the weathered look; feels like it belongs. Now that it’s complete I need to take it on a glamour shoot with nice bokeh.

 Specs:

• ~50″ steel frame and fork, Taiwanese made, labeled Monarch.
• Sugino Mighty Crank 171, 144m BCD
• Origin8 Mighty Crank Replica Alloy 47T Chainring
• Wellgo WPD M-17c Clipless/Platform pedals
• 2 Speed freewheel (15T, 16T)
• KMC Z610HX
• Campagnolo-style rear brake
• Tektro R556 Long-reach front brake
• Mavic A719 rear wheel and hub
• Arya front wheel and hub
• Duro Tires
• Campagnolo Aero Seat Post
• Forte Performance “Classic” Saddle
• Steel Handle bar on Dia Compe Grand Compe Stem
• Weinmann Brake Levers

“I’m smiling because I’m hoping you can tell me why I’m holding a marital aid and an electric shaver up to this confusing TV” Img Src: TechDigestTV

The industry philosophy – A philosophy of moving into a market with no clue what to do.

We are in the midst of numerous releases of TVs that do everything. The industry is right in this respect, TV’s should do more. Despite the incredible thinness and screen size, TVs look like dinosaurs… relics from the past. They are a product of the broadcast system, a system dating back to the 1930s for TV and earlier than that for radio. Much like the decreasing usage of traditional radio the broadcast system is experiencing erosion of its business model. The reality is they are becoming oversized tablets when the form factor isn’t right.

App overload on a form factor never designed for it.

Use of company’s paradigms in an unrelated form factor. If you are focused on using something your company is already an expert at, does that count as going into a new market?

They see TVs as monitors, not as cultural items. Similar to how a fireplace is more than just a provider of warmth and a ward against dangerous animals. It’s a gathering place, centerpiece, conversation starter, an escape and a whole host of other constructs society has placed on it in the past 80 years. This rich history has to be simultaneously thought of (for resonance) and ignored (for progress). The television set industry is almost completely on the side of ignoring what makes the TV a powerful and popular product.

People have a couple of needs when watching their flat screen: be entertained by shows, get important breaking information quickly. Smartphones are becoming the go to for the second need. Which is great for the industry, it takes tremendous burden off the industry to develop something that serves both. It also gives them some extra time to really look at some of those cultural constructs. But they don’t. Instead they go after the latest buzz-spec: Apps.

Apps can be great and even be a great platform to really leverage those rich cultural constructs. Non-standard interfaces for “Apps” can be good but generally aren’t. It’s a double edged sword. The problem is that having too many different interfaces on one device automatically eliminates the majority of the market from fully utilizing your product, the only people who can comprehend every single different service interface offered are young people who can’t yet afford your product and the costs of those services.

Mind and body ergonomics that are bent out of shape

Samsung TVs are an enigma. They have incomprehensible interfaces and yet are highly acclaimed by supposedly tough reviewers like CNET. Samsung’s SMART Hub TVs are lauded for boasting more apps and streaming services than the competition. But who wants to look at and navigate this every evening?

Samsung’s promotional material thinks that smart and easy don’t necessarily go together. Tells you something. Oh, and that’s me raising my hand to say, “Hey Sammy! This is making me nauseous!”

There is customizability but it just looks so damn silly. And I have to wave my hand around trying to do all this? I’m not surprised the suits designing this monstrosity didn’t hear this in their future customers’ voices: “I’m tired I just got back from work you stupid TV!” I’m a tech anorak of sorts who can set up a tidy home theater system, yet I don’t even want to bother trying to wrap my brain around this. Imagine the average user.

What doesn’t help them either is that they have so many different remotes on different devices, no consistency year to year. Sony has been great about this, the interoperability and design consistency of their remotes for the past 10+ years is a glorious lesson in encouraging repeat customers. Sony may be losing money on their TV division because they aren’t bringing that eye for user familiarity into the next generation of their products. Samsung’s never had that eye, so they and other TV brands are cluttering our lives and living rooms with junk “smart” TVs while they try to figure out that “smart” doesn’t mean half-baked.

Img Src: Slashgear

I will give them credit for what is a decent concept: including two separate remotes in the box. One remote for initially setting up and another, sexier one for everyday use. But they screw that up by adding touchpads and gestures that users have to read the manual to understand. Users end up using the traditional remote because they just want to watch the game on channel 7 and it’s easier just to tap the button for it. That or users end up using a cancerous remote anyways because it has a keyboard grafted onto it and it’s necessary to use a feature of SMART Hub.

It’s like they don’t even care about ergonomics. Yes, that’s a calculator-style screen. Img Src: Engadget

If I see a keyboard on a remote, I know the company doesn’t give a rat’s ass about the user experience. It’s nonsensical to introduce a control device more complicated than what it is replacing. There is a reason why people paid thousands extra to have all the RS-232 ports on their home theater equipment professionally set up for home automation. Because it’s friggin’ awesome and gets you to the best experience quicker and without having to touch too many things. It’s also great that we seem to be moving in a direction to bring the cost of that down. However, it’s the industry (not just Samsung) that is adding more layers of menus and confusion that only get in the way of being entertained.

Instead of nitpicking the remotes for a whole page, let me ask this question: “Are the companies too afraid to not have a feature?” Things like the integration of webcams into a TV might be a great idea for changing the nature of video communication, but it’s going to suck if it’s among a metric shit-ton of apps, buried in an interface you don’t use regularly and you have to flail your tired arms to use. The primary usage is to watch something fun, no one is thinking about how to quickly navigate to Skype for TVs; so if you want that to be a major selling point, actually put some thought into making it second nature on the device.

A recent release raises an important Q

Can this die-cast techno boob (left) render GoogleTV(right) irrelevant?

The recent Nexus Q release raises a related issue about second nature computing and it’s relationship to Google TV. It’s the dichotomy of extremely simple vs super complex and how there is a fine line between them. Nexus Q seems like an Airplay-esque conduit for Android devices, which, in concept, makes it a super simple device to operate.  GoogleTV is an interesting idea of using search for everything related to entertainment. Powerful concept, but does it actually work in practice? It goes back to what I was saying earlier, it’s a paradigm that doesn’t fit the form factor. You don’t search from a couch, you surf and just ride the content wave. Nothing has ever trained you to do anything more complex than a couple button clicks with a TV (if it has, you probably hated it). However, on the tablet and on an OS designed for searching, this can work because it’ll be second nature in this form factor. Searching on a tablet is a lot more natural to people who are already using them. After that, there is no resistance in just flinging content to the screen.

So yes, the Nexus Q will nullify the Google TV because it’s just a better concept from the get go. Will the Nexus Q be a successful product overall? I don’t know at this point. It is a bit expensive at $299 and requires a smartphone or tablet. Primarily, its success will be heavily reliant on Google’s Play ecosystem and I’m still wrapping my head around the the convoluted mission Play has.

But what about the revolution in this article’s title? Entertainment ecosystems will play a huge role in the change of television, not the actual devices themselves. In Part 2 I explore what it will take to seize the future in the TV market. Yes, I’m going to be doing a Part 2, and it’ll be a killer…

http://www.theverge.com/2012/6/26/2986317/google-project-glass-wearable-computers-disappoint-me

I says a lot of the things I wanted to say about Google’s potential implementation better than I possible could. It also talks in depth about the history of wearable computers. I will have my own article about this device, after carefully reading over today’s announcement, sometime in the coming weeks.

There is potential for this Google Glass to incorporate elements from my 2010 project attn:world.