Bringing you information on nearly everything!

Lenovo loves its red mousing nipple, Apple digs its aluminum and IBM adores those light pulses. Nearly two full years after we heard this very company touting breakthroughs in science thanks to a nanophotonic switch, in flies a similar technique from Yorktown Heights that could “greatly further energy efficient computing.” As the story goes, gurus at IBM have figured out how to replace electrical signals that communicate via copper wires between computer chips with tiny silicon circuits that chat using pulses of light. The device is called a nanophotonic avalanche photodetector, and according to Dr. T.C. Chen, this kind of embedded optical interconnection makes the “prospect of building power-efficient computer systems with performance at the Exaflop level” something that could be seen in the not-so-distant future. Reportedly, the avalanche photodetector demonstrated by IBM is the world’s fastest device of its kind, able to receive optical information signals at 40Gbps and simultaneously multiply them tenfold. We know that’s over some of your (read: our) heads, but there’s a sufficiently nerdy video after the break that gets right down to the whos, whats, whys and wheres.

Continue reading IBM keeps light pulse bandwagon rolling, uses ‘em for chip-to-chip communication

IBM keeps light pulse bandwagon rolling, uses ‘em for chip-to-chip communication originally appeared on Engadget on Sun, 07 Mar 2010 20:40:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Permalink Hot Hardware  |  IBM  | Email this | Comments

The Internet-era has made establishing trust an increasingly complicated issue. Our finely tuned ability to read facial expressions does not apply to e-mail, and emoticons are, at best, an imperfect substitute for sarcastic inflection (raise your hand if you’ve ever gotten into trouble for typing something that was meant to be a joke). So, how can we establish trust when our online identities are often little more than an avatar and few lines of text?

Fortunately, some in the scientific community have taken it upon themselves to help us through the confusion. Through both laboratory studies and field observation of people conversing over the Internet, scientists can survey when participants are likely to trust word-of-mouth or stab an absent colleague in the back. I sat down with a leading figure in this field, Professor Judy Olson, to talk about the essentials of building trust with digital communication.

The Psychology of Trust

Olson’s findings are based on a pillar of psychological research: People are willing to pass judgment, with or without good information. Where examples of one’s competence or reputation are lacking, people will construct whole profiles of another’s personality from what little information is available.

For instance, psychologists have found that when judging our own mistakes, we tend to blame the situation (traffic, a problem at work, an overbearing partner, etc.). When others make a mistake, we tend to blame their personality (they’re selfish, incompetent, uncaring, etc). Why? For ourselves, we have a full plate of information to link any series of situations to the cause of our misbehavior. For others, we see only the mistake itself; constructing a personality in explanation of that mistake is the shortest path from confusion to simplicity.

This fact leads Olson to one of her most important findings.

Responsiveness Is Key for Digital Communication

In e-mail, Linkedin and Facebook messages, much of the traditional markers of trust, such as voice intonation and body language, are hidden. Olson finds that when only text is available, participants judge trustworthiness based on how quickly others respond. So, for instance, it is better to respond to a long Facebook message “acknowledging” that you received the message, rather than to wait until there’s time to send a more thorough first message. Wait too long and you are likely to be labeled “unhelpful,” along with a host of other expletive-filled attributions the mind will happily construct.

Psychologically speaking, responsiveness makes it easier for others to attribute our misdeeds to the situation, rather than our personality. If you find keeping up with multiple inboxes difficult, you might consider having sites such as Linkedin and Facebook send e-mail alerts. Then, only archive the e-mail once the message has been responded to.

The same advice holds true for a medium such as Twitter, where one’s identity is represented by little more than a small square avatar and 140 characters of text. Earlier this month, when Southwest and director Kevin Smith went head to head, Southwest’s social media team jumped into the fray immediately with this tweet:

While reactions to Southwest’s decision to eject Smith from his flight have been mixed, its immediate response on a Saturday night allowed the company to be perceived as committed to a controversial policy, rather than a much worse alternative: ambivalent to customer concerns.

There are also other great examples of responsiveness, for those of us not in charge of a major airline’s public relations. The Veggie Grill, an up-and-coming vegetarian restaurant in Southern California, responded to a customer’s request for a particular dish via Twitter:

Veggie Grill’s responsiveness seems to have paid off: @quarrygirl devoted an entire blog post to reviewing her meal. She sealed the experience with a statement that must have made Veggie Grill quite happy, “Please take my advice and get out to the veggie grill el segundo location NOW. and if you can’t go now, be sure to go ASAP.”

The Hierarchy of Trusted Communication

Not all forms of communication are created equal. For establishing trust, video is better than audio (with no video), and audio is better than a chat window. The logic of this hierarchy seems intuitive: People communicate as much, if not more, with how an idea is conveyed, than with what it said. Shifty eyes and raised shoulders can reveal anxiety; intonation can convey passion. The more non-substantive information the medium can convey, the more data a listener has to decide how trustworthy the speaker is.

For instance, when Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger wanted to thank his Twitter followers for sending useful ideas on how to reduce government waste, he went straight to video:

It’s all too common for politicians to send out a “thank you” statement to constituents. Schwarzenegger, with rolled-up sleeves and clearly unscripted message, took a giant leap forward on the scale on authenticity.

Schwarzenegger is not alone in the video-making department. In 2009, Domino’s Pizza president, Patrick Doyle, twice went in front of a camera to express his frustration, once to apologize for a nauseating employee YouTube prank, and again to pledge to make a tastier pizza. Below is a video of Doyle’s apology overlaid with a graph of user reaction. Notice how the confidence meter spikes and dips along with his inflection.

Curiously enough, the use of video has been absent from many of social media’s biggest crises. Facebook’s privacy blunder and Southwest’s aforementioned tiff with Kevin Smith both sought to redeem shattered trust with a disembodied message. When so much of our trust is based on body language and inflection, why not use video? What do you think, should Facebook and Southwest have used video to respond to critics?

Conclusion

Few, if any, educational institutes teach the art of proper digital communication. Most of us have simply made up an impromptu strategy and crossed our fingers in the hopes that disaster doesn’t strike. With a bit of help from our friends in the fields of psychology and information technology, we can apply the age-old intuitions of face-to-face conversation to whatever advances in technology come our way.

More social media resources from Mashable:

- 3 Ways Educators Are Embracing Social Technology

- Top 5 Must-Read Social Media Books

- Social Media Can Change The World Through Common Ground

- 5 Ways Social Media Is Changing Our Daily Lives

- How Social Media is Taking the News Local

Images courtesy of iStockphoto, CHRISsadowski, pavlen

Reviews: Facebook, LinkedIn, Twitter, iStockphoto

Tags: arnold schwarzenegger, business, communication, e-mail, kevin smith, MARKETING, politics, psychology, Science, social media, social networks, Southwest, trending, Trust, twitter, video, youtube

Soren Gordhamer is the organizer of the Wisdom 2.0 Conference, which brings together staff from Google, Facebook, and Twitter with others to explore living wisely in our modern age. Mashable readers can use code ‘Mashable‘ for a discount when registering.

In the era of social media, our networks are much larger than they have ever been, and we have more ways to communicate with those in them. Even if you are not very active on Facebook or Twitter, my guess is that your sphere of communication has expanded significantly in recent years. Who you communicate with and how you communicate has changed radically. This new connected era brings both opportunities and challenges.

In the past we had a set of contacts, all of whom generally knew how to reach us — via phone, e-mail, or regular mail. Today, thanks in large part to social media, we have many different levels of communication, each with a specific purpose and etiquette. When we do not understand the role of these levels, they can become huge time wasters. When we do understand them however, they can help us more effectively engage and navigate these new waters.

Level 1: The Public Reply

Just about everyone, including Bill Gates (who if you have not heard, recently joined Twitter), has learned the importance of having both a means to communicate with people, and a channel where people can respond. Though you can do this on Facebook through comments on Fan pages and in groups, this seems most applicable to Twitter, where people use @replies to send and receive short, publicly viewable messages.

The public reply provides an open and transparent channel for people to interact with public figures, brands, and each other, without the pressure of response that comes with e-mail. Public interactions are a great starting point for engagement that never existed before social media, and if done correctly, can often lead to more fruitful direct communication.

Level 2: The Direct Message

Once a relationship is established through public communication, the next step is often a direct message within a social network. A direct message creates a private connection without opening the floodgates of e-mail. In fact, in may even be preferable to e-mail in the long term.

Why? Especially with Twitter, a DM has a character limit, and can only come from people you follow. If you have ten e-mails (of unlimited length and possibly unknown sources) and ten Twitter DMs, which are you likely to open first? For an increasing number of people, the answer is DM.

Once you make a connection through DM and get permission to follow-up via e-mail, the e-mail is often better received. Facebook, where most people allow private messages, can also be a means to take communication to the next level.

Level 3: E-mail

E-mail still has its place in this new era. It allows for more in-depth communication, can be easily forwarded, and sent to numerous people at once. When e-mail is used skillfully, it enables deeper communication. When not used effectively, it can become a huge time drain, as people write lengthy messages without much thought of the time and attention they are asking of recipients.

This fine line makes e-mail tough to master in the social media age. If you’re looking to advance to the next communication level with someone, respect this direct and private channel, and be sure to keep your e-mails succinct and meaningful.

Level 4: Phone

Hearing someone’s voice allows people to get a better sense of one another. While communicating via text, a person can take time to carefully craft his or her words, potentially presenting an image that may not be true or is harder to trust. A phone call allows for more immediate back-and-forth, and can be particularly helpful if a subject matter is delicate or people are considering a more in-depth relationship.

Some time back I was communicating with an editor about an issue that we had bounced back and forth several times. Finally she said, “Let’s chat about it on the phone.” This furthered the dialogue significantly and bypassed what may have taken weeks to sort out via e-mail.

Level 5: In-Person (or Video Chat)

I have met numerous people in person that I first communicated with via social networks. All of these meetings were enhanced by the natural progression of our first digital communication. While at one time face-to-face interactions were the entry point, today, in-person meetings often come at later stages.

Particularly if people are considering working on a project together, an in-person meeting allows for the most in-depth connection. For some people Skype or other video chat may be enough to experience this.

Too often people think communication is only through words, but our bodies communicate as well. They communicate how comfortable or uncomfortable we are discussing a matter, our level of passion for a subject, and our hopes and fears. Meeting with someone in person allows for communication to occur on multiple levels, and people often come away with a much better sense of each other.

Conclusion

In this era of social media when we are reaching out and engaging more and more people, the question is not just “Should I communicate with someone?” but “How should I communicate with someone? How can I build engagement one step at a time?” The more we allow for and understand the importance of all the various levels of communication, the more we can skillfully and effectively use each one.

More social media resources from Mashable:

- Zen and the Art of Twitter: 4 Tips for Productive Tweeting

- The Tao of Tweeting

- How Social Media Has Changed Us

- 5 Tips for Building Lasting Online Friendships

- 4 Steps for Effective Online Networking

Images courtesy of iStockphoto, TommL, PaulPaladin, Kohlerphoto, sandoclr

Reviews: Facebook, Skype, Twitter, iStockphoto

Tags: communication, e-mail, email, facebook, List, Lists, meeting, social media, social networking, social networks, twitter

Longing to get reacquainted with your hog? Looking to not get all lonely on the open road? Cardo Systems — which has been doing the whole intercom-laced motorcycle helmet for years now — has just pushed out its latest concoction, and the Scala Rider G4 looks to be the most advanced version yet of the talking cranium protector. Aside from boasting an integrated Bluetooth chip for handsfree calling and voice activation, there’s also a built-in FM radio and an intercom system that enables up to four riders to communicate within a full mile of one another. The company claims that the G4 is the “first Bluetooth headset to offer group intercom between up to three riders as well as communication among two riders and their two passengers on two bikes at distances up to 5,280 feet,” and if A2DP audio streaming is your thing, you’ll find support for that as well. Each lid will run you $279.95 and should last up to ten solid hours if yapping continuously, though we’re guessing your jacksy will be needing an overnight stay before you hit that milestone.

Scala Rider G4 Bluetooth headset enables four-way biker communication originally appeared on Engadget on Tue, 02 Feb 2010 10:04:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Permalink   |  Business Wire  | Email this | Comments

digg_url = ‘http://digg.com/hardware/16_Year_Old_Invents_Radio_For_Texting_1000_Feet_Underground’; You know what’s really annoying? Teenagers. Even more annoying? Teenagers inventing legitimately useful things and getting awards for it. Meet Alexander Kendrick, the 16-year old inventor of a new low-frequency radio that allows for cave-texting, which isn’t some fresh new euphemism, it just means people can finally text while deep underground. How deep, you ask — well, Alexander’s team of intrepid explorers went far enough (946 feet) to record the deepest known digital communication ever in the United States. What you see the young chap holding above is the collapsible radio antenna, though plans are already afoot to ruggedize and miniaturize the equipment to make it more practical for cave explorers and rescuers. Way to go, kid.

Teenager invents low-frequency radio for underground communications originally appeared on Engadget on Mon, 01 Feb 2010 06:11:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Permalink Slashdot  |  NPR  | Email this | Comments

You know what’s really annoying? Teenagers. Even more annoying? Teenagers inventing legitimately useful things and getting awards for it. Meet Alexander Kendrick, the 16-year old inventor of a new low-frequency radio that allows for cave-texting, which isn’t some fresh new euphemism, it just means people can finally text while deep underground. How deep, you ask — well, Alexander’s team of intrepid explorers went far enough (946 feet) to record the deepest known digital communication ever in the United States. What you see the young chap holding above is the collapsible radio antenna, though plans are already afoot to ruggedize and miniaturize the equipment to make it more practical for cave explorers and rescuers. Way to go, kid.

Teenager invents low-frequency radio for underground communications originally appeared on Engadget on Mon, 01 Feb 2010 06:11:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Permalink Slashdot  |  NPR  | Email this | Comments