The Progressive Puppy

Tech Toys from CES, and a Sex Robot from New Jersey

CNN and the Washington Post report on some cool new toys being displayed at the Consumer Electronics Show in Las Vegas.  I am not a gadget geek (I have trouble working the toaster) but these two items struck me as intriguing:  Parrot AR.Drone, a remote-controlled helicopter the size of a pizza that can hover motionlessly, propelled by four rotors and an on-board computer.  Users steer the Drones with iPhones, which act as remote controllers.  A camera on the drone sends a live video feed to the iPhone, meaning that you see what the Drone sees.  Then there's Samsung's LD2202 Multi-touch monitor, which allows users to write on the screen with their fingers. Cool, huh?  (Or maybe I just like the pretty colors.)

There's also a handheld device that scans printed text, converts it to voice and reads it aloud; a 3D TV without the cumbersome 3D glasses; a laptop with a touch-sensitive screen that pops off to become its own tablet reader; a TV remote with TV screen on it; and a cell TV with hand gesture technology (which would go haywire in my household where large dogs meander back and forth in front of the screen).

WaPo has a slideshow with dozens of pics of these eye-popping devices, and CNN compiles a "top ten list."

Las Vegas was also host to the Adult Entertainment Expo this weekend, where the world's first sex robot was unveiled.  (I thought they already made those in Japan.)  From Huffington Post:  A New Jersey company says it has developed "the world's first sex robot," a life-size rubber doll that's designed to engage the owner with conversation rather than lifelike movement. (A sex robot that just lies there, motionless?)  The level of sophistication demonstrated was not beyond that of a child's talking toy, but Roxxxy has a lot more brains than that – there's a laptop connected to cables coming out of its back.  It has touch sensors at strategic locations and can sense when it's being moved. But it can't move on its own, not even to turn its head or move its lips.  (So it's basically a blow-up doll that talks back.)  The sound comes out of an internal loudspeaker... The phrases that were demonstrated were prerecorded, but the robot will also be able to synthesize phrases out of prerecorded words and sounds.  Owners will also be able to select different personalities for Roxxxy, from "Wild Wendy" to "Frigid Farrah."  ... The suggested retail price is between $7,000 and $9,000.

Crude Michelle Obama Image Made Cruder by "Related Searches"

I don't know why Huffington Post's screen shot isn't showing the "related searches" tag - which to me is just as offensive as the image itself.  HP's is on top, my screen grab is right below. 

Notice where the arrow I drew points.  Why is this happening?  I understand how the "image popularity" might affect its ranking and placement - but "Related searches: Michelle Obama Monkey...?"   I mean, come on.  Shouldn't a related search be something like: "Michelle Obama First Lady" or "Michelle President's Wife?"

Nuts and bolts from HuffPo:  Google has purchased online ads in an effort to explain to users why an offensive image of Michelle Obama is appearing, and is ranked so highly, in its Google Image search results.  The Google ad, titled "Offensive Search Results," appears directly over the pictures of the First Lady that show up when users perform a Google Image search for "Michelle Obama."  Google's advertisement reads, "Sometimes our search results can be offensive. We agree." (So that makes seveal million of us.)  It then continues with a longer explanation [read the full text here] on why certain search results appear, and why they may be highly ranked.

"Sometimes Google search results from the Internet can include disturbing content, even from innocuous queries. We assure you that the views expressed by such sites are not in any way endorsed by Google. [...] We apologize if you've had an upsetting experience using Google. We hope you understand our position regarding offensive results."

The image was previously removed by Google on the grounds that the site hosting the Michelle Obama picture "violated Google's guidelines by serving malware to visitors," SearchEngineLand writes.  Now, however, the offensive photo has been posted to another site that does not violate Google rules.  (And it's ba-aaack.)

Interestingly, if you key in Michelle Obama without the quotes, the first picture in the lineup isn't the one that's been photoshopped.  (See screen shot, left.)  But it still includes that detestable "related searches" link which supposedly applies to the entire page. 

How did Google come up with the criteria for this?  Who wrote it?

(For what it's worth, on the search engine Bing, that image doesn't get top billing with OR without the quotes.)