Samsung Galaxy Note 7 production permanently aimed following battery explosions

South Korean electronics company to kill off its flagship smartphone after failing to fix problems with batteries catching fire

Samsung has confirmed that it is permanently stopping production of the Galaxy Note 7 smartphone after it was involved in dozens of fires and explosions worldwide.

In a regulatory filing in South Korea late on Tuesday, the firm said it had attained the decision to stop production, to the purposes of customer safety.

A day earlier Samsung said it was adjusting production, an admission that many assured as the first steps towards killing the phone entirely.

It said in a statement: Putting customer security as the top priority, we have reached a final decision to halt production of Galaxy Note 7s. A spokesman confirmed that the suspension was permanent.

The move comes after the flagship smartphone, which the company wish i could set it dedicate it an advantage over iPhone-maker Apple, was beset by batteries catching fire and exploding. Tries to rectify the problem by recollecting a replacing faulty batches were undermined when replacing phones also started malfunctioning.

Samsung said customers will be able to apply for a full rebate or to swap their Note 7s for other Samsung products. It also advised all customers with an original or replacement Galaxy Note 7 to power down and stop using the device immediately.

In discontinuing the phone, Samsung follows the relevant recommendations of many analysts who considered it as a lost cause, and who argued that the companys priority should be protecting the rest of its brand.

If its once, it could be taken as a mistake. But for Samsung, the same thing happened twice with the same model so theres going to be a considerable loss of consumer religion, said Greg Roh at HMC Investment Securities.

The reason customers opt brands like Samsung and Apple is because of product reliability so in this case brand injury is inevitable and it will be costly for Samsung to turn that around again, Roh said.

The company will struggle to keep premium clients from switching to other manufacturers such as Google, which released its own Pixel XL phone this month as a direct challenger to the Note 7. Edison Investment Research said: As a result of making a complete mess of the Galaxy Note 7 remember, Samsung is more likely to lose a large number of high end users to other Android handsets rather than to Apple.

Richard Windsor, an analyst with Edison, added: As long as Samsung carried out the remember smoothly and maintained users very happy, the issue would eventually blow over. Unfortunately, this is very far from the lawsuit and the fact that Samsung appeared to still be shipping defective devices could trigger a large loss of religion in Samsung products.

It also ensures that when there are problems with its other products they will be brought into laser focus by the media. The net outcome is that Galaxy Note 7 proprietors are now likely to end up with devices from other manufacturers.

The phone initially launched to rave reviews, with critics praising its waterproofing, curved screen, high-quality cameras and fast charging. It appeared to be a success for Samsung, which had intentionally pursued a strategy of rapid invention to capitalise on the expected release of the dull iPhone 7.

But shortly after its release on 19 August, reports began to surface of fully charged Note 7 telephones smouldering, catching fire, and even exploding. The company announced that it was suspending marketings of the phone on 2 September, which prevented most devices hitting Europe a secondary marketplace for phablet-sized telephones after the US and Asia. It also offered a voluntary replacement programme for users with affected Note 7s, which it calculated covered 70% of the phones it had produced.

That voluntary replacement program led to a rap on the knuckles from the US customer watchdog on 9 September, which argued that Samsung should instead have issued an official remember which it started a few weeks later. The company might have hoped this would be the end of the issues, but replacement devices began to exhibit the same problems.

On 1 October, Samsung resumed sale of the phone in South Korea and replacements were continuing in the US. Five days later came a report of a replacement Note 7 starting to smoulder on a US flight.

By the time Samsung announced a hiatus to production there were eight reported cases of supposedly safe replacement Note 7s catching fire.

According to the Associated Press, South Koreas safety agency is still investigating why the replacement phones have been explosion, and an official said the replacement phones may have a different defect to the problem with the original Note 7s.

Neil Campling, Head of Global TMT Research for Northern Trust Capital Markets, estimated the total financial cost of the affair as potentially higher than$ 2bn, but added that the reputational damage could be greater still.

The affair has not been as damaging for Samsungs stock price as might have been expected, however. The companys shares reached a low in mid-September, after news of the recall transgressed, but proceeded to rally to an all-time high in early October.

After confirmation of multiple faulty replacement devices came in over the weekend, however, the stock has fallen almost 10% in the past two days, to 1,554, 000 won. The news of halted production came too late be included in Tuesdays trading in South Korea.

Karissa Chua, an analyst with Euromonitor International, said: This setback will cast doubts on whether Samsung can sustain its stellar results in its mobile business over the next two to three one-quarters. In words of financial losses due to the product recall, it will be greater in the US where Samsung is also plagued with potential suits in the US and claims over damage to property and medical bills.

The biggest challenge for Samsung would be to prevent the consumer and investor fallout from worsen, Chua added. The fact that its premium Note 7 smartphone is labelled a safety hazard is damaging to Samsung Corp and its affiliate Samsung SDIs reputation. It has the potential to have repercussions on consumers overall confidence in Samsung smartphones if the company does not take steps to assuage customers fears over its devices, particularly with the new Note 7 replacements.

Read more:

Robots have already taken over our run, but they’re made of flesh and bone | Brett Frischmann and Evan Selinger

The triumph of digital Taylorism means that many jobs in the modern economy have been sapped of their humanity, write professors Brett Frischmann and Evan Selinger

Most of the headlines about technology in the workplace be attributed to robots rendering people unemployed. But what if this threat is confusing us from another of the distorting effects of automation? To what extent are we being was transformed into workers that resemble robots?

Take taxi drivers. The prevailing wisdom is they will be replaced by Uber drivers, who in turn will ultimately be replaced by self-driving automobiles. Those lauding Transport for London’s refusal to renew Uber’s licence might like to consider how, long before that company “disrupted” the industry, turn-by-turn GPS route management and dispatch control systems were de-skilling taxi drivers: instead of building up navigational knowledge, they increasingly rely on satnavs.

Fears about humans becoming like machines go back longer than you might suppose. The sort of algorithmic management we see in the modern gig economy- in which drivers and riders for digital platforms such as Uber and Deliveroo are dispatched and managed not by human beings, but by sophisticated computer systems- has its roots in a management hypothesi developed by Frederick Taylor in the early 20 th century. As a young man, Taylor worked as a shop foreman for a steel-making corporation in Philadelphia, where he diagnosed inefficiencies he saw as being products of poorly structured incentives, unmotivated and sometimes shirking workers, and a huge knowledge gap that rendered management ineffective. Administrators, he proclaimed, knew too little about the workforce, their tasks, capabilities and motivations.

Taylor and his disciples extolled the virtues of breaking down chores into inputs, outputs, processes and procedures that can be mathematically analysed and transformed into recipes for efficient production. Over decades, and across different industries, his theories have been used to apply time-and-motion studies to workplaces, workers and what they render. The assembly line is the most recognised instance of Taylorism: unskilled workers engage in repetition, mindless chores, attending to semi-finished parts that, in the end, are combined into a whole product.

Over time, Taylorism became synonymous with the evils of extracting maximum value from workers while treating them as programmable cogs in machines. An early case in point: in 1917, at the high levels of wartime, approximately 100, 000 Australian workers took part in a general strike. The action was sparked by the introduction of day cards, which recorded every minute expend at employment creation and breakings. Today, it’s hard to think of time cards, even digital ones, as innovation. They have faded into the background of office life, business-as-usual for many employees. But back then they were seen as a new tool of repression. Directors could use the information to learn how fast everyone worked and demand a quicker pace. This humiliating model was decried as” robotism “.

‘ Instead of building up navigational knowledge, they increasingly rely on satnavs- but it’s not just taxi drivers being de-skilled .’ Photograph: Richard Gardner/ Rex Features

Taylor’s approach jump-started debates about data-driven innovation and surveillance that continue today. The modern, digital version of Taylorism is more powerful than he could have ever imagined, and more dehumanising than his early critics could have predicted. Technological innovations have stimulated it increasingly easy for managers to quickly and inexpensively collect, process, evaluate and act upon massive amounts of information. In our age of big data, Taylorism has spread far beyond the factory floor. The algorithmic management of the gig economy is like period cards on steroids.

And it’s not just taxi drivers who are being de-skilled. The logistics and trucking industries utilise even more extensive and intensive data-driven systems that control fleets and employees. Employers utilise an array of sensors to track locating, timing, driving and other aspects of performance. Complex algorithms, analytics software and other hidden components of management systems generate intelligence which is then are applied to inform truck driver. Cornell University professor Karen Levy has documented how these intense management systems reduce employees’ autonomy and can incentivise sleep deprivation and speeding.

Technology also permits much more sophisticated performance management of employees than during Taylor’s lifetime. Back then, employee reviews were costly in resource terms. They required face-to-face meetings or documents that took time to pull together. Today small businesses as well as giants such as Amazon are employing digital tools to generate continuous streams of data for employee appraisal. Constant monitoring, and the addition of peer review to supervisor feedback, can create overly competitive, and sometimes hostile, dynamics between employees.

It’s not just the intensity of the monitoring that is different. Surveillance is increasingly conceals. In Taylor’s analogue era, employees were acutely aware when they were being observed by management with stopwatches and notebooks. Today management tools are much less visible. A cashier at a fast-food franchise who rings up buys with a virtual cash register app on her tablet might be unaware of the programs running surreptitiously in the background, logging keystrokes, recording audio or video, transmitting data and continuously rating performance. Employees who might know that their boss monitors calls, texts, and browsing on their employer-issued smartphones might be surprised to learn that the device also communicates geolocation data, letting tracking of their motion 24/7.

The first line of defense against digital Taylorism is to resist its relentless creep within and outside the workplace. Taylor’s logic has become embedded in our everyday lives through our always-on digital environment. There is no easy solution to this. To find remedies, we’ll need to experimentation with regulation and strengthened workers’ rights through institutions- such as unions- which have become weakened. France’s effort to promote the” right to disconnect” by banning workplaces with 50 or more employees from sending emails on weekends or vacations might not be perfect, but it is a step in the right direction.

We also need a shift in perspective. Taylorism starts from the assumption that employees are innate shirkers. While there will always be some who want to game the system and put in as little effort as is practicable, there are plenty who don’t. When the guiding presumption of management is that employees won’t be productive unless forced to be by constant observation, it engineers low morale and moves people to act like resources that need to be micromanaged. Too often, we become what we’re expected to be.

On paper, constructing human being behave like simple machines might deliver greater efficiency. But modern-day Taylorism threatens something that those kinds of market analyses fail to capture: the value of being human.

* Brett Frischmann is a professor in statute, business and economics at Villanova University, Pennsylvania; Evan Selinger is a philosophy professor at Rochester Institute of Technology, New York state

Read more:

Bain, Carlyle, Thoma Bravo Are Among Bidders for Citrix

Private equity firms Bain Capital, Carlyle Group LP and Thoma Bravo are among bidders for cloud-services company Citrix Systems Inc ., people familiar with the issues said.

The buyout firms submitted bids last week, said the people, who asked not to be identified because they weren’t authorized to speak publicly. Citrix, which has a market value of about $12.3 billion, has furthermore attracted interest from at least one strategic suitor, the person or persons said. The name of the corporate bidders couldn’t immediately be learned.

No final decision has been made and Citrix may choose not to seek a sale, the people said.

Citrix is working with Goldman Sachs Group Inc . to seek potential suitors for the company, people familiar with the issues said in March. A full buyout by a private equity firm would be the largest since Apollo Global Management LLC acquiredADT Corp. in 2016 in a deal valued at $15 billion including indebtednes, according to data compiled by Bloomberg.

Representatives for Carlyle, Goldman Sachs and Thoma Bravo declined to comment. Representatives of Bain and Citrix didn’t respond to email requests for comment.

After reaching a standstill arrangements with activist shareholder Elliott Management Corp. in 2015 and adding Elliott’s Jesse Cohn to its committee, Citrix has undertaken strategies of operational reviews. Last July the company announced its intention to spin off its GoTo business and merge it with LogMeIn Inc ., in a $1.8 billion deal to combine the rival online session organizers.

Read more:

Crunch Report | Soylent Is Back

Todays Stories

  1. Super Mario Run tops 5 million downloads on day one, but half reviews are just one star
  2. 2016 isnt done yet as Soylent powder goes back on sale
  3. To prevent another accident, Facebooks solar drone will get an airbrake


Written by : Tito Hamze, John Mannes
Hosted and edited by : Tito Hamze
Filmed by : Joe Zolnoski
Teleprompter : Joe Zolnoski

Notes :

  • I dont know what to wear on Crunch Report( Its a hard decision and I suck at dressing myself ). If you are a startup andwant to me to wear something mail me an XL T-shirt and Ill wear it in an episode. Im not going to mention the company on the shirt in the episode but it will be there. No offensive stuff, its entirely at my discretion if I wear it.Mail it to me. Thanks <3 ok, bye.
  • TechCrunch C/ O Tito Hamze
    410 Townsend street
    Suite 100
    San Francisco Ca. 94107

    Read more:

Accenture, can I ask you a few questions?

Hey Accenture, are you recognizing also that your PR firm is pitching your latest corporate beta for a creepy face and emotion-monitoring algorithm as a party trick?

Do you know what a party is? Have you read the definition?

Would you call requiring people to download an app before they can get into an event a party-time kind of thing to do? Would you say that demanding that people scan their faces so theycan be recognizedby an algorithm fun hours?

Doeshaving that same algorithm watch and record every interaction that happens in the Austin bar or event space youve filled with some light snacks and abunch of free liquor count as rockin like Dokken?

Do good hosts require people to become lab rats in the latest attempt to develop HAL?

Is monitoring patients faces in hospitals actually the best way to apply the technology outside of your PartyBOTs par-tays? Or is that also a creepy and intrusive employ to new technologies, when other solutions exist to track actual vital signs?

What doyour own office parties look like? Does Samfrom the front desk have to try out the newest accounting software to get a drinking from the punch bowl? Does Diane have to swear allegiance to Watson before grabbing that tuna roll? Do you throw them at Guys American Kitchen& Bar?

Does your spirit succumb a little when youturn people into test subjects for the AI apocalypse?

Maybe after reading this press release, it should?

With the rise of AI and voice recognition, customer experiences can be curated to the next level. Imagine Amazons Alexa, but with more emotion, depth and distinction.Accenture Interactives PartyBOT is not simply a chatbot it is equipped with the latest technologies in facial recognition that allow the bot to recognise user impressions through facial expressions, and words resulting in more meaningful conversations.

Featured at this years SXSW , the PartyBOT delivered an unparalleled party experience for our guests detecting their predilections from favorite music, liquors and more. The PartyBOT ran so far as to check in on every attending guest at the party, curating tailored activities based on their preferences. Link to video: https :// 2121401 28 ( pw: awesome )

But the PartyBOT goes much further than facilitating great party experiences. Its machine learning applications can apply to scope of industries from business to healthcare acting as an agent to support patient recognition and diagnosis in hospitals that can recognize patient distress and seek the appropriate help from doctors.

If you would like to learn more about the PartyBOT, Im happy to put you in touch with our executives to discuss the applications of our technology and potentially schedule time to see this in our studios.

Read more:

Dumbphone! Can I survive modern life with the original Nokia 3310?

The classic mobile has been relaunched as a distraction-free device. We dug out a device from 2000 to see how it rates in 2017

Last week assured the launch of Nokias new incarnation of its classic 3310 mobile phone. The original, which first seemed 17 years ago, was immensely popular 100 m handsets sold and there is an obvious nostalgic appeal in a cheap retro copy, complete with an update of video games Snake. Reviews suggest the 49.99 3310 would build the perfect festival telephone meaning, I guess, that if you dropped it into a lagoon of dirt at 3am, you wouldnt intellect too much.

The interest in the 3310 also feels a bit like yearn: a wish to return to a simpler day, when a phone was just a phone, when batteries never ran out, and the world emails, the news, Twitter, Instagram, Facebook, every ballad ever recorded didnt come with you when you went somewhere. Back then, if you sat staring at your telephone screen on a Tube platform, people thought you were a simpleton; there was nothing to look at. I do not consider myself to be awfully technology-dependent the most transformative aspect of my smartphone is the fact that wherever I run, I always have a torch with me but who wouldnt want to return to that time, if merely for a visit? I certainly would. Count me in.

But theres a problem: while the new 3310 is certainly reminiscent of its predecessor simply a bit flatter and wider, as if someone had taken a rolling pin to it it has also got a camera and a colour screen. You can listen to music on it, and it offers serviceable, if slow, internet access. It may look the component, but you cant escape modern life with this impostor. If I was going to travel back in time for a week, I would need an original 3310.

An old handset isnt too hard to track down they were very robust, so there are a lot of them still knocking about. You can find used ones on Amazon or eBay, but it turns out someone from the office has a darknes grey one sitting in a drawer at home, complete with charger. After a bit of fiddling with an adaptor, I am able to jam the modern sim card from my iPhone into the Nokias old-school slot. I push the button and the swooning green backlight comes on. I go to bed ready to wake up in the year 2000.

The next day no one rings all morning. At lunchtime, I ask my wife to call me to make sure the old phone actually runs. After a few seconds a shrill cascade of notes tumble out of the phone.

Hello? I say.

Yes? my wife says.

Is that you, caller?

Can I help you? The voice is swooning nowhere near as loud as my wifes actual voice, coming from the next room but it is there. It sounds like the past.

I should be noted that the phone hasnt recognised my wifes number, and I realise I will have to input all my contacts by hand. I manage a total of three( recollect having to made the 7 key four times to produce an s ?) before I decide it is too labour intensive to bother with the rest. I will only permit myself to be surprised.

No one rings anyway, which I decide is liberating, a feeling that lasts right up until I go to the supermarket in the afternoon. As I wait in the till queue, I automatically reach for my smartphone, and find only my dumbphone. Commonly I would kill these few minutes with a little routine: check email, check Twitter, check other email, go back to Twitter and watch a clip of a baby llama someone has links between. I try to play a few rounds of Snake, but I have forgotten how and have to read the rules. I end up staring into space, bereft.

When I get home I receive my first text, from one of the three contacts I have managed to input. It tells: You keep pocket-dialling me. I had forgotten that you have to lock old Nokias manually. I have also forgotten how. I try to send an apologetic text sorry Im employing a shit phone but the primitive predictive text isnt cooperating. I get as far as sorry in using a shiv and give up.

Ironically, I spend a lot of day on the internet trying to figure out how to use my dumbphone, typing in questions such as, How do I turn off predictive text on 3310 ?, How do I stimulate the call volume louder? and How do I win Snake? A colleague informs me that I need to disable iMessage on my real phone, or else all my Apple friends will be sending me texts I cant receive. Who knew the simple life could be so complicated?

Heres something I forgot about life 17 years ago: I used to spend at the least an extra hour a day in front of my computer screen, because it was the only route I could access stuff. When was the last time you said: I cant used to go right now, Im waiting for an email? Heres something else I forgot: in the year 2000, the idea of the mobile as a universally accepted accessory was reasonably new. We were not long past the epoch when people abused you for answering your phone on a train. As late as 2008 I wrote an article accusing Madonna of being some kind of ogre because she had admitted she took her Blackberry to bed with her. When the 3310 first appeared, sending a text instead of leaving a polite voicemail still seemed a little bit gauche, like faxing a letter of condolence. Im not even sure I knew how to send a text in 2000.

Midweek, I have an appointment in central London. I require: a scrap of a paper with the number of the person I am gratifying written on it, a hard copy of the email imparting details of the event I am attending, a printed Google map of the environs and something to read on the Tube. I do not need: headphones, a charger or knowledge of Donald Trumps latest tweet. I look at the Nokia and I suppose: to be honest, Im not even sure I need you.

At the event, however, I proudly demonstrate everyone my 3310.

Does it have Snake? asks one person.

How long does the battery last? asks another.

On the develop home I try to play a little bit of Snake. It is not the classic telephone game I remember, but a deep irritating way to pass time. The screen feels small, and my thumbs huge. When I lose, which is every few seconds, the phone devotes out a loud, disappointed chirp, alerting everyone else in the transport of my failure. Game over! tells the screen. Your score: 0.

By the end of the week I have mastered as much of the old 3310 as I have use for. When it rings, I deftly press the call button and the asterisk in quick succession to unlock it. I glance at the mystery number on the screen, and answer. Hello? I tell, tentatively. Hey! How are you? People think Im really excited to hear from them, when Im just vastly relieved that theyre not someone else. If I miss a call and no message follows, I know someone is probably sending a follow-up email I will not consider for hours. But who cares?

On the day I remove the sim card, the Nokia still has another week of battery life left, and my iPhone, I discover, has a weeks worth of unacknowledged WhatsApp messages waiting for me. I realise you cant go back to the past, because almost everyone else you know is still plugged into the present, staring down at their screens, engrossed in their own worlds, reasoning: why has he has still not been replied to my emoji with another emoji? Within minutes I have rejoined them. A few minutes later, my phone wants recharging.

Read more:

China’s new cybersecurity statute sparks fresh censorship and espionage dreads

Legislation creates concerns foreign companies may need to hand over intellectual property and help security bureaux in return for marketplace access

China adopted a controversial cybersecurity statute on Monday that it told would tackle growing threats such as hacking and terrorism but has triggered fear from foreign business and rights groups.

The legislation, passed by Chinas largely rubber-stamp parliament and set to come into consequence in June 2017, was an objective need of China as a major internet power, a parliamentary official told.

Overseas critics argue it threatens to shut out foreign technology companies and includes contentious requirements for security reviews and for data to be stored on servers in China.

Rights advocates also say the law will stiffen restrictions on Chinas internet, already subject to the worlds most sophisticated online censorship mechanism, known outside the country as the Great Firewall.

Yang Heqing, an official on the National Peoples Congress standing committee, said the internet was already profoundly links between Chinas national security and developing.

China is an internet power, and as one of the countries that faces the greatest internet security risks, urgently needs to establish and perfect network security legal systems, Yang said at the close of a bimonthly legislative meeting.

More than 40 global business groups petitioned the Chinese premier, Li Keqiang, in August, exhorting Beijing to amend controversial segments of the law. Chinese officials have said it would not interfere with foreign business interests.

Contentious provisions remained in the final draft of the law issued by the parliament, including requirements for critical datum infrastructure operators to store personal information and important business data in China, provide unspecified technical support to security bureaux, and pass national security reviews.

Those demands have raised fear within companies that dread they would have to hand over intellectual property or open back doors within products in order to operate in Chinas market.

James Zimmerman, the chairman of the American Chamber of Commerce in China, called the provisions vague, equivocal, and subject to broad interpreting by regulatory authorities.

Human Rights Watch told elements of the law, such as criminalising the use of the internet to injury national unity, would further limit online freedom.

Despite widespread international concern from corporations and rights advocates for more than a year, Chinese authorities pressed ahead with this restrictive law without stimulating meaningful changes, Sophie Richardson, China Director at Human Rights Watch, said in an emailed statement.

Zhao Zeliang, a director at the Cyberspace Administration of China, said every article in the law was in accordance with the rules of international trade and that China would not close the door on foreign companies.

They believe that[ phrases such as] secure and independent control, secure and reliable, that these are signs of trade protectionism. That “they il be” synonymous. This is a kind of misunderstanding, a kind of prejudice, Zhao told.

Many of the provisions had been previously applied in practice, but their formal codification coincides with Chinas adoption of a series of other regulations on national security and foreign civil society groups.

The laws adoption comes amid a broad crackdown by President Xi Jinping on civil society, including rights lawyers and the media, which critics say is meant to quash disagreement.

Last year, Beijing adopted a sweeping national security law that aimed to make all key network infrastructure and information systems secure and controllable.

Chinas government has come to recognise that cyberspace instantly and profoundly impacts on many if not all aspects of national security, told Rogier Creemers, a researcher in the law and governance of China at Leiden University in the Netherlands.

It is a national space, it is a space for military action, for important economic action, for criminal action and for espionage, he said.

Read more: