This is likely not the first time you’ve heard about the war over net neutrality and it certainly won’t be the last. The long debated issue is still being fought as talks have recently heated up in the White House, among the FCC, and throughout large corporations. But what is really happening? Why are we still talking about this and is there anything we can do to preserve the open Internet as we know it? We decided to take a look into the furious net neutrality argument and go over why you should deeply care. What is Net Neutrality? The current Internet as Americans use it today is a neutral place for the free exchange of ideas to fly across your computer screen and mobile device. You can liken today’s Internet to a Reddit thread or the comments in any news article as good examples to demonstrate the absolute freedom we have on the interwebs. Tim WU, the Columbia University professor credited with coining the term, describes net neutrality in these terms: “Network neutrality is best defined as a network design principle. The idea is that a maximally useful public information network aspires to treat all content, sites, and platforms equally. This allows the network to carry every form of information and support every kind of application. The principle suggests that information networks are often more valuable when they are less specialized — when they are a platform for multiple uses, present and future.”   Sounds Good, Who Would Threaten That? As the open Internet climbed to the raging popularity it mightily commands today, capitalists of all kinds pitched the idea of creating a sort of a tiered system to the Internet. This would give preferential treatment to those who have more cash. For example, a large corporation with a boat-load of money could pay to have their site send information faster than those who can’t afford it. The topic for and against net neutrality has been a fiercely fought issue for well over a decade, but recently became a bit more complicated. Those in favor of shifting the Internet to a tiered service argue that if there are companies that can afford faster data delivery, they should be given that option. Again, ending net neutrality is simply a matter of how fast the information is delivered. Some Internet Service Providers (ISPs) see this idea as a win because they could separate preferred sites - sites in the “fast lane” - so that users would blame the actual site rather than the ISP for the poor performance of sites not in the fast lane. The reason the issue became even more hotly debated is because in 2014 politicians became more involved than ever before. In April 2014, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) took a stab at net neutrality by releasing a proposal that suggested broadband companies could provide Internet “fast lanes” for those, like large corporations, that could afford to pay a higher fee. As previously stated, this would mean that smaller companies with littler wallets unable to afford the higher fee would suffer in terms of content delivery speeds and would therefore have to compete with a significant disadvantage. Crap. So What’s Next? The issue caught the attention of the White House, which seemingly supports the principle of net neutrality. In a statement released in November 2014, President Barack Obama took a side: “We cannot allow Internet service providers (ISPs) to restrict the best access or to pick winners and losers in the online marketplace for services and ideas. That is why today, I am asking the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to answer the call of almost 4 million public comments, and implement the strongest possible rules to protect net neutrality.”   Since then the FCC has responded and allegedly will be revising their proposal. They will soon vote on new terms yet to be determined, but FCC chairman Tom Wheeler suggested in an op-ed just days ago that he will push for net neutrality. “These enforceable, bright-line rules [in the new proposal] will ban paid prioritization, and the blocking and throttling of lawful content and services. I propose to fully apply — for the first time ever — those bright-line rules to mobile broadband. My proposal assures the rights of Internet users to go where they want, when they want, and the rights of innovators to introduce new products without asking anyone’s permission.” And now, we wait. The future of net neutrality now rests in the hands of the FCC, which will meet on February 26th to vote on the next phase of the battle over open Internet. Wheeler has proposed that, “the FCC use its Title II authority to implement and enforce open internet protections. Using this authority, I am submitting to my colleagues the strongest open internet protections ever proposed by the FCC.” We will soon see if this will become a reality when they vote on the 26th.

“If we’re going to get people to wear sensors, they either have to be gorgeous or invisible.” Sonny Vu – Founder/CEO of Misfit Wearables Depending on your generation, different heroes wowed you with high tech accessories. James Bond was the king of exotic, unthinkable equipment, Batman always had a new tool under his cape. Every 80’s kid wanted a hand phone like Inspector Gadget, and Disney princesses had nothing on Wonder Woman’s tiara which doubled as a deadly boomerang. While the weapons haven’t quite gone mainstream, some of these then-fictional accessories have come to life. Yes the wearable market has existed for decades, but now microprocessors are compact enough for the wearable category to reach real life fruition. Built first for function, these devices have surely captured the marginal interest of consumers...but none have fully captivated a massive stand-in-line-for-hours-like-the-release-of-iPhone large scale obsession. So today’s innovators in Silicon Valley and beyond have not only the task to impress with cutting edge function, but to equally impress with style. The device needs an aesthetically pleasing allure - to look sophisticated, sleek, even sexy. This demand for the next tech hottie has created an exciting new space for current tech giants and new companies - but it looks like there’s a long way to go. Current Giants Get Fashion Forward...And Struggle Google caught widespread attention with the unveiling of wearable pioneer Google Glass last year, but have yet to make Glass a success. Studies continue to show that only around 9% of American consumers would actually consider purchasing the device if they could afford it. The reasoning ranges from privacy concerns to a lacking awareness of the utility Glass provides, but continued resistance is around the way Glass looks. Particularly, how Glass makes the wearer look. Consumers currently have no other base to compare Glass to, which causes confusion around what the device actually does as well as fear of being the only one with odd, arguably invasive glasses. While Google is still grappling with acceptance, Intel too has jumped in the wearable game. The mega company announced in September their new focus on wearables as an attempt to utilize their resources and intellectual property. Thus came the announcement of their smart bracelet MICA, My Intelligent Communication Accessory. MICA is set to debut to the public this month, a showcase at Barney’s for a relatively affordable $495. Yet early reviews of the device are less than encouraging, revealing that while MICA is a stunning intersection of high fashion and technology, too much of the focus is on flash and less about technological substance. New, Exclusively Wearable Companies As Google and other giants struggle, their woes reveal that the biggest problem with the wearable industry is that no one has figured it out yet. Yet at the same time this is just as much good news, allowing startups and relative tech nobodys to jump in the game and possibly get on the map. ABI Research estimated in February 2013 that 61% percent of the wearable market was attributed to fitness or activity tracking purposes. This leaves ample opportunity for developers to create new solutions wearable technology can solve. For example, the Sesame Ring is a 3-D printed ring, complete with an RFID card and a fully functional subway pass. Available for only $25, students at MIT invented the lightweight ring praised as the “ultimate accessory for fashionistas.” In addition to streamlining transportation, wearables are also breaching the safety sector. Guardian Angel is a jewel looking pendant developed in support of the Association of Women for Action and Research (AWARE) to provide a couple of security uses. The $100 - $120 pendant can be worn as a necklace or bracelet complete with a small button that triggers a fake call to the wearer’s phone. This is intended to get the user out of uncomfortable situations, for example an awkward blind date with your sister’s friend’s tax accountant or an excruciatingly long holiday confabulation with your privacy-invading Aunt. Fashion Pros Dress Up Devices Building technology while keeping fashion in mind is only one piece of the wearable industry pie. Well known fashion designers have entered from the purely fashion side, pairing technology with their already fashionable lines of clothing and accessories. For example Ralph Lauren’s “polo tech” compression shirts debuted in the 2014 US Open, monitoring athletes’ breathing and heart rate. Yet another space for burgeoning designers is dressing up already fully functional wearables, which may not have mastered aesthetic appeal on their own. Elite fashion designer Diane von Furstenberg designed DVF Made for Glass, glasses intended to make the struggling Google Glass a more desirable accessory for the fashion forward. Similarly, San Diego based FUNKtional wearables creates exclusive accessories suited for Fitbit and other activity trackers. Complete with an entire line of accessories such as bracelets and necklaces, FUNKtional provides a host of designs for anyone interested in monitoring fitness goals while maintaining an eye on fashion. The wearable industry is new, exciting and full of possibilities. However no one has found the secret sauce to bring on the masses, but chances are someone will. Wearables dominance is up for grabs but the question is, which device will finally find big time success? Tell us what you think in the comments below.

Technology has given personal trainers quite the run for their money in recent years. Between fitness apps that help dieters keep calories down, to wearables that track a user’s every move, there is an increasing amount of ways for Americans to improve eating, exercise and fitness habits. Lumo Run is another company aiming to improve the exercise experience, but have taken the concept many steps further with smart shorts. Yes, smart shorts, the shorts intended to help runners improve their running form to achieve maximum performance. While these aren’t the first piece of smart clothing on the market, their primary objective strays from the others intended to track progress. Although these shorts can track progress, the aim is to help the users improve posture and form. Improving Running Form Running is an exercise prone to injury. Given the repeated beating joints get with each weight bearing step, runners commonly suffer injuries to the knee, back, ankle, etc. On top of that, shin splints and hamstring injuries are rampant, all of which adding to reasons why having a good running form should be every runner’s paramount concern. As such, runners who don’t want to blow out their knees or their egos in the earlier years of life consult with personal trainers. This is exactly the space where Lumo Run has a hungry market. According to Lumo Run, the shorts, “incorporate the personal attention of a running coach with the professional data of a lab - all within the lining of your shorts to help you achieve your best.” How They Work Training apps tend to provide exercise results after the activity has completed. Luma Run wearables work differently, in that they provide real time data and corrections so the runner can make improvements to their form as the activity is happening. Sewn into the shorts are a 9-axis inertia measurement unit (IMU) as well as a Bluetooth LE module into a waistband that comes with the shorts. These two devices work together to collect data about a user’s run, jog, or walk, which is then sent to a connected app in real time. Pairing the combination embedded in the clothing, a user’s biometrics, posture, and mileage are all measured and recorded, which can assist in guiding toward new and realistic cardio goals. Founder and CEO Monisha Perkash explains, “This is a very exciting piece and a completely different form factor using our motion technology to address challenges in running. The vision is to be the leader in real-time motion tracking and solving movement challenges related to sports, workplace safety and health and medicine.” What’s Available and Where Can I Find Them? The smart shorts come in shorts for men and capris for women. Lumo Run is taking preorders now but anticipates shipping next spring. If you can’t wait until then, the company that makes Lumo Run,  Lumo Biotech, already came out with the predecessor to the running shorts, Lumo Lift. This product shares the similar intention of Lumo Run in that it helps weight lifters improve posture and performance. As interesting as Lumo Lift is, it will be exciting to see how the Lumo Run hits the market and if it changes the way runners train and exercise. Until then, you’ll have to find some other, probably boring, way to improve your posture and running form. Do you have the next best idea for a wearable app? Ping us here and let’s get started.