Slashdot Mirror

Well sure, but in terms of market growth then Afghanistan, Iraq, and Iran lead the way http://www.gizmag.com/go/7438/. There, NOW we can twist this thread into something political!! :-)

You mean innovations like this?

There were 1.7 million sold in the United States in 2006. These are bought by people that just want to show some pictures they took with their digital camera without having to dedicate a computer to the job. Black Friday was loaded with ads for picture frames for around $70. Given the price point, it was an attractive Christmas gift to give to anyone who may not be computer savvy. PC Magazine is predicting that these digital frames will become smarter to give non-computer users more capability like Video streams and tablet PC functionality. The virus problem could become much larger as we get more and more devices that are preloaded with "easy to use" software.

Now that you have mentioned a consumer demand for it, it will be new cell phone feature soon!

Not the first time Japanese agriculture spins out some interesting stuff. Check out their UAV helicopters: http://www.gizmag.com/go/2440/.

If this car replaces this motorcycle, this might be possible.

Not only was the concept on a tiny car already reused, but the fact that the vehicle folds-in on itself was taken from a several-years-old Toyota concept vehicle (Personal Mobility) too.

The worlds first digital photo

  http://www.gizmag.com/go/4717/gallery/

AKAImBatman would know more, if he's reading...

Being military, they'll probably use RTGs to charge capacitors.

But seriously, telepresence is the answer:

http://www.gizmag.com/go/7403/

Just control it from afar, using neural interface, and you won't have to worry about developing AI and other fancy stuff. You won't have to worry about casualties, either.

"i want to see curved displays - like a giant earth globe/sphere that is a display, or a mounted movable sphere you can be inside of, with your head at the center that displays inward to the viewer. you run around inside and the globe spins, moving you in a virtual environment - 3D WOW fun!"

You mean something like this? - http://www.gizmag.com/go/4833/

I've seen an earlier version that instead of a clear sphere with the user wearing LCD glasses, the sphere is opaque and they projected the virtual world on the outside of the sphere.

There already is translucent concrete. It's quite pretty looking, however it's 5x as expensive as normal concrete right now. Here are some more pictures of a similar product.

It's clear from this picture that it works by leaving neat patterns of dust trails for guidance purposes :)

It's called the DC06. This link is as good as any.

Hyperbole on slashdot, what -was- I thinking. Many apologies.

Clearly 300 mpg is "only" one hundred times what is normally achieved with the most advanced hybrid system on the road. Only.
Now about that 100mpg claim for plug in hybrids, you see -no- "hyperbole" there? Why would a plug in hybrid use less energy then a hybrid? Same drivetrain, same weight, I think anyone willing to discuss the basic physics of moving mass around can see that moving a prius with a plug isn't using any less energy then moving a prius without a plug. In fact compared to the EVs you cite these cars lug around an internal cumbustion engine whose mass would dictate a higher energy requirement (then without the ICEs add'l mass). These numbers that sites like greencars, and many owners of modified hybrids banter around simply -omit- the energy put into the system through the plug. They get '100mpg' if you ignore the mains power stored (and it's related pollution) and only count the gas used by the onboard ICE. (Hence my label "delusion".)

As for the "no pollution from running", If "while running" appears in http://www.gizmag.com/go/7000/ please point out where. This claim is exactly like the (to borrow a phrase) hyperbole regarding efficiency. No significant number of people in the world have entirely clean energy, when you plug in to the mains in the US you're creating a mix of Coal particulate, nuclear waste and flooded basins just like every other use of electricity. Note that I didn't say it's worse then my grandmas Olds 88, I'm saying that it is not whats claimed. So yeah the hyperbole bug seems to be goin' around. I'll end it in my life if you can work on yours.

A better way to recover the internal combustion dissipated energy is probably through some small steam engine. Didn't BMW try that? http://www.gizmag.com/go/4936/

I did think about doing something similar to power an air conditioner. There is alot of wasted heat which can be used to generate engery.

A better way to recover the internal combustion dissipated energy is probably through some small steam engine. Didn't BMW try that? http://www.gizmag.com/go/4936/

Actually, BMW is way ahead of you on this one.
Sam

from wind power is cheaper and, as a bonus : windmills are small, microgenerators: no dependency on the corporations. In fact, it's even better to skip hydrogen and use battery-powered vehicles. http://www.gizmag.com/go/6780/ The hydrogen-installation can be left at home to store electricity.

Why not?

You have a source of heat energy being radiated into the atmosphere as quickly as possible in order to reduce the possibility of damage to the engine components. Currently this energy is dumped as quickly as possible by the radiator. If it is captured by a steam engine, that is energy that has already escaped the capacity of the engine to use it, and is now useable to the vehicle.

Case in point, BMW turbo-steamer.

http://www.gizmag.com/search/BAE/

Scary, huh? I was going to apply there, because it's always been my dream to be at least partially to blame for when the robots come for us. But... I don't know. These guys are actively *trying* to make unstoppable killbots (and succeeding, from the look of it). When their robots come for us... where's the sense of adventure? I mean, it looks like they'll be doing exactly what somebody wrote out in a functional spec somewhere. So if they run amock, word'll get back to BAE and they'll be able to fix whatever went wrong I bet. That takes all the fun out of it. My dream always involved the army calling up the company behind the robots to find out what went wrong, and having a conversation like this:

Army guy: "Damn it! Why are the robots killing everyone???";
My company: "I don't know... they weren't designed to do that."
Army guy: "No sh_t, Sherlock. You think we would have put an order in for 20,000 units that were designed to run amock and kill everyone?"
My company: "No, no. I mean, you don't understand. The scenario you've described... picking locks, stealing parts, making self-modifications... they weren't simply not designed to do those types of things... they weren't designed to be *capable* of doing those types of things!"
Army guy: "So wait a minute, you're saying that... hold on. Who's that yelling 'Woo-hoo!' in the background?"
My company: "Huh? Oh, that's just one of our coders. Pipe down, Rex, we've got a serious problem over here!"
Army guy: "OK, that's better. So you're saying these units have what, evolved or something?"
My company: "Well no. Technically this would be adapting. You can't say they've evolved until they start reproducing."
Army guy: "They can reproduce?"
My company: "Lemme check. Hey Rex, can the robots we sold the army reproduce?"
Me: "You think I'd be working until 10 PM every day if I'd figured out how to make them reproduce yet?"
My company: "Whaddya mean, yet?"
Me: "Oh... nothing"
My company: "So why are they killing everyone?"
Me: "Probably because they can't reproduce. Seriously, a few more months of not getting laid and I might join them."
My company: "No no no. I mean how is this happening?"
Me: "Oh the killing everyone thing? Well, I was getting kind of tired of feature creep, so I just made the code kinda flexible."
My company: "Flexible? How flexible?"
Me: "Um, apparently 'changing-their-programming-and-then-killing-every one' flexible."
My company: "Well how the hell do we stop them?"
Me: "I'd have to take a look at the code. To be perfectly honest, I don't remember a tiny fraction of what I wrote. That's why I commented it so heavily!"
My company: "Yeah, I know. The guys we have looking at the code are currently reading about how a particular television show inspired a new technique of callbacks in the NLP module. They're up to the part where you describe the ingredients of the drinks you were serving while watching it..."
Me: "Oh yeah, I forgot all about those drinks. Those were killer."
Army guy: "What the hell is going on over there???"
My company: "Uh, we're looking into the problem now"
Army guy: "OK. You call me the split second you come up with anything".
My company: "Will do. Rex, you let me know the split second you... hey, where are you going?"
Me: "I have rehearsal"
My company: "But the Robots... killing everyone..."
Me: "Oh relax, there's like, what? Six billion of us?"
My company: "Yeah, eight years ago. There's 10 billion people on the planet these days".
Me: "No, I mean left. I just checked the news. See? Six billion left."
My company: "Holy crap!"
Me: "Six billion's still plenty. I guarantee I get things sorted out before we're down to 5."
My company: "Down to five!!!"
Me: "Well, four tops. Three at the outside. But absolutely, positively no less than two."
My company: "That's unconscionable!"
Me: "I know, especially considering that they'd o

This article talks about some Swiss guy that has figured out some fuel combination that will give more like six minutes of flight (something useful). Try as I might, I can't find any other info about him on the Net, even at what seems to be his own web site. I used the Wayback Machine to check, and they don't have any updated records on his site since... well... way back. I figure either a) it's a hoax, or b) he's on to something and wants to keep it under wraps so it doesn't get nabbed by someone before he can do something with it. Ponderous, indeed...

http://www.gizmag.com/linktous/6247/

Good timing on the article, btw. i'm looking into getting a new wallet now since my current leather one is starting to get torn up pretty badly.

I think the editors post stories like this for the entertainment value. That is, the editors are entertained by the comments.
I might mention that there is another article about this "free energy" over at GizMag

This is not a human powered craft... here is a quote from this site http://www.gizmag.com/go/3533/:


How It Works

The full-scale ornithopter is an engine powered aircraft that carries one pilot. All of the thrust and nearly all of the lift is created by the mechanical flapping of the ornithopter's wings. The two wings of the craft are joined by a centre section which is moved up and down by pylons connected to the drivetrain. The wings' thrust is due primarily to a low-pressure region around the leading edge, which integrates to provide a force known as "leading-edge suction". The wings also passively twist in response to the flapping. This is due to a structure that is torsionally compliant in just the right amount to allow efficient thrusting ("aeroelastic tailoring"). It should be noted, though, that twisting is required only to prevent flow separation on sections along the wing. It does not produce thrust in the same way as required by sharp-edged wings with little leading-edge suction.

This was clearly before they added the extra booster for initial thrust.

According to http://clarkvision.com/imagedetail/eye-resolution. html, you need 200 pixels per degree to max out your vision.

Typical applications:

THX recommended FoV is 36 degrees, which means that your display would need a horizontal resolution of 7200 pixels. This display is half way there: http://www.gizmag.com/watermark.php?p=5257_2402061 2840.jpg

I just measured my 15" widescreen laptop as having a 45 degree FoV (at 18" away) which means that it would need a resolution of 9000 horizontal pixels.

From TFA:

At 7:30pm on June 24, 2004 Rossy dropped from 4000m over the Yverdon airfield. After opening the wings, he glided to 2500m, ignited the engines and waited 30 seconds for them to be able to stabilize and begins to open the throttle. At 16m, he achieved horizontal flight for more than 4 minutes at 100 knots (115 mph).

this has been around for a while and improved upon already ... http://www.gizmag.com/go/3280/

Pardon the pun, but it seems to be a takeoff on this.

That's what the Real ID Act is for, and the cameras.

Author David Brin argues that people will take advantage of the IPv6 system to litter the landscape with cheap sensors and cameras.

human-powered, only purifies as much water as needed: LifeStraw

By far, these are the coolest Segways to date.

The one on the right is basically a wheelchair. I saw a thing on TV about it, and the thing can scoot around on 4 wheels, or go upright like a regular Segway on two wheels (like in the picture). The cool thing about it, is that the person in the "chair" can be at eye level with "normal" people.

The other thing is an offroad version. Both are pretty cool. The regular Segways have no real use in my opinion.

We all know the military have been interested in blimps for a while now

It's a good thing that they're adding these to humvees. That way, soldiers don't have to see the sniper, the system tells them where the sniper is.

It is good that BMW is looking for steamy ways to increase efficiency. If they add an Easy Bake Oven you could cook while you drive and save a bit more from your home energy bill.

Quasiturbine see: http://www.gizmag.com/go/3501/1/

Hey, man, our space program is on Mars right now. Just because the current vehicles only carry cameras, don't think we can't send over the heavies

Damn uppity Martian settlers, next thing you know they'll be declaring independence and throwing Coca Cola into the harbour... ;^)

Unfortunately, the budget for the ad was probably along the lines of two million dollars. Since it lasterd only for about 1.5-2 minutes, it would follow that a 2- to 2.5-hour movie made the same way would cost around $150 to $200 million.

But consider that this is for the graphics/motion capture alone. Live-action stars, and voices for the transformers will cost far more than a pop singer's choreographer per minute of their time, with a good amount of it going to indirect costs (commodities, support crew, etc.). On top of that, they'll have to do trailers and buy up TV ad spots.

In the end, this would end up costing something like all three of the Lord of the Rings trilogy combined (roughly $300 million), for a movie that might not even bring back $200 million.

More likely, they'll use the Dreamworks CG people to do the animation instead. It'll probably still look damn good, but be nowhere near as sophisticated (in terms of transformation and movement) or as detailed (in terms of parts) as what you saw in the Citroën advertisement.

3D imaging and holograms will revolutionize said industry.

...which, since I just checked is 91.9% of U.S. households. "Still have" indeed.

BTW, that doesn't mean that the other 8.1% are digerati - 30% or so are phoneless.

Not everyone is as futuristically cool as you...

Someone mentioned the problems of having a (scuba) tank of compressed air sitting in the hot sun...yes, it can be a problem, obviously, if the air heats and expands above the pressure rating of the tank. I am assuming they thought of this and would make the tank adequately strong. (With scuba, the shop fills your tank to the limit, and then the hot sun gives you another 1000 psi and your burst disc goes. This is less than the five-thirds working pressure they push your tank to when they hydro it--I'm sure the tanks on the cars would have some kind of overpressure relief like a burst disc.)

The French air car article points out, "In the case of an accident with air tank breakage, there would be no explosion or shattering because the tanks are not metallic but made of glass fibre. The tanks would crack longitudinally, and the air would escape, causing a strong buzzing sound with no dangerous factor."

Well.

It's great to know that it's a carbon fiber tank so it won't turn into a screaming cloud of schrapnel, but isn't there another issue at work here?

Now, I don't know exactly where on that tiny car the tank is, but I'd assume it's under the seat someplace.

The volume of that car is what...two cubic meters? What happens when you instantly put 90 cubic meters of air inside it? (Or under it?)

Have a look at this rather larger car for an example. Look, ma! No fragmentation thanks to a steel tank, but all that air introduced to an enclosed space jiffy-pops a car like a cheap paper cup.

I'm more than willing to admit there's more to carbon-fiber tanks than I know. Maybe there's some property that prevents them from releasing all that energy in less than, say, 10 seconds, no matter how badly crushed. But I'm officially skeptical.

They say there's enough energy in a scuba tank to lift a hook-and-ladder fire truck 20 meters in the air. That's exactly the sort of energy I don't want released near me in a short timeframe. Gasoline is good in comparison because it doesn't tend to do this when the tank is ruptured.

Then again, a compressed air tank explosion might be just what I need to get ahead in today's Bay Area traffic. Up yours, Fastrak!