Slashdot Mirror

I have a feeling that a lot of this is driven by the pharma industry who don't want deaths turning public (or investor and regulator) opinion on something.

The case of Jesse Gelsinger, who died after some poorly designed experimental gene therapy, took the wind out of gene therapy's sails. Maybe it wouldn't have gone anywhere anyway, but with everyone too spooked to fund it anymore after one death, it definitely wouldn't.

CAR-T too, more recently

made in Europe at public Universities. Most drugs are

Can you please provide a citation, because it was pretty easy for me to discover that isn't the case.

http://www.xconomy.com/seattle...

The flu virus hijacks your body's cells to reproduce pretty much the same way. Surely you've heard of the flu virus.

Citation needed. Yes influenza has DNA, but it also has an envelope in order to get into the cells. DNA just floating around in the air isn't going to get into a cell. DNA floating around in your bloodstream even is going to get shredded by your immune system. So please, prove to me that naked DNA outside of cells can cause viruses inside the cells.

The suggestion that there should be a biosafety level 5, higher than an intact ebola virus, for DNA by itself is patently absurd.

I'm not sure what prions have to do with anything either. This is not going to be biochemical reactions with transcription, translation, chaperones, and proteins. Proteins are not going to be generated.

The company working with MS, Twist biosciences, make DNA on silicone dots.. Not using living cells with translation machinery. It sounds like there's no proteins involved in the synthesis or the "writing" of data.

Reading the data will most likely be through nanopore technology. Again, no translation, generation of proteins, or any other biological process going on there.

So tell me, where the hell is a prion or any other protein going to be generated in that process?

Finally, I'm not convinced it's a mathematical certainty that the sequences for any pathogen WOULD be generated. They're extremely long sequences. If there were legitimate concerns that viruses could spontaneously generate from protein-free, sterile DNA, and if MS were unable to keep themselves from injecting their data into their veins and if there are viruses whose DNA can magically worm their way into human cells, it's entirely possible for MS to automatically scan for DNA being written that happens to be similar to a pathogen's genome and disrupt it. Say "only write that half in this block, put a spacer with a bunch of stop codons, then put the other half somewhere else.

Again, you're describing something that is less likely than a regular hard drive achieving sentience and going skynet.

And the first stat I looked up, internet speeds, shows we're not even in the top 10 http://www.xconomy.com/boston/...

Nonsense.

http://www.netindex.com/downlo...

http://www.akamai.com/dl/akama...

http://www.xconomy.com/boston/...

http://www.bloomberg.com/slide...

If you count the US on a state-by-state basis and compare with the rest of the world, US states would take most of the top-10 spots.

On the other hand, parts of Europe (and the EU) are poorly served in terms of telecom services, charging high prices, having low penetration, and/or being slow.

one of the mains things he is claiming to patent is any GaN structure grown on a foreign substrate with a low temperature poly-crystalline layer. Nearly all commercial LEDs are grown on sapphire of SiC with the use of some kind of low temperature poly-crystalline buffer layer.

The patent talks about MBE and dopants and such, but the claims don't necessarily involve that. Just look at the first invention claimed:

A semiconductor device comprising:
a substrate, said substrate consisting of a material selected from the group consisting of(100) Silicon, (111) silicon, (0001) sapphire, (11-20) sapphire, (1-102) sapphire, (111) gallium aresenide, (100) gallium aresenide, magnesium oxide, zinc oxide and silicon carbide;
a non-single crystalline buffer layer having a thickness of about 30 to about 500 , comprising a first material grown on said substrate, the first material consisting essentially of gallium nitride; and
a first growth layer grown on the buffer layer, the first growth layer comprising gallium nitride and a first dopant material.

That's it.
And as you say, that's basically how-to grow a modern LED on sapphire. (Whether you could skirt it by growing undoped GaN on top of your buffer....)

The fact that companies are actually settling might suggest there is some validity to the patent.
The LED industry is completely embroiled in patent disputes and doesn't seem to mind. The companies settling include AUO, LG, Samsung, Seoul Opto, and Toshiba--big names in Japanese and Korean LED manufacturing who all certainly know the lay of the land.
Not settling includes EpiStar (major Taiwanese manufacturer).

Note that the memo is presented here by Xconomy, which happens to have this guy as a member 'Xconomist'. So, read just the memo if you care, but skip the puffery all around it.

The dot-com bubble, at least, was understandable: a "gold rush" in a new frontier. But what is everyone chasing now? Is it a bubble for its own sake? Or is it a legitimate unleashing of capital pent up from the 2008 global financial crisis?

I'm guessing the former. From xconomy.com (emphasis added):

In my view, this is the nastiest of all startup sins: failing to involve customers and their feedback from literally the first day of a startup's life, keeping the most vital opinions silent—those of the eventual customers--for far longer than necessary.

When I hear this comment, as I do far too often, I switch to pleading mode: "Please. Take a week. Get some feedback. Does anybody really care, or are they giving you polite nods and little more." This generally leads to the second biggest reason too many startups suck: they're solving a non-problem.

The nearest I can tell, these Brooklyn startups are not serving Wall Street or HFT, where it is known there is money. Honestly, I couldn't even find a list of Brooklyn startups.

Hi all, author and submitter here. Sorry about the link problems - it's all my fault. I edited the headline to make Sequoia possessive, to avoid confusion with another fund. To be OCD about it, I also added the 'S' to the URL. Which means a ton of you bonked the 404 page when you went to read the article. Never edit before coffee. So I have changed it back. This one works again: http://www.xconomy.com/national/2013/03/27/kleiner-sequoia-fund-returns-could-be-exposed-in-ca-lawsuit/?single_page=true Thanks to the other commenters who found the temporarily working link, which is no longer live. That'll teach me.

correct link: http://www.xconomy.com/national/2013/03/27/kleiner-sequoias-fund-returns-could-be-exposed-in-ca-lawsuit/

Just fyi, the posts link failed for me. Try these :

http://www.xconomy.com/national/2013/03/27/kleiner-sequoias-fund-returns-could-be-exposed-in-ca-lawsuit/

http://www.xconomy.com/national/2013/03/27/kleiner-sequoia-fund-returns-could-be-exposed-in-ca-lawsuit/

Just fyi, the posts link failed for me. Try these :

http://www.xconomy.com/national/2013/03/27/kleiner-sequoias-fund-returns-could-be-exposed-in-ca-lawsuit/

http://www.xconomy.com/national/2013/03/27/kleiner-sequoia-fund-returns-could-be-exposed-in-ca-lawsuit/

I can't speak for others, but I suspect he's talking about concentrated solar thermal. Some configurations use a molten salt (usually a fluoride) as the operating fluid. This also acts as a thermal mass which can be stored underground, then pumped out after sundown to run the generators at night. Personally I prefer other approaches, but there have been a few of these plants built, and they seem to work as advertised.

Another cool application of molten salts is a liquid metal battery technology recently developed at MIT. This would provide "grid-level" storage for intermittent renewables such as wind and solar, allowing them to operate 24/7 and smooth out gaps between supply and demand.

Here is a diagram from the patent application that shows the entire vehicle. It definitely looks like a shuttle craft, but the "two torpedoes" are right there, longer than the command pod (with props on the front, no less).

The drive unit looks like two torpedoes. Look at the out of water picture.

Submission has one: http://www.xconomy.com/boston/2012/06/21/juliet-marines-ghost-ship-emerges-from-stealth-startup-gears-up-for-war/?single_page=true

First, the jobs move overseas and we get told it's a "good thing":
http://blog.douweosinga.com/2003/10/why-jobs-moving-overseas-isn-so-bad.html

Then, there is complaining that the industry can't find any programmers:
http://www.xconomy.com/seattle/2011/05/23/tech-talent-shortage-one-of-this-years-major-storylines-illustrated-in-national-study-by-job-search-site-dice/

Next, the industry tries to figure out where all the programmers went:
http://www.google.com/search?q=shortage+of+programmers

Finally, they realize they've castrated themselves and simply claim it's a dead-end career. Nice.

Page shows me a bunch of irrelevant news pages. Guess what the top story is?. Hmm.

The guy has a model engine and is trying to raise money in Silicon Valley. What isn't mentioned is that Detroit engineers have worked with pretty much every type of engine over the years, including this type. Maybe this guy's engineers have made a breakthrough but he'll have to prove it first.

And he's been trying since the 70s which means his idea doesn't work in passenger vehicles.

Detroit is begging for any innovation that will put them ahead of the hybrid invasion. They've even gone plug-in hybrid before any other manufacture with the Chevy Volt and GM pioneered the electric car in the 90s which was poor timing since gas was still only about $1 a gallon. If there were some magic engine technology that allowed 50% better fuel economy in cars while maintaining reasonable reliability Detroit would be all over it.

Remember Detroit must average 35mpg by 2016 and 54mpg by 2025.

So anyone saying "Oh I have this amazing engine technology that uses 50 less fuel but no one wants it" is either a liar or crazy.

I think GM said it best:
“There are 50 opposed piston engine companies out there, and they all haven’t gotten to the point where they’ve figured out what their Achilles’ heel is,... there is always a ‘but,’ and most of these companies haven’t gotten to the ‘but’ yet.” says Byron Shaw, general manager at GM’s Advanced Technology division in Palo Alto.

TFA displays some page contents on my FF, then immediately refreshes to http://m.xconomy.com/ which formats a bunch of category links on IBM green and white printer paper, but contains no useful text.

I'm able to read a copy obtained by wget with no problems.

Before admitting that PC sales are down, people will start to include all kinds of devices in the PC category, like Ballmer did with the iPad. PCs tend to be associated with Windows, and investors could get antsy if the holy market share started to dip.

I thought Jobs summed it up reasonably well here

There’s this company, TerraPower, which former Microsoft CTO Nathan Myrhvold and I have spun out of his invention group, Intellectual Ventures. We’ve got a new nuclear design, a generation four.

If only energy companies would depend on the patented technologies of Gates' cronies, the world would be a much better place. Intellectual Ventures is that patent troll company run by ex-Microsofters.

http://www.xconomy.com/seattle/2010/12/08/intellectual-ventures-files-first-three-patent-infringement-lawsuits-against-nine-companies-including-mcafee-symantec-altera/

http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20101208/11073712190/intellectual-ventures-files-its-first-lawsuits-giant-patent-troll-awakened.shtml

Agreed 100%. "Something as trivial as a phone" is said earlier in the thread. But it is not a phone. It is a computer!
This is a trivial phone.
This is also a phone.
This is a computer that can make phone calls. Also can send e-mails, play games, provide navigation and mapping, record video, play video, play music etc etc etc

As the Federal CIO sang the praises of Amazon.com-backed Animoto's use of the Amazon Cloud, the Chairman of the Recovery Board decided giving Amazon the contract to host Recovery.gov was the right thing to do, and called on the public to 'imagine if other, much larger federal agencies were to follow our lead.'

Credit for deciding to tap Amazon was given to government contractor Smartronix, who reportedly used AWS in the development and testing of recovery.gov, but did not go live with it in the initial roll-out.

The government planned to find another home for the more than $1 million in computer hardware and software that were previously purchased to host the (apparently) relatively low-traffic Recovery.gov site, but were no longer needed after hosting was switched to Amazon.

Check out Xconomy's coverage: Skyhook, Fighting for Its Life in Suit Against Google, Cries Foul: “Call in the Referees and Review the Tape” http://www.xconomy.com/boston/2010/09/16/skyhook-fighting-for-its-life-in-suit-against-google-cries-foul-%E2%80%9Ccall-in-the-referees-and-review-the-tape%E2%80%9D/ What's really at stake is who gets control of the anonymized consumer-level data generated each time a mobile device performs a location lookup. In a world of hyper-targeted advertising, this data could be worth billions, which is more than enough reason for Google to see Skyhook as a threat.

Bill Gates has made a significant investment in a company called TerraPower. Their reactor design (called a Traveling Wave reactor) will make use of depleted uranium and unenriched uranium.

Please provide a link.

If you mean this SGI, Synthetic Genomics, Inc., I note that the July 14, 2009 press release to which I linked is not as positive as you: "Under the terms of the agreement, SGI will work in a systematic approach to find, optimize, and/or engineer superior strains of algae, and to define and develop the best systems for large-scale cultivation of algae and conversion of their products into useful biofuels."

I'm not the only one who thinks it may require years. Here is a quote from an article subtitled, 'Restraint' an Unspoken Watchword of Algae Biomass Sessions: '... much of the fundamental production technology is "immature," and that timelines of two to four years from inception to production are unrealistic. Barclay says flatly, "Commercially feasible biodiesel from photosynthetic algae is more than 10 years away.'

Part 2 of the story, published today, has the actual interview.

Defenders of the Wikimedia Foundation say the images are in the public domain (even though they aren't under UK law) and applaud Coetzee as if he were some kind of Robin Hood. Unfortunately, it's a case of the poor stealing from the poor. If all museum images were simply appropriated by file-sharers under the rationale that they *should* be in the public domain, pretty soon there wouldn't be any museum willing to pay for the digitization of important works, and we'd all be worse off. See the rest of my argument here: http://www.xconomy.com/national/2009/07/17/art-isnt-free-the-tragedy-of-the-wikimedia-commons/

As is usual whenever electric cars comes up, it's time for some mythbusting.

No, they don't increase pollution and overload the grid; precisely the opposite (more specifically, the only pollutant that goes up is particulate matter, and it's displaced away from population centers. NOx and SOx remain the same, CO2 drops, and CO and VOCs are nearly eliminated; the grid gets to make use of its surplus off-peak capacity and, with smart charging, can eliminate the supply/demand fluctuations that are currently so troublesome).

Yes, they are far more energy efficient than their alternatives.

No, modern batteries don't take forever to charge. The phosphates, titanates, modern spinels, and others can all charge in 5-20 minutes, given sufficient power.

Yes, fast chargers exist. The SAE J1772 standard covers Level 3 charging at hundreds of kilowatts. Yes, chargers as strong as 250kW exist. Yes, there's already a network of 60kW Level 3 chargers in place around Oahu. Install one yourself.

No, the batteries are not toxic. Current li-ions are only mildly toxic, and this only because of their cobalt-based cathode. The phosphates and spinels eliminate this cathode in favor of nontoxic elements.

No, lithium is not running out.

Yes, the batteries last a long time. The phosphates last 7000+ gentle cycles, having only 20% capacity loss after 1000 abusive cycles. The titanates? 20,000 cycles. Accelerated aging tests suggest LG Chem's packs will last 40+ years in typical use.

Yes, both rapid charging stations and EVs make financial sense.

Hmm, did I miss any?

Xconomy was one of the sites hosted at "H1," as The Planet calls it. After waiting all day Sunday to see whether we'd be back up on Monday, we decided to move the site back over to Media Temple, our previous hosting provider, at least temporarily. (Ironically, one of the reasons we left Media Temple in the first place was that they couldn't handle the traffic when our flying car stories got slashdotted.) We published a post about our experience with the outage this morning.

Xconomy was one of the sites hosted at "H1," as The Planet calls it. After waiting all day Sunday to see whether we'd be back up on Monday, we decided to move the site back over to Media Temple, our previous hosting provider, at least temporarily. (Ironically, one of the reasons we left Media Temple in the first place was that they couldn't handle the traffic when our flying car stories got slashdotted.) We published a post about our experience with the outage this morning.

Here at Xconomy we were pretty surprised by the overwhelmingly negative, skeptical tone of the Slashdot community's comments on our article last week about Terrafugia's drivable airplane, the Transition. We decided to boil down the comments to about a dozen commonly-voiced criticisms and put them directly to Carl Dietrich, Terrafugia's CEO. Today we've published Dietrich's responses to the criticisms. It's a worthwhile read for anyone seriously interested in the future of general aviation.

Here at Xconomy we were pretty surprised by the overwhelmingly negative, skeptical tone of the Slashdot community's comments on our article last week about Terrafugia's drivable airplane, the Transition. We decided to boil down the comments to about a dozen commonly-voiced criticisms and put them directly to Carl Dietrich, Terrafugia's CEO. Today we've published Dietrich's responses to the criticisms. It's a worthwhile read for anyone seriously interested in the future of general aviation.

Yes, getting slashdotted creamed our server (and we have choice words today for both our blogging platform provider and our hosting provider) but the story is back up now, we think (http://www.xconomy.com/2008/05/08/from-the-runway-to-the-road-terrafugia-redefines-the-flying-car-make-that-drivable-airplane/). Our apologies for the inconvenience. -Wade Roush, Xconomy