Slashdot Mirror
BASF Shows Off Some Tantalizing Nanotech
Dan B. writes "The Technology section in The Age today is running a story on the current 'Next Generation' nanotech coming to a store near you from BASF. Interesting read, but I'd like some more info on the 10 hour batteries the size of a cigarette lighter."
Insult the readers. Best way to increase the readership, right mike?
Not that it ever happened to me... oh wait...
Good quote, too many chars. Seriously, the slashdot 120 char limit sucks!
If you believe in what you say so much, put your money where your mouth is. Take your editorial opinions out of the story text and post it as a comment. Surely it'll be modded up to +5, Insightful in short order anyway, you being such a veritable fountain of wisdom and all.
Loneliness is a power that we possess to give or take away forever
If you are going to mod me down offtopic, at least have the decency to mod your own comment down, for it, too, is off topic.
Good quote, too many chars. Seriously, the slashdot 120 char limit sucks!
What's really amazing is that michael thinks he is in the right. He is so blinded by his own self-worth that he honestly believes he is doing the right thing here. It's so sad to see someone throw good intelligence down the drain.
In Soviet Russia...michael would be rotting in Siberia!
There's always an "editor" (I use the term loosely, since their copy would rarely pass my third grade English teacher) who will weakly respond to the criticism that their irresponsible hyperbole has earned them; congratulations, you're the one for this story.
This is a serious issue in science and technology alike, and shouldn't be avoided as an issue.
A lot of people don't understand the kind of thinking that goes into the scientific process these days. There are many cases of Physicists, Chemists, Bio-chemists who spend many years testing a single hyposthesis.
Sitting in a lab all day looking at spreadsheets for 5 years will challenge anyone's sanity. Often times these scientists, who are very pressured by the "publish or perish" dogma of academia, are very anxious about thier results. So much so that many of them begin to have fantasies in thier minds about the results...they literally build a play-world in thier minds.
Almost any scientist who's worked on a new theory can attest to this, it's like thinking you're holding the $100Billion lotto ticket in your hand, it's very exciting...you want to believe, the lust for fame, the recognition you always deserved but never recieved, fantasies of being promoted, going to a better university...it sounds like something a very disturbed individual would think...but believe me, it's very very common place.
My point here is this; these scientists who release bad results are not neccesarily "evil" or trying to "dupe" the scientific community. They have simply lost touch with reality...and want thier fantasy world to come true so badly...that they really do believe in the validity of what they publish. So ultimately the "fault" should rest in the rigor of the editors who publish these results. That's where the check and balance between fantasy and science should be.
The government has a defect: it's potentially democratic. Corporations have no defect: they're pure tyrannies. -Chomsky
This looks like a job for Seth Finkelstein!
time to drop three karma points. i wonder if this will add me to the No More Trolls neo-rtbl shit list...
Cretin - a powerful and flexible CD reencoder
Screw you for offtopic, just about everyone was cracking on the contributor...
Lets hang the moderators!!!!!
I like michael sims.
G. Oatse.
hey michael, how many posts have you censored today?
hey michael, you fucktard, he was replying to something *you* wrote. Don't like it? Why don't you just edit the story! Asshole
BASF we don't make nano tech, we make nano tech better.
...for 10-hour battery schematics.
Sony ha
sure...
What is that even supposed to mean?
Prey is coming true
If mere words are so harmful to your children, then I fear for their future.
My children have been taught not to fear words or thoughts. I hope they're not too progressive for your world.
NetInfo connection failed for server 127.0.0.1/local
BBC's site is still up.
But yeah, this is off-topic.
A regurgitation in "spare me the tech mumbo jumbo" language in a mainstream aussie newspaper about vitamin delivering liposomes and small batteries is more important for Slashdot.
I guess it depends upon the load, eh?
NetInfo connection failed for server 127.0.0.1/local
Imagine never having to polish your shoes again, having glistening white teeth without visiting a dentist, or owning a mobile phone powered by a miniature battery. These are not just idle fantasies, but a reality where small things could make your wildest dreams come true.
wow! this guy's pretty darn wild! I bet for a big night out he turns on the TV and drinks a whole light beer. I mean, c'mon - with all the possibilities for nanotechnology, having self-polishing shoes is the best he could come up with?
it looks that just as with other technologies (www, e-commerce, ...) we're gonna have to wait for the pron industry to break new ground and lead the way ... oh, the possiblities!!! Wait a minute, don't. Eughh!
This sig intentionally left bla... dammit!
Who's got the whiteout?
The impression I got from the article is that it would be 10 hours for something possibly smaller and less power hungry than a laptop, since it was in the context of devices getting smaller.. I could be wrong though.
BASF = Badische Anilin -und- Soda Fabrik
Hour is not a measure of power. How many amp- hours is this battery capable of? What terminal voltage?
A standard size D Alkaline battery is 17 amp-hours at 1.5 volts. That sounds a lot more impressive than a 10 hour battery, and it's using 30 year old technology.
Jason
ProfQuotes
If they are rebuilding your Enamel to make your teeth whiter... it seems a whole lot more interesting that you are actually repairing your teeth.
;)
Say good bye to dentists? Now that really would rock. Well for those of us that actually go
Jonas Stewart Silver Creek Entertainment Solitaire-Spades-Hearts-Euchre
From the article:
Imagine never having to polish your shoes again, having glistening white teeth without visiting a dentist, or owning a mobile phone powered by a miniature battery.
When my work shoes need polishing, my wife does it or I pay 50 cents and have them done at the Mall Foodcourt or something.
I got glistening white teeth by using Colgate Gel. It's $14.99 and quite a bargain.
And my mobile phone gets 6 hours of battery life on a single charge, which is plenty since I don't really talk to many people.
So, honestly, could someone point me toward some practical real-world applications of this supposed "Next Generation" of nanotechnology?!
Reply or e-mail; don't vaguely moderate. Ex-O'Reilly/MIT employee, now a full-time Google employee.
A battery the size of a cigarette lighter that lasts for 10 hours? I've got those. They're these little sticks with two "A"'s marked on them and they run my GBA for a good 15 hours
Miniature batteries for my mobile phone? Gee I think I've got that too. It lasts about 10 hours. And I can replentish it by using this other magical device on my wall called a socket.
Seriously... fuel cells will need to run a phone for a month at least to be worth it. A laptop better run for a couple weeks. Recharging them isn't a simple matter of plugging them in the wall as it is now... you've got to replace the hydrogen (or other fuel, most people seem focused on hydrogen for some inane reason, even though it's hard to make and doesn't have much energy content).
This article, like many other nanotech articles, is mostly hype and handwaving (and most of these things aren't even what you typically consider nanotech). So who won buzzword bingo? ;-)
Don't think of it as a flame---it's more like an argument that does 3d6 fire damage
"So Snake, I'm going to activate your nanomachines in your blood to give you massage in your arm after that torture." Wasn't that one of the most weird moments in videogame history?
"There is no teacher but the enemy."-Mazer Rackham
And I gotta agree with someone who posted above. When it comes to nanotechnology, which probably will be a cornerstone on science in years to come, and these are the applications the writer busts a hard on over, god help the man if he ever sees a porno. I mean come on, at least write about something I can't do by myself. I want tiny robots damn it! And flying F'in cars!
Mod Points: Helping you keep your opinion to yourself.
From an economist's or business person's perspective, that's one hell of an achievement. As near as I can figure, just about everybody in 1st world nations wear shoes. That means they've developed a new product which is marketable to every person on the planet who wears a pair of shoes.
Figure $5/bottle. Figure 1 billion customers. You do the math.
It's football dude.
Then I certainly hope you don't let your children watch television or read magazines or books or newspapers or look at billboards or cartoons, all of which may occasionally use the word "porn." I certainly hope you're a troll, otherwise I fear for your children. People who think like you simply shouldn't breed.
Manufactured products are made from atoms.
No shit, Sherlock...
If I hate something more than a buzzword (remember Blast Processing and the Sega Genesis?), is an article that is just about a buzzword.
"There is no teacher but the enemy."-Mazer Rackham
Children don't want freedom. They want obedience. You're ideologically blinded if you don't see that.
the connotation it gives females and the sickening thoughts it gives males about domination and bossing around women.
This statement is just not true. Since you are not well versed in porn, I suggest you do not have the capacity to make this judgement. The porn industry is egalitarian about all sorts of sexual practice, including male-female domination and female-male domination, and all combinations therein. Porn does not give men (or women) nasty thoughts, it gratifies them.
If you truly understood the nature of porn, I think you might still be upset by it; but I can certainly tell you that your current understanding is incomplete and incorrectly biased.
are you hear to replace SexyKellyOsbourne?
Oh and I forgot to mention my kids are 34 and 35 years old.
-- Amsterdam Vallon
But seriously. That's ridiculous.
ok...most of us know all of this already. we all know that nano tech can be a great service...longer battery life, clothes that clean themselves, etc...
what they don't mention are the possible negitive effects. it's like atomic power...great benifit, possibly nasty applications. to apply nano tech to consumer goods is one thing, but to use it to make weapons is quite another (on a morality scale). this technology is more highly adaptive than anything else we have seen before.
governments the world over have been toying with nano tech to make weapons that kill more efficently, are more easily hidden, etc. what happens when common street thugs can "make" their own weapons with nano tech? what happens when countries that have firearms bans (uk, australia, others) have people running arround with nanotech weapons that are small and more leathal than the standard lead slug fired by a gun today? how do you track things like this? what happens when the government/corperation/etc decides to make a nanotech listening device out of the paint in your home?
this is a tech that is to be truly feared and respected. remember...technology is only as good as those who use it.
-frozen
I'm not always the brightest pixel in the stream
These outrageous claims remind me of the old AT&T commercials:
... ... ...
"Ever had a robot that did all your household chores, cooked your meals, ran your errands, and looked like it came from http://www.realdoll.com?...
No?
You will!
And the company that will bring it to you is AT&T."
Of course, nothing they promised ever got delivered, and certainly not by AT&T.
-Michael
Threshold RPG
Explains why you enjoy masturbating so much.
Jesus Fuck, you are really good! Post more please!
Here's the link to the article on the BASF website.
Dan. -- So what if it's spelt wrong, nobody's perfect
I'm still waiting for my mediatronic chopsticks.
my associative arrays can kick your hash - TCL
This is a recap of press releases issued from 1999-2002. Seriously! They're even ordered chronologically in the thesis paragraph. I realize this because I've been keeping a local archive of every mnt-related press release that I've come across since 1998.
It's a well-written piece, a good article for the site it's on, and I wouldn't think it out of place in "USA Today" or "Popular Science," but why does a pointer to it belong on Slashdot? The newest piece of information in the article is about the "lotus effect cling", which was 'news' in 2001!
Bill Joy warned about. BASF makes a lot of the killer nanotech Bill Joy warned about better.
umm.... I'm trying... nope never polished my shoes [boots] before, can't imagine polishing them again.
They're not batteries, they're just hydrogen power cells, just like we've been hearing about forever.
Also, for those who said hours is not a measure of power, you're idiots. It was placed in a strong context. read the article next time.
Read jack phelps dot net
umm for those of us in ther real world whats an "eag-nut"?
well now that you know that /. might contain offensive content, you can add it to your blokcing software on your computer.. you are using blokcing software arent you? Its clear you arent hovering around watching every second or you wouldnt really be worried about this.
I pity your kids with such a foul mouthed hypocritical TROLL of a father
The general reason my shoes look crusty is from scuffing NOT dirt.
The wax coating for the "Lotus-Effekt" (from the BASF Article, 9 paragraphs down, under the heading "Nanotechnology means learning from nature") will still be susceptible to this.
Me lost me cookie at the disco.
I call them "two double-a batteries"
:)
I can normally get at least a good ten hours playtime out of my Gameboy Advance with 2 AA batteries.
These consoles really are ahead of their time
... and then there were none
Recharging them isn't a simple matter of plugging them in the wall as it is now... you've got to replace the hydrogen (or other fuel, most people seem focused on hydrogen for some inane reason, even though it's hard to make and doesn't have much energy content).
;-)
True. "Recharging" a fuel cell will not just involve plugging them into the wall (unless someone makes a *MAJOR* breakthrough in both electrolysis techniques and hydrogen storage).
Most likely, it would work more like a cross between "normal" batteries, and the sort of propane tanks people use for BBQ grills. You would buy a 6-pack of methanol cartridges, roughly the size and shape of an AA battery (as a hypothetical example, of course... I have no more knowledge of future fuel-cell-form-factors than anyone else ). You'd pop them into your electricity-consuming device, just like normal batteries. The actual functional bits of the fuel cell would form a part of the electricity consuming device (or some sort of hip-pack to support legacy devices until everything takes the standard size fuel cell cartridges), and it would simply "drink" from the cartridges you plug in.
When you have a pile of empty cartridges, you'd take them back to the store for a rebate, a lot like recycling an aluminum can. Except, to reuse them, we wouldn't need to melt them down and make a whole new fuel cell, we'd simply refill them. The stores themselves might have some means of doing this, or they might just send them on to some sort of regional refilling center, but the whole process would (could, anyway) involve very little waste.
Of course, I only describe the *SENSIBLE* way to do it. More likely we'd actually build the entire functional fuel cell as a single encapsulated unit, complete with fuel *and* nasty chemistry for the catalyst; ship them across country both ways in a hideously polluting diesel 18-wheeler; and we'd make them out of a plastic that for reasons no one understands, we can't reuse, so they go to the landfill and we waste even *more* petroleum making more plastic.
But hey, what do I know. I need to stop acting so optimistic all the time.
Everytime I hear about Nanotechnology I keep thinking about the Nanolathes in Total Annihilation!
"Everything you know is wrong. (And stupid.)"
Moderation Totals: Wrong=2, Stupid=3, Total=5.
Imagine a Beowulf cluster of these!
Now imagine dropping it and losing it in the carpet!
This is when she's already down there, might as well clean his shoes. It's called multi-tasking. ;)
Who doesn't - it is suppossed to be enjoyable.
At the last Foresight Conference Eric Drexler expressed his frustration at the amount of hype and effort going into research and development on this psuedo nanotechnology. Everyone is jumping on the bandwagon and getting "nano" into their products.
Real nanotechnology, often called molecular nanotechnology, consists of actual manipulation of atoms into molecules and structures with useful properties, and will make most of the current claims of nano products look extremely weak. But no-one knows exactly how to do it just yet!
Lots of progress is being made on the research front, and they will get there, but anyone who tells you they have nanotechnology products available now or in the near future are talking about the weak versions of nanotechnology that have been around for thousands of years. See here for a better description of the distinction between weak and strong nanotechnology.
Really, you need to go by watt hours. This is because no battery has a totally flat discharge curve. For example, a LIon battery is rated at 3.6V but really spends the vast majority of its battery life at about 3.9V.
So if you take the rated voltage times the total amp-hours drawn you get a misleading number.
Watt-Hours. That's the way.
In 30 years they'll figure out...
:)
How to scan any object like an apple down to the atomic level and store that in a PC and then reconstruct the apple from the stored pattern. World starvation solved.
How to reclaim the matter that would normally be thrown out in the trash or go down the toilet and separate the atoms so that they could be used for the apples in above example. Some environmental problems solved.
Kind of first example but... how to create a catalog of commonly eaten organic fruits and vegeatables such that we can deallocate most of the farmland we stole from nature and give it back as wetlands and such. More environmentaland health problems solved.
How to make a pefect copy of any CD/DVD such that there is no difference from the bought version and a copy. RIAA/MPAA problem solved.
fruit juices get their rainbow of colours from tiny particles that dissolve in liquid and disappear without a trace.
Yes, it's called "Kool-Aid powder"...
We make nano-things... Nano-er?
Keep your packets off my GNU/Girlfriend!
My children have been taught not to fear words or thoughts. I hope they're not too progressive for your world.
I don't mean to be a troll, but that statement makes you seem like the kind of person that gets an ego trip from raising kids the right way.
IMHO, most children aren't able to fully grasp all ideas and words. The simple truth is that most kids won't be able to understand consenting sexual agression the first time they encounter it on the Internet. The original poster had a valid point. Just because you're obviously super intelligent and a great parent, doesn't mean everyone else can be as perfect.
Oh come on... ...You can't be that small.
"It's much easier to mod me down than to post an intelligent reply."
Unless of course you don't have any mod points.
So what exactly does "real" mean here? If you can arrange the shape of molecules to create particular functionality, does the technology matter? It's a bit like arguing that piece of metal A is inferior to piece of metal B because A was cast to shape in a mold and B was carved from a black by a machining centre. The real question is surely, which is best fitted for its putpose?
Panurge has posted for the last time. Thanks for the positive moderations.
Because this sort of thing is called "chemistry" or maybe "material research" but not nanotech at all.
"My Watch Battery has lasted for 4 years now, and it is only small! Could we give London 4 years of unlimited powerf ro 4 years on a watch battery? Why hasnt anyone else thought of this, i am going to patent the idea and become rich"
Crap Stories, Crap Comments
that comment really turned me on, fuck yeah my huge cock is growing so big, fuck yeah. cant wait till my 13 year old daughter comes home cause im going to slap her up and fuck her little brains out, the little whore
we don't make explosions, we make them bigger.
The CIA is already spraying villages in Africa with government-synthesized nano. It was meant to be used as a "smart exfoliant"..Rather than run in there with an army of bulldozers and pissing everyone off, we're dropping lumberjack nano in there to clear large areas of dense forest. Why? to lay oil pipelines in West Africa under the guise of improving Africa's economy:
Buruli Busters
Since the only way to kill the nano is to deprive it of sunlight and dissolve it, theyre packing mud onto all the people who've been afflicted with it in order to kill it off.
Oh well, it was the thought that counts.
PS.. I just made all that shit up on the spot. Ha-ha, gullible, arentcha?
Bowie J. Poag
We don't make the things you buy, we make the things you buy with nanobots better...
Yes Francis, the world has gone crazy.
Welcome to the 20th century. :-p
Well, perhaps this is still a novelty in your part of the world
at airports, government buildings, elsewhere when small nanoparticles could be sprinkled about that work to consume metal and concrete.
Someday we may be asked to remove more than our shoes when we travel.
Chemists put a UV absorbing solid into suspension and then sell it as sunscreen - and its nanotechnology!? I don't think so. Since when is making a wax similar to a plant leaf wax called nanotechnology? Just because someone uses atoms and molecules and small particles to make things doesn't make it nanotechnology in my book - it makes it chemistry.
fuck you
I find that actually emailing the editor in question works better. I remember a while ago there were two MAGLEV articles on the front page. Quick email to both editors involved and it was corrected inside of twenty minutes.
Matthew G P Coe
http://mgpcoe.blogspot.com/