Coolest University Tech Lab Projects in the Works

NW writes "While universities like MIT, Berkeley and CMU don't tend to shout as loudly about their latest tech innovations as do Google, Cisco and other big vendors, their results are no less impressive in what they could mean for faster, more secure and more useful networks, computers, etc. Here's a good roundup of 25 of them, from studies on putting T-Rays to use in computers to advancing wireless to the next level to outsmarting terrorists on the Web."

Comments

T-Rays, cool!

[Anonymous Coward]

It's funny that "terahertz rays" are somehow considered "not catchy". Thus, promoting their usage had to start with their re-branding as T-Rays, which has more in common with the T-Rex than the terahertz idea. It's part of the work of the scientist today to think of a Hollywood-like publicity poster and catchy phrases in order to get grants.

Re:55 saves gas

[GumphMaster]

Driving constantly at slower speed definitely saves fuel for the single vehicle. Driving with an erratic, typically slower, speed because you are not paying attention while on the phone will increase fuel consumption; accelerating on and off is wasteful. Further, traffic is not a single vehicle but an aggregate of many vehicles. In your phone induced daze, you are also slowing traffic around you, which then has to accelerate to jockey into position, overtake and regain highway speed; also wasteful.

I can beat that...

[Anonymous Coward]

"The bulk of searches (80%) proved to be informational, with the other 20% split between navigational and transactional. The researchers used an algorithm that they say classified searches with a 74% accuracy rate. "

I have a better algorithm that achieves 80% accuracy, verses their 74%....

    int QueryTypeClassifier(char *str)
    {
        return INFORMATIONAL;
    }

I better starting working on the research paper before those conference deadlines hit.

Nail on the head

[RAMMS EIN]

"While universities like MIT, Berkeley and CMU don't tend to shout as loudly about their latest tech innovations as do Google, Cisco and other big vendors, their results are no less impressive in what they could mean for faster, more secure and more useful networks, computers, etc."

I feel that hits the nail on the head. A lot of impressive innovations come out of universities, but it's the corporate world that makes most of the hype. Sometimes, they promote inventions that originally came from universities. Sometimes, they promote inferior technology to what already exists. But it's usually the hyped technology that wins. I think we should be paying more attention to university research.

Re:Nail on the head

[moosesocks]

Yes, but the OP's choice of universities is mildly amusing to say the least.

MIT blows its own horn very loudly. Hell, they do a better job of marketing and hyping themselves than Apple do.

The Media Lab might not produce a great deal of "legitimate" scientific output, but it does a fantastic job of capturing the imagination of the public.

Their magazine also serves as a fantastic vehicle for bolstering their own reputation.

This isn't all necessarily a bad thing, although you've got to acknowledge that most of the "top" universities owe much of reputations by shrewdly marketing themselves to the people providing the research grants.

R&D are two different things

[wintermute1974]

Generally:
Universities do research.
Corporations do design.

You might be pleasantly distracted by the shiny toys that corporations make, but those toys rely on the knowledge gained in university labs.

Re:55 saves gas

[jmcnaught]

I think society would be best served by city planning that makes it easier and quicker to get around by walking, biking and mass transit than by car. Making it easier to drive around isn't the answer. In my city, the city council solves all transportation issues by widening roads to make room for more cars and adding new parking lots. Cities should be layed out so that nobody lives outside of walking distance from places to play, shop or catch a bus. Reduce the need for cars, and our neighbourhoods can have less pavement and more green space. Downtown the parking lots can be built up and reclaimed as productive spaces or turned into parks to play and relax. Cities with fewer cars would also be safer. I ride my bicycle every day, and almost every day I feel in danger from cars. Drunk drivers, drivers on their cell phones and hot shots that drive too fast can easily wipe me out with the smallest mistake. It should be safe for our children and pets to run around in the streets. Cars are ridiculous in general. Using machines with triple digit horsepower that weigh tonnes to move 100-200 pound people around. It's like using a jack hammer on finishing nails. And it's not as if anyone can claim ignorance to the impact of cars on the environment these days. We all know what's happening, and still so many of us place our hopes in hybrids and new fuel sources. The type of transition it would take to get all cars off of fossil fuels would take years, possibly decades. But just about every house has a bike in the basement or garage, and a decent brand new bike can be purchased for under $500. Myself, I'm all for reducing the speed limit inside cities. Make it 30 km/h. It would be foolish to get rid of all cars. They're still useful for moving stuff around in. But most of the driving these days is just for moving people and no stuff. Mostly single people driving the same routes every day to and from work. I don't have kids, but I don't understand how people can reconcile caring about their children's futures and driving their cars.