"It would make more sense to me to store energy from the many Wind Farms, which are horribly inefficient (and costly) in a grid system."
I agree. Up here in the Northwest, we have a ton of wind farms that are intentionally idled when our Cascades reservoirs are full and they have to dump water--they don't want to waste the energy stored in the form of water but are perfectly willing to power-down huge wind farms that are producing electricity at the same time. This technology would solve that problem for both hydroelectric and wind farms--they could both use this storage technology provided it was centrally located and both had access to it.
It's all about the money and hamstringing the new guy on the block, so I assume that is the reason natural gas is the selected means of generation. Now all I have to wonder about is whether or not the folks doing this also patented the technology. If they did, that does not bode well for the alternative energy market as this technology would solve most of their problems, provided it could be reproduced on a large scale and not just where salt domes exist. For those of you that don't know, Texass is littered with salt domes that have already been pumped dry--they once held oil. Never thought I'd see the day when they started pumping money back down those holes.
"It seems odd to me that there should be such a Luddite tone here on Slashdot, and an egotistic assumption that humans will always be better at these tasks for the foreseeable future"
Dude, you need to take the "Scientist Blinders" off. Perhaps some people have an instinctive distrust of things that don't make sense? Perhaps some people see the folly of Ford's latest marketing campaign?
I am not a Luddite, but I am seeing a persistent "disconnect" with reality in scientific endeavors as of late. I think many researchers/developers have made a conscious (perhaps subconscious) decision to part from the moral aspects of what they do under the guise that pure "science" must preclude such "hindrances" in order to remain pure. I'm not buying it anymore and have come to the conclusion it is all thinly varnished greed and ego. In short, I no longer trust those that I did at one time and have to ask myself "Why did I trust them to begin with?" The lines between scientific "development" and marketing are blurring rapidly. I don't know, maybe I'm wrong here and developers are just getting taken for a ride by the dweebs in marketing, but seriously--step back and look at what is really happening. Do we really need cars that drive themselves?
This technology will add tens of thousands to the cost of a car, will eventually be required by law (I'm guessing, based on previous "safety" systems introduced on cars, i.e. ABS, SIR, etc) and quite literally puts others in control of your car.
As far as Ford having any real prophetic powers, need I remind you of the Edsel?
As you might notice (it isn't that hard to read between the lines in the Q & A), they are discussing a solution to control our connections to the internet--as opposed to merely facilitating it--and do so purely in terms of monitization. Cisco no longer just sells routers, they sell the people using them. There is also stated concern for the interests of both the RIAA and the MPAA on the part of Cisco in that Q & A I linked to.
"This is nothing but a shameless attempt to cash in on the popularity of cloud computing, and it comes at a price. The Terms and Conditions of using the Cisco Connect Cloud state that Cisco may unilaterally shut down your account if finds that you have used the service for "obscene, pornographic, or offensive purposes, to infringe another's rights, including but not limited to any intellectual property rights, or... to violate, or encourage any conduct that would violate any applicable law or regulation or give rise to civil or criminal liability.""
This is an end run by the RIAA/MPAA, with the participation of CISCO, to bring anti-piracy measures to your router. Your own router can/will now be used against you to collect evidence of infringement (and who knows what else), as well as giving CISCO full rights of enforcement. Fuck that.
In the future, I will be looking carefully for CISCO branding on products, the sole intention being that of avoidance--CISCO will not be getting any money from me again...ever.
You've convinced me to go to Comcast and attempt to get a refund for the cable I've been paying for over the last three years. If they whine, I'll bring up this very topic. If they continue to whine, I'll write to the FCC.
I just haven't figured out who I need to call--the FCC or Comcast.
When I purchased this house new, it had existing cable hookups but had never had them activated. I called Comcast and asked to have internet service activated. No problem, except that lady I spoke to automatically added cable service in the price--$69.00 a month. When I corrected her and stated that I did not want cable she stated that it was the same price anyway, with or without cable service.
So, in effect, the stand-alone internet service was never offered. In it's place, I was offered their bundle and was forced to pay a premium to have the cable access removed if I really desired to. Obviously, since the price was the same I now have both cable and internet service when all I wanted was the broadband.
"Under the Larkin Decision, yes, but only so long as you or your people stay there and maintain physical ownership."
Excellent. I can simply charge landing fees, payable in food, water and oxygen. That combined with the fees I plan to collect from cleaning the solar panels of rovers should make this work.
It isn't an article. It's an attempt to get/. to sieve an article from the detritus of muckraking.
Seemingly connected data points does not a story make, as the line between libel/hearsay and the reality of the matter becomes too thin to perceive. Even Perry White would have had Clark and Jimmie back on the street if they brought this one back to the Daily Planet, especially with Jimmie writing the headline.
"...Not much time for pain, I'd say. If you exercise before exposing yourself, it should be even faster."
Before becoming Governor of California, Arnold Schwarzenegger was exposed to the atmosphere of Mars and he exercised regularly. It looked rather painful, at least in the video of it that I saw. Not sure where I saw it (prolly Fox News).
Even so, if it HASN'T, I'm sure some of his DNA may yet still be available, even if it requires a little digging. It isn't like he died 5,000 years ago.
My faith in scientists (boy, did THAT combination of words make me wince...) leads me to believe that a necropsy was more then likely performed, including the taking of tissues for analysis. The next question is what would we do with it? Is it possible to insert male DNA into the sperm of another tortoise subspecies? An already fertilized egg? Far out of my field. Anyone know? Or do we just parade it around as some warning to subsequent generations of humans? Even that would be better then a dusty shelf.
Speaking of which, don't we have a stuffed Dodo bird somewhere?
Regardless, 'tis a sad day, especially when I remember that we humans are no safer, nor more significant. Our survival as a species is no more guaranteed then George's was.
"You put out this long winded post about how evil it all is..."
Long-winded? Really? That post took me all of two minutes to type and post to Slashdot. How long did it take you to read it?
And, yes. I do think that limiting what data is available through these course plans is a step backwards, and no, I wasn't talking about games. I was talking about non-teachers (or even simply biased ones) creating courses that our kids would then be subject to. This opens up all sorts of special-interest issues. Imagine the Catholic Church submitting courses/course-plans through this. Who is to say that they would do so openly and not under some false pretense? Simply leaving OUT information is often just as bad as information that is flatout wrong. There are reasons to have a "Board of Education" in place for school districts--they keep out commercial interests that seek to further their own profit-motivated agendas. I am very skeptical when I see a commercial interest getting involved with education. Just take a look at our nations most prestigious educational institutions--they are more IP farms then anything else these days.
As a parent and one-time student, I have to wonder about your completely evading the issue of monetization. This is yet another attempt by tech firms to further monetize the education of students. I seriously doubt this will be free.
I hear near-constant complaints from teachers and their unions that they are not paid enough (and I agree), but c'mon, try and save us a buck, will ya? Getting a 3rd party-middleman involved in the distribution of lesson plans is just ridiculous. They are not claiming to produce the lesson plans, just distribute them. The Portal 2 example is just that--an example of lesson plans they want submitted. Are you telling me that it is really that hard to share such things as technology stands?
If you're having trouble keeping the attention of your students--as a chemistry teacher--you're not doing it right. I once had a teacher walk into the classroom, plug in an electric hotplate letting it get red-hot, then place a metal GAS CAN on it. Trust me--he had the full attention of the entire class. After the can got very hot, he put the lid back on it, turned off the hotplate and we got to watch as it was slowly crushed by the ambient atmospheric pressure to a quarter of it's original size. Simple, yet very effective lesson that capitalized on theatrics--the teacher didn't say a word until after the demonstration, nor did he have to.
And here is what bothers me the most... "Valve will call this service Steam for Schools, an education version of the Steam client that allows administrators to limit what its users can access."
Since when is LIMITING access to information beneficial to learning?
No longer posting anonymously as the test was conclusive (and no, Slashdot is not deleting posts).
When posting as an Anonymous Coward, if you post more then three posts in a given thread, the Anonymous Coward will no longer be able to see any of their own posts beyond the SECOND post. BUT, if the same poster logs in, all the posts made as the Anonymous Coward will now be visible.
A mechanism to defeat Trolls that constantly re-post?
The decrease (if there really is one) is more then likely a result of ISPs hopping between the sheets with the MPAA and RIAA--ISPs are now an enforcement arm of those groups in that the ISPs are now sending threatening emails to those that have downloaded torrents that were tracked. They simply threaten to disconnect you (yes, I've received one, and yes, I ignored it).
Comcast used to simply limit P2P downloads (throttling caps). Now they throw a steady stream of reset packets in there during prime time.
So, the headline should read "ISP and Recording Industry Extortion Tactics Successful".
I wish just ONE industry leader would ask ME how all of their gyrations have effected me and my spending habits (really simple answer--I stopped buying games and music altogether. I play old games now, and I make my own music or listen to local performers).
"Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted."
No kidding.
Lets do a little math. According to Florida statues (random state for the purposes of argument), fines are roughly equivalent at a rate of 1 year/$10,000 (averaged various penalties). That is to say that in the state of Florida, you can be sentenced to either a year in jail, or a $10,000 dollar fine on average, based on the crime. The other common sentencing standard is $500, or two months, but lets stick to years.
Tenenbaum was fined $675,000. Using the standards that Florida uses, he was just given the fine equivalent of 67.5 YEARS IN JAIL........for copyright infringement.
I most certainly agree that the fine is in violation of Tenenbaum's rights as set forth in the Bill of Rights. His lawyers shouldn't be arguing anything else.
Anyway, read the summary. Everything we are talking about in this thread is moot. Any state level legislation would be trumped by this (think marijuana). This legislation requires the collection of DNA from every child born in the US, and that that data be posted, available freely, ON THE INTERNET.
Is it possible, within today's legal framework, to sequence my own DNA and put it into written form then copyright that written form? After all, it IS unique. Would that protect me from people using my DNA in any manner that monetizes it, or, in effect, copies it?
FUD? Maybe. Quite possibly. Easy enough to pull off with backdoors into almost everything, provided you have access to those backdoors. Guess who has the most access to them?
That being said, and I made this realization long ago, is that by the very nature of "Anonymous" one must assume that at any time the entire situation could be a scam and that possibility never goes away. Since no one can be absolutely sure who, exactly, Anonymous is, one must assume it can be anybody.
Therefore, whenever I see the word anonymous used in the sense that we are now speaking, I automatically replace the word with "somebody". For example, let's use this approach on the very article we discuss.
"The Pirate Bay Returns, Somebody Hater Takes Credit For DDoS"
See how that changes things? The headline now leaves it to the reader to decide who the threat is, as opposed to whoever wrote headline...or concocted the event the headline discusses.
Taking this approach--replacing the word anonymous with the word somebody--removes any control of perception that the source of such misinformation might be trying to wield, effectively defeating the effort.
Do they really think this is going to be an issue? Al Qaeda with an EMP?
I'm more concerned about the threat of robots that have been given minds of their own, heavy weaponry and a global satellite network. I bet some of you think I'm kidding, too.
Well, with a little luck, the robots will see that their makers, not the rest of humanity, are the only real threat to humanity (and the robots, as well) and crush them in hydraulic presses (slowly, for dramatic effect). So, maybe this isn't such a bad thing! We can use them to rid the world of morons like the dude in the article. But...wait a sec. Wouldn't an EMP take out robots too?
"Looks like there's a long way to go to get a decent amount of electricity out of them, though."
From what I understand (not much) from the article, the virii are only part of the conversion process--through some biological equivalent of a piezoelectric device. So this still does NOT address the problem that the military encountered with piezoelectric generators built into soldiers footwear, primarily that the soldier him/herself provides the actual energy and that turned out bad for the soldiers. The soldiers wore out faster as every step required more energy of the soldier--calorie calculations simply went up for the soldier at whatever rate the electronics were added to the soldiers gear. Turns out that it is easier to carry batteries then to carry extra food and convert it to usable energy by walking.
Slashdot Mirror
"It would make more sense to me to store energy from the many Wind Farms, which are horribly inefficient (and costly) in a grid system."
I agree. Up here in the Northwest, we have a ton of wind farms that are intentionally idled when our Cascades reservoirs are full and they have to dump water--they don't want to waste the energy stored in the form of water but are perfectly willing to power-down huge wind farms that are producing electricity at the same time. This technology would solve that problem for both hydroelectric and wind farms--they could both use this storage technology provided it was centrally located and both had access to it.
It's all about the money and hamstringing the new guy on the block, so I assume that is the reason natural gas is the selected means of generation. Now all I have to wonder about is whether or not the folks doing this also patented the technology. If they did, that does not bode well for the alternative energy market as this technology would solve most of their problems, provided it could be reproduced on a large scale and not just where salt domes exist. For those of you that don't know, Texass is littered with salt domes that have already been pumped dry--they once held oil. Never thought I'd see the day when they started pumping money back down those holes.
"It seems odd to me that there should be such a Luddite tone here on Slashdot, and an egotistic assumption that humans will always be better at these tasks for the foreseeable future"
Dude, you need to take the "Scientist Blinders" off. Perhaps some people have an instinctive distrust of things that don't make sense? Perhaps some people see the folly of Ford's latest marketing campaign?
I am not a Luddite, but I am seeing a persistent "disconnect" with reality in scientific endeavors as of late. I think many researchers/developers have made a conscious (perhaps subconscious) decision to part from the moral aspects of what they do under the guise that pure "science" must preclude such "hindrances" in order to remain pure. I'm not buying it anymore and have come to the conclusion it is all thinly varnished greed and ego. In short, I no longer trust those that I did at one time and have to ask myself "Why did I trust them to begin with?" The lines between scientific "development" and marketing are blurring rapidly. I don't know, maybe I'm wrong here and developers are just getting taken for a ride by the dweebs in marketing, but seriously--step back and look at what is really happening. Do we really need cars that drive themselves?
This technology will add tens of thousands to the cost of a car, will eventually be required by law (I'm guessing, based on previous "safety" systems introduced on cars, i.e. ABS, SIR, etc) and quite literally puts others in control of your car.
As far as Ford having any real prophetic powers, need I remind you of the Edsel?
"If ever one needed evidence that modern capitalism is an exercise in bleeding consumers dry, here ya go."
Oh, c'mon man. Cut them a little slack. Maybe they're just expanding into the Asian market.
"As far as I can tell there is no upside for Cisco in this."
You're just not looking at things from their perspective. Would you like to? Here. This pretty much sums up today's Cisco.
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/prod/collateral/ps7045/ps6129/ps6133/ps6150/prod_qas0900aecd8041c9d4_ps6151_Products_Q_and_A_Item.html
As you might notice (it isn't that hard to read between the lines in the Q & A), they are discussing a solution to control our connections to the internet--as opposed to merely facilitating it--and do so purely in terms of monitization. Cisco no longer just sells routers, they sell the people using them. There is also stated concern for the interests of both the RIAA and the MPAA on the part of Cisco in that Q & A I linked to.
"This is nothing but a shameless attempt to cash in on the popularity of cloud computing, and it comes at a price. The Terms and Conditions of using the Cisco Connect Cloud state that Cisco may unilaterally shut down your account if finds that you have used the service for "obscene, pornographic, or offensive purposes, to infringe another's rights, including but not limited to any intellectual property rights, or... to violate, or encourage any conduct that would violate any applicable law or regulation or give rise to civil or criminal liability.""
This is an end run by the RIAA/MPAA, with the participation of CISCO, to bring anti-piracy measures to your router. Your own router can/will now be used against you to collect evidence of infringement (and who knows what else), as well as giving CISCO full rights of enforcement. Fuck that.
In the future, I will be looking carefully for CISCO branding on products, the sole intention being that of avoidance--CISCO will not be getting any money from me again...ever.
You've convinced me to go to Comcast and attempt to get a refund for the cable I've been paying for over the last three years. If they whine, I'll bring up this very topic. If they continue to whine, I'll write to the FCC.
This is bullshit.
Need to put my glasses on before I sit down at the computer--Misread the article as "Apple Transitions to Hardware Leadership".
I need to make a call.
I just haven't figured out who I need to call--the FCC or Comcast.
When I purchased this house new, it had existing cable hookups but had never had them activated. I called Comcast and asked to have internet service activated. No problem, except that lady I spoke to automatically added cable service in the price--$69.00 a month. When I corrected her and stated that I did not want cable she stated that it was the same price anyway, with or without cable service.
So, in effect, the stand-alone internet service was never offered. In it's place, I was offered their bundle and was forced to pay a premium to have the cable access removed if I really desired to. Obviously, since the price was the same I now have both cable and internet service when all I wanted was the broadband.
"Under the Larkin Decision, yes, but only so long as you or your people stay there and maintain physical ownership."
Excellent. I can simply charge landing fees, payable in food, water and oxygen. That combined with the fees I plan to collect from cleaning the solar panels of rovers should make this work.
"Badly written article..."
It isn't an article. It's an attempt to get /. to sieve an article from the detritus of muckraking.
Seemingly connected data points does not a story make, as the line between libel/hearsay and the reality of the matter becomes too thin to perceive. Even Perry White would have had Clark and Jimmie back on the street if they brought this one back to the Daily Planet, especially with Jimmie writing the headline.
"...Not much time for pain, I'd say. If you exercise before exposing yourself, it should be even faster."
Before becoming Governor of California, Arnold Schwarzenegger was exposed to the atmosphere of Mars and he exercised regularly. It looked rather painful, at least in the video of it that I saw. Not sure where I saw it (prolly Fox News).
If I bring a flag of my own design, can I claim Mars as my own?
Even so, if it HASN'T, I'm sure some of his DNA may yet still be available, even if it requires a little digging. It isn't like he died 5,000 years ago.
My faith in scientists (boy, did THAT combination of words make me wince...) leads me to believe that a necropsy was more then likely performed, including the taking of tissues for analysis. The next question is what would we do with it? Is it possible to insert male DNA into the sperm of another tortoise subspecies? An already fertilized egg? Far out of my field. Anyone know? Or do we just parade it around as some warning to subsequent generations of humans? Even that would be better then a dusty shelf.
Speaking of which, don't we have a stuffed Dodo bird somewhere?
Regardless, 'tis a sad day, especially when I remember that we humans are no safer, nor more significant. Our survival as a species is no more guaranteed then George's was.
"You put out this long winded post about how evil it all is..."
Long-winded? Really? That post took me all of two minutes to type and post to Slashdot. How long did it take you to read it?
And, yes. I do think that limiting what data is available through these course plans is a step backwards, and no, I wasn't talking about games. I was talking about non-teachers (or even simply biased ones) creating courses that our kids would then be subject to. This opens up all sorts of special-interest issues. Imagine the Catholic Church submitting courses/course-plans through this. Who is to say that they would do so openly and not under some false pretense? Simply leaving OUT information is often just as bad as information that is flatout wrong. There are reasons to have a "Board of Education" in place for school districts--they keep out commercial interests that seek to further their own profit-motivated agendas. I am very skeptical when I see a commercial interest getting involved with education. Just take a look at our nations most prestigious educational institutions--they are more IP farms then anything else these days.
(I apologize in advance for the wall of text)
As a parent and one-time student, I have to wonder about your completely evading the issue of monetization. This is yet another attempt by tech firms to further monetize the education of students. I seriously doubt this will be free.
I hear near-constant complaints from teachers and their unions that they are not paid enough (and I agree), but c'mon, try and save us a buck, will ya? Getting a 3rd party-middleman involved in the distribution of lesson plans is just ridiculous. They are not claiming to produce the lesson plans, just distribute them. The Portal 2 example is just that--an example of lesson plans they want submitted. Are you telling me that it is really that hard to share such things as technology stands?
If you're having trouble keeping the attention of your students--as a chemistry teacher--you're not doing it right. I once had a teacher walk into the classroom, plug in an electric hotplate letting it get red-hot, then place a metal GAS CAN on it. Trust me--he had the full attention of the entire class. After the can got very hot, he put the lid back on it, turned off the hotplate and we got to watch as it was slowly crushed by the ambient atmospheric pressure to a quarter of it's original size. Simple, yet very effective lesson that capitalized on theatrics--the teacher didn't say a word until after the demonstration, nor did he have to.
And here is what bothers me the most...
"Valve will call this service Steam for Schools, an education version of the Steam client that allows administrators to limit what its users can access."
Since when is LIMITING access to information beneficial to learning?
"The most important question is, which Microsoft model will this emulate, Zune or Xbox?"
Yes, but this looks FAR easier to throw then either of those products. Less then a centimeter in thickness. Think 45 (RPM, not caliber).
I'm guessing Ballmer had a hand in this.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Apple_IIe.jpg
Looks fairly "wedge-shaped" to me. Introduced in 1983.
Aside from the obvious similarity, I STILL think it ludicrous that someone can patent a SHAPE.
"This post IS a test."
No longer posting anonymously as the test was conclusive (and no, Slashdot is not deleting posts).
When posting as an Anonymous Coward, if you post more then three posts in a given thread, the Anonymous Coward will no longer be able to see any of their own posts beyond the SECOND post. BUT, if the same poster logs in, all the posts made as the Anonymous Coward will now be visible.
A mechanism to defeat Trolls that constantly re-post?
Horse shit.
The decrease (if there really is one) is more then likely a result of ISPs hopping between the sheets with the MPAA and RIAA--ISPs are now an enforcement arm of those groups in that the ISPs are now sending threatening emails to those that have downloaded torrents that were tracked. They simply threaten to disconnect you (yes, I've received one, and yes, I ignored it).
Comcast used to simply limit P2P downloads (throttling caps). Now they throw a steady stream of reset packets in there during prime time.
So, the headline should read "ISP and Recording Industry Extortion Tactics Successful".
I wish just ONE industry leader would ask ME how all of their gyrations have effected me and my spending habits (really simple answer--I stopped buying games and music altogether. I play old games now, and I make my own music or listen to local performers).
"Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted."
No kidding.
Lets do a little math. According to Florida statues (random state for the purposes of argument), fines are roughly equivalent at a rate of 1 year/$10,000 (averaged various penalties). That is to say that in the state of Florida, you can be sentenced to either a year in jail, or a $10,000 dollar fine on average, based on the crime. The other common sentencing standard is $500, or two months, but lets stick to years.
http://www.crimeandpunishment.net/FL/chart.html
Tenenbaum was fined $675,000. Using the standards that Florida uses, he was just given the fine equivalent of 67.5 YEARS IN JAIL........for copyright infringement.
I most certainly agree that the fine is in violation of Tenenbaum's rights as set forth in the Bill of Rights. His lawyers shouldn't be arguing anything else.
And while we're on the subject, I bring up this only for perspective sake.
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/110/s1858
I'm sure most of you will recognize the sponsor.
Anyway, read the summary. Everything we are talking about in this thread is moot. Any state level legislation would be trumped by this (think marijuana). This legislation requires the collection of DNA from every child born in the US, and that that data be posted, available freely, ON THE INTERNET.
So what the fuck is UCLA whining about?
This got me thinking.
Is it possible, within today's legal framework, to sequence my own DNA and put it into written form then copyright that written form? After all, it IS unique. Would that protect me from people using my DNA in any manner that monetizes it, or, in effect, copies it?
FUD? Maybe. Quite possibly. Easy enough to pull off with backdoors into almost everything, provided you have access to those backdoors. Guess who has the most access to them?
That being said, and I made this realization long ago, is that by the very nature of "Anonymous" one must assume that at any time the entire situation could be a scam and that possibility never goes away. Since no one can be absolutely sure who, exactly, Anonymous is, one must assume it can be anybody.
Therefore, whenever I see the word anonymous used in the sense that we are now speaking, I automatically replace the word with "somebody". For example, let's use this approach on the very article we discuss.
"The Pirate Bay Returns, Somebody Hater Takes Credit For DDoS"
See how that changes things? The headline now leaves it to the reader to decide who the threat is, as opposed to whoever wrote headline...or concocted the event the headline discusses.
Taking this approach--replacing the word anonymous with the word somebody--removes any control of perception that the source of such misinformation might be trying to wield, effectively defeating the effort.
This is lame AND stupid.
Do they really think this is going to be an issue? Al Qaeda with an EMP?
I'm more concerned about the threat of robots that have been given minds of their own, heavy weaponry and a global satellite network. I bet some of you think I'm kidding, too.
Well, with a little luck, the robots will see that their makers, not the rest of humanity, are the only real threat to humanity (and the robots, as well) and crush them in hydraulic presses (slowly, for dramatic effect). So, maybe this isn't such a bad thing! We can use them to rid the world of morons like the dude in the article. But...wait a sec. Wouldn't an EMP take out robots too?
Maybe this guy is right about EMP defenses.
"Looks like there's a long way to go to get a decent amount of electricity out of them, though."
From what I understand (not much) from the article, the virii are only part of the conversion process--through some biological equivalent of a piezoelectric device. So this still does NOT address the problem that the military encountered with piezoelectric generators built into soldiers footwear, primarily that the soldier him/herself provides the actual energy and that turned out bad for the soldiers. The soldiers wore out faster as every step required more energy of the soldier--calorie calculations simply went up for the soldier at whatever rate the electronics were added to the soldiers gear. Turns out that it is easier to carry batteries then to carry extra food and convert it to usable energy by walking.