Any sort of an NDA is an agreement between, say, silicon Vendor A, and the initial user. Once it's out there, the most you're infringing by copying it is copyright law. Besides, what I mean by beating them at their own game: Chinese use those documents to develop hardware that may well be sold in a mall perhaps a dozen miles from Vendor A's HQ. Can't really hurt Vendor A that someone else is using their own damn chips?
As for "risks" for Baidu: LOL. If you get anything that's made and designed in China, odds are the mechanicals were designed using pirated SolidWorks or somesuch, and noone was asked for permission for anything. That's the reality there.
I guess we agree personal anecdotes are just that:) I think though that the execution of the procedure can play a major role, infections I'd think aren't a random "oh you're just unlucky" thing. Hospital staff can mess things up, and like everyone some are just bad at what they do.
Alas, I think that before going to Mars we need urgently to figure out why one's healing gets screwed up at Amundsen-Scott South Pole Station. There's a book by Jerri Nielsen about her experience; she was a doctor there for one winter. To put it mildly: weird shit happens at the South Pole. Same gravity, not all that bad air pressure (equivalent of 11000 ft during an arctic low), reasonably warm interiors, yet somehow your body acts up.
Your second sentence is a bit contradictory: you say that preplanned C-section is one of the easier surgical procedures -- I agree. So why you're saying it shouldn't be considered almost routine?
A personal anecdote: a friend has almost lost custody of her child because she didn't follow a hunch of doing a preplanned C-section. The vaginal delivery had complications and the baby ended up with some sort of an intracranial hemorrhage. The parents weren't told about that, and it wasn't monitored (like it should have been). A couple months later his head grew 2cm in circumference overnight while at a "good" hospital, this was ignored by the doctors there. The reason for hospitalization was seizures/vomiting. The parents were suspected of child abuse (nonsense in this case) due to a diagnosis of shaken child "triad" and are fighting in court to this day (for over a year!) to clear their name. A pediatrician who was involved in this has vanished without a trace (seriously). $10k later spent on a private investigator failed to uncover her whereabouts.
Vaginal delivery is OK when you are an oracle and can predict no problems. For us, two planned C-sections went without a hitch and I just don't get why anyone would suffer through natural childbirth.
That's the thing: it will only ever work on a small scale. The writing is on the wall, precisely as you state. To power a whole city wirelessly, you'll pretty much need an antenna covering the total area of the city. The reason that Intel has to use large antennas is because the math works out that way. For a house powered from 1000 miles away, you'll need an antenna the size of a small skyscraper.
I'm not talking about how it was back then. All that nutters today care about is Tesla's wireless transmission. Somehow AC in their wall sockets is not so spectacular anymore:(
You misunderstood. I'm talking about his power-tower wireless transmission projects. AC power distribution has been, um, sufficiently demonstrated in practice;)
Baidu is better at one thing, though: if you need some odd datasheets/specs/standards that are normally supplied under an NDA or for a stiff fee, google typically doesn't find them but baidu often will. Beat them at their own game and all that...
Here the scale is uber-important. His approach is not wrong by orders of magnitude, it's worse, it's got an off-by-one on the exponent. Intel's "experiments" and such are doing stuff on the order of hundreds of watts at most, over distances of inches.
You have to demonstrate transmission of terawatts for thousands of kilometers for this to be feasible. And your losses need to be pretty much where they are with copper distribution we have now.
Attachment of the zygote, you say? I'd think that's pretty trivial: the uterus is contracted, there's barely any room there. The zygote has nothing to do but to attach. I'd presume that any effects of gravity on the migration of the zygote must be small, in light of HUGE surface tension and other local forces acting on it.
TCP is already being transparently recreated at the ends of the link in many satellite internet access systems. The TCP connection is transparently terminated at the uplink side, and re-created at the downlink. Over-the-air uses custom protocols geared towards high latency and dropouts.
And then you go and compare their (Sarovar, Ishizaki, Whaley and Fleming's) papers to Montagnier's, and you pretty much know who did the science, and who is just pretending.
Just like with Montagnier: being right about A doesn't necessarily make you right about B. Tesla got AC transmission right, Motnagnier discovered HIV allrighty, but they are both wrong about other unrelated things. Get over it. Science is not about how many times you were right or wrong beforehand. Every discovery must stand up to scrutiny in its own right. That's how it works.
Tesla was quite wrong about certain things. His wireless energy transmission idea is unrealizable, for one. He did not "end up" being right about that.
More to the point, Tesla's ideas for wireless transmission of energy miss the reality by orders of magnitude. They don't hold up to simple electromagnetic propagation calculations (path loss, for one).
Woooooosh. The onus of PRESENTING TO and CONVINCING the reader of an article that the authors did in fact "attempt this multiple times before publishing" is on THEM. They did nothing of the sort. I see absolutely no solid data that would show it's a repeatable phenomenon that cannot be explained by experimental mistakes. End of the story right here. Nothing to see, move on. Seriously.
The quality of the paper is IMHO abysmal. It's very non-technical despite the appearance of being so, and I don't think that the authors quite know what they are writing about.
Humor us and do some math as to how much energy would be captured if we could harness all the lightning strikes in the U.S. Then contrast that with some estimates on investment required to do so.
You seem to think that reality can be bent your way by throwing money at it. Sorry, but Nature doesn't give shit about money or good intentions.
The only technologically feasible way to capture lightning energy right now is to have an effing big capacitor. Building-size-effing-big. There's nothing smaller that can be charged to megavolts within a millisecond or so and survive it.
A company of Apple's size has no place for a "limited" QA budget for a key breadwinner product like iPhone. The basic product development is costing tens of millions already, spending a few more on QA wouldn't be out of place. Just developing production line testing jigs and scripts is easily a $500k endeavor, with a couple $M spent on the test hardware deployed on the factory floor. Test-grade wideband digital receivers with associated software for spectrum analysis, demodulation, etc cost about as much as decent cars do. You can't spend $10-$20M on setting up production and argue that spending $5M on QA testing is too much.
Slashdot Mirror
Any sort of an NDA is an agreement between, say, silicon Vendor A, and the initial user. Once it's out there, the most you're infringing by copying it is copyright law. Besides, what I mean by beating them at their own game: Chinese use those documents to develop hardware that may well be sold in a mall perhaps a dozen miles from Vendor A's HQ. Can't really hurt Vendor A that someone else is using their own damn chips?
As for "risks" for Baidu: LOL. If you get anything that's made and designed in China, odds are the mechanicals were designed using pirated SolidWorks or somesuch, and noone was asked for permission for anything. That's the reality there.
I guess we agree personal anecdotes are just that :) I think though that the execution of the procedure can play a major role, infections I'd think aren't a random "oh you're just unlucky" thing. Hospital staff can mess things up, and like everyone some are just bad at what they do.
Alas, I think that before going to Mars we need urgently to figure out why one's healing gets screwed up at Amundsen-Scott South Pole Station. There's a book by Jerri Nielsen about her experience; she was a doctor there for one winter. To put it mildly: weird shit happens at the South Pole. Same gravity, not all that bad air pressure (equivalent of 11000 ft during an arctic low), reasonably warm interiors, yet somehow your body acts up.
Your second sentence is a bit contradictory: you say that preplanned C-section is one of the easier surgical procedures -- I agree. So why you're saying it shouldn't be considered almost routine?
A personal anecdote: a friend has almost lost custody of her child because she didn't follow a hunch of doing a preplanned C-section. The vaginal delivery had complications and the baby ended up with some sort of an intracranial hemorrhage. The parents weren't told about that, and it wasn't monitored (like it should have been). A couple months later his head grew 2cm in circumference overnight while at a "good" hospital, this was ignored by the doctors there. The reason for hospitalization was seizures/vomiting. The parents were suspected of child abuse (nonsense in this case) due to a diagnosis of shaken child "triad" and are fighting in court to this day (for over a year!) to clear their name. A pediatrician who was involved in this has vanished without a trace (seriously). $10k later spent on a private investigator failed to uncover her whereabouts.
Vaginal delivery is OK when you are an oracle and can predict no problems. For us, two planned C-sections went without a hitch and I just don't get why anyone would suffer through natural childbirth.
That's the thing: it will only ever work on a small scale. The writing is on the wall, precisely as you state. To power a whole city wirelessly, you'll pretty much need an antenna covering the total area of the city. The reason that Intel has to use large antennas is because the math works out that way. For a house powered from 1000 miles away, you'll need an antenna the size of a small skyscraper.
I'm not talking about how it was back then. All that nutters today care about is Tesla's wireless transmission. Somehow AC in their wall sockets is not so spectacular anymore :(
You misunderstood. I'm talking about his power-tower wireless transmission projects. AC power distribution has been, um, sufficiently demonstrated in practice ;)
Jargon constructs -- you mean more typing is better? I'd take the keyword search offered by Google anytime over askjeeves's verbosity.
Baidu is better at one thing, though: if you need some odd datasheets/specs/standards that are normally supplied under an NDA or for a stiff fee, google typically doesn't find them but baidu often will. Beat them at their own game and all that...
Here the scale is uber-important. His approach is not wrong by orders of magnitude, it's worse, it's got an off-by-one on the exponent. Intel's "experiments" and such are doing stuff on the order of hundreds of watts at most, over distances of inches.
You have to demonstrate transmission of terawatts for thousands of kilometers for this to be feasible. And your losses need to be pretty much where they are with copper distribution we have now.
He didn't prove anything. He couldn't do undergrad physics right.
Attachment of the zygote, you say? I'd think that's pretty trivial: the uterus is contracted, there's barely any room there. The zygote has nothing to do but to attach. I'd presume that any effects of gravity on the migration of the zygote must be small, in light of HUGE surface tension and other local forces acting on it.
I wouldn't count on anything but a C-section on Mars. Better be prepared than be sorry.
TCP is already being transparently recreated at the ends of the link in many satellite internet access systems. The TCP connection is transparently terminated at the uplink side, and re-created at the downlink. Over-the-air uses custom protocols geared towards high latency and dropouts.
And then you go and compare their (Sarovar, Ishizaki, Whaley and Fleming's) papers to Montagnier's, and you pretty much know who did the science, and who is just pretending.
Just like with Montagnier: being right about A doesn't necessarily make you right about B. Tesla got AC transmission right, Motnagnier discovered HIV allrighty, but they are both wrong about other unrelated things. Get over it. Science is not about how many times you were right or wrong beforehand. Every discovery must stand up to scrutiny in its own right. That's how it works.
Tesla was quite wrong about certain things. His wireless energy transmission idea is unrealizable, for one. He did not "end up" being right about that.
More to the point, Tesla's ideas for wireless transmission of energy miss the reality by orders of magnitude. They don't hold up to simple electromagnetic propagation calculations (path loss, for one).
Woooooosh. The onus of PRESENTING TO and CONVINCING the reader of an article that the authors did in fact "attempt this multiple times before publishing" is on THEM. They did nothing of the sort. I see absolutely no solid data that would show it's a repeatable phenomenon that cannot be explained by experimental mistakes. End of the story right here. Nothing to see, move on. Seriously.
The quality of the paper is IMHO abysmal. It's very non-technical despite the appearance of being so, and I don't think that the authors quite know what they are writing about.
A lot of those devices are out of support in 5 years, and govt labs usually replace them at that time.
He's not a troll. The submitters and the test givers were had by R&S's marketing department.
Oh, I forgot: just how much of lightning's energy do you think is spent on antimatter production?
Humor us and do some math as to how much energy would be captured if we could harness all the lightning strikes in the U.S. Then contrast that with some estimates on investment required to do so.
You seem to think that reality can be bent your way by throwing money at it. Sorry, but Nature doesn't give shit about money or good intentions.
The only technologically feasible way to capture lightning energy right now is to have an effing big capacitor. Building-size-effing-big. There's nothing smaller that can be charged to megavolts within a millisecond or so and survive it.
A company of Apple's size has no place for a "limited" QA budget for a key breadwinner product like iPhone. The basic product development is costing tens of millions already, spending a few more on QA wouldn't be out of place. Just developing production line testing jigs and scripts is easily a $500k endeavor, with a couple $M spent on the test hardware deployed on the factory floor. Test-grade wideband digital receivers with associated software for spectrum analysis, demodulation, etc cost about as much as decent cars do. You can't spend $10-$20M on setting up production and argue that spending $5M on QA testing is too much.