The article spells it out but that doesn't mean that's what it is about. It also sounds fishy: why would they tell the inventor that his device passed the testing and would be used and then say "we will not pay"? It doesn't make any sense, licensing the invention would keep the use a secret.
Telomeres isn't a buzzword IMHO. But all recent research I've seen (note: not my field - but I do try to keep up to date) indicate that telomeres isn't too significant for cell aging, not completely irrelevant but not a priority either. Increasing telomere length without taking care of the aging on a cellular level will mostly increase cancer...
Standard operating systems have a lot of surface to exploit. The real question is if there will ever be a secure operating system, I'm not sure given the expectations of users. Still could be a _lot_ better...
Okay so by posting that we know that you are immature at least intellectually, that you don't know the definition of malware - in fact being so far from the definition that you most likely have no clue about computers or programming.
The start of this sub-thread is ludicrous, no it isn't a back door for Microsoft to use. Know why? Us that actually knows what a computer is can check such things, maybe you'll learn about it when you grow up.
Really? Try to read some literature from the 1920-30s and then compare their predictions with the actual outcome. Then realize that predicting things is near impossible.
BTW perfect tooth regeneration sounds sweet until one remembers that is essentially impossible in the human body. There still would be a need for dentists.
No it isn't complicated about amplifying sound. But if you think the industry have designed special ultra-low power DSP processors for hearing aids just for fun you are wrong. There are versions that are multi-core too, think that is required for mere amplification?!?
Well one could make a room from pure tungsten and fill it with ultra-purified air and it could come close to radiation free. Close as there still would be neutrino radiation present.
I'm not that good with physics but perhaps placing the room in the middle of a neutron star would be enough to remove neutrino radiation too.:P
That's true. We are talking about ionizing radiation of which there are several kinds too.
The stuff that can accumulate inside your body and slowly irradiate your organs for decades is much more dangerous than external radiation that can't penetrate the skin.
Well, yes but now you are talking about consuming radioactive particles, not kinds of radiation. Radiation in itself doesn't accumulate.
Besides, the issue of "hot spots", that is areas that have not been fully decontaminated, is only one of many problems preventing people returning to Fukushima.
If everything _could_ be decontaminated what other problem is there?
Worse it seems that nobody has tested these drives for the emission of charged particles.
Well, yes but there are many other confounding factors too. Both NASA Eagleworks and Dresden have measured forces in the 10 micronewton range. Problem is that the null test at Dresden gave an even larger force.
Which is why the authors of the Dresden paper essentially say they can't confirm or refute the effect. Compare that with what is widely "reported" on the Internet that it is a positive experiment verifying earlier ones.
20 micro newtons is TINY, and you somehow have to couple 700W into this thing without accidently coupling forces in magnetically or via thermal effects.
By way of example, You will feel 20 micronewtons of force is someone stands moderately close to you simply from gravitational effects.
It's very, very very hard to measure small forces on such a large object and especially so when high powers are involved.
Yes. While I hope this is some new effect that can increase our understanding of the world (don't care much about space travel) it is most likely measurement errors of one or more kind(s). But finding out if it is something real or not is proper science _and_ could improve measuring techniques as a side effect.
Coincidentally, I just came across this Ted talk from Alex Winter the other day. It was most excellent. (Sorry, I couldn't resist.) He made a very compelling argument for the value of privacy in the marketplace, why Dark Web vendors such as Silk Road (which he made a documentary on) and others are battling to protect it, and why privacy needs to be protected.
Right. The idea behind such sites are to make money by doing things that are illegal.
Are you happy right now with private businesses, credit bureaus, banks, and the government all logging, monitoring, and referencing your entire financial history? Would you like it any more if any of these institutions were hacked, and all your data was made public? If you aren't, then you should be mourning the loss of a private marketplace.
First: you are using a very specific meaning to the phrase "private marketplace", something that actually never existed except as a rendezvous between two (pseduo-)anonymous parties trading non-traceable goods. Even that case isn't private as the people involved can be traced and identified.
In reality what one can have is transactions that are reasonably private, limiting information sharing on a need-to-know basis.
LOL! Try to realize that people once complained about Mozart creating crap music and then realize whatever kind of music _you_ prefer actually is still created! In essence you think you are the arbitrator of what suck and not, just as every generation have thought the "new" kind of music worse/more immoral than the thing they grew up with.
I don't see how wasting of energy on non-essential things (most of the light you see at night is from deserted buildings, advertising etc.) is a positive trait. But maybe I misunderstood the point of your post?
Nice blurb. Of course it mentions FDA aproval otherwise it would be verboten.
Now if you or someone you know is sick with Cancer or another one of those "incurable" diseases my advice is: do not be afraid to search for a cure yourself.
They should - many of the so-called "cures" are dangerous in many ways. Some of them directly (as injecting poisons isn't healthy) and some indirectly (reducing effects of medical treatment). Some are "harmless", assuming the patient doesn't think they should replace real, proven effective treatment with whatever snake-oil they choose. Those in the third category can even have positive effects just as any other placebo.
The very idea of a cancer cure is idiotic as it is a wide spectrum of different kinds of cellular malfunction. That's the reason there are a lot of different drugs and treatments as something effective for one of the cancers will not be effective for another kind.
Yes, a cure. I'm sure it's a crazy concept for many people stuck with approved science but until you have direct, personal experience with an option you can't dismiss it anymore than you can dismiss mainstream-approved chemoterapy and radiotherapy, which by the way are bigger killers than the cancer itself.
And that's bullshit spread by ignorant fools and people wanting to make money on peoples fears and hopes. How do I know? Science, medical science. Yes there are people that dies of the cancer treatment, most commonly by a fragile body overdosing on painkillers. It isn't talked about much but is a reality. But how should those deaths be avoided? Many terminal cancer cases are extremely painful and not giving them large amounts of painkillers would be torture of people not (even if they'd want to) capable of ending their own lives, even with the Hippocratic ideals in mind allowing the patients to be tortured by their own decaying bodies for a few extra days of "life" in agony isn't a realistic choice.
Mind you I'm not saying there aren't charlatans out for desperate people.There are a lot... in the medical establishment as well as outside of it. Caveat emptor.
I can count 6 people I know of (having read their sites, articles etc.) that thought they knew a cure for cancer. They all died of the cancer they were sure to be cured. Some of them just "knew" the cure(s), some of them left a huge pile of robbed corpses.
There are people that claim to have been cured by something, the thing in common is that they either was self-diagnosed or diagnosed by quacks.
If someone told me or anybody else I know that I/he/she have terminal cancer I'd seek a second opinion (not expecting any better news) and then just accept palliative care trying to make my/his/her last days as comfortable as possible.
I'll end by noting that you didn't say what any of the "cures" are.
Of course it does harm - the reason copyright was invented was to encourage production of art like books, plays, music etc. It costs money and effort to produce, how could removal of the encouragement be without harm?
Maybe you shouldn't drink soda when working on your computer? That's the main reason keys are sticky...
That stuff fails to work even when new is well known and is the same for software, hardware and people. And that isn't relevant as we were talking about keyboards failing mechanically, implying that the (normal) use of keyboards will commonly kill them. Which isn't true in my experience, not even for bargain-basement crap.
Sure if one uses _any_ mechanical component long enough it will fail, fact of life. Even ICs can fail from mechanical stress (electromigration, bound wires cracking etc.), still doesn't make the post I replied to any near correct.
Slashdot Mirror
The article spells it out but that doesn't mean that's what it is about. It also sounds fishy: why would they tell the inventor that his device passed the testing and would be used and then say "we will not pay"? It doesn't make any sense, licensing the invention would keep the use a secret.
Apps?
I doubt you have so why should we? But no, blowing up shit isn't in it.
just FYI: one can't convince people to be "queer" (I guess you mean homosexual), it isn't a choice.
Telomeres isn't a buzzword IMHO. But all recent research I've seen (note: not my field - but I do try to keep up to date) indicate that telomeres isn't too significant for cell aging, not completely irrelevant but not a priority either. Increasing telomere length without taking care of the aging on a cellular level will mostly increase cancer...
US or metric LoCs?
Standard operating systems have a lot of surface to exploit. The real question is if there will ever be a secure operating system, I'm not sure given the expectations of users. Still could be a _lot_ better...
Are you serious? If they wanted to take control of the OS they could have done it without crappy hacks - AS THEY FUCKING WROTE THE FUCKING SYSTEM!
Okay so by posting that we know that you are immature at least intellectually, that you don't know the definition of malware - in fact being so far from the definition that you most likely have no clue about computers or programming.
The start of this sub-thread is ludicrous, no it isn't a back door for Microsoft to use. Know why? Us that actually knows what a computer is can check such things, maybe you'll learn about it when you grow up.
Really? Try to read some literature from the 1920-30s and then compare their predictions with the actual outcome. Then realize that predicting things is near impossible.
BTW perfect tooth regeneration sounds sweet until one remembers that is essentially impossible in the human body. There still would be a need for dentists.
I just have to comment: how deluded does one have to be to think that protecting a market is in any way _communist_? LOL!
No it isn't complicated about amplifying sound. But if you think the industry have designed special ultra-low power DSP processors for hearing aids just for fun you are wrong. There are versions that are multi-core too, think that is required for mere amplification?!?
Well one could make a room from pure tungsten and fill it with ultra-purified air and it could come close to radiation free. Close as there still would be neutrino radiation present.
I'm not that good with physics but perhaps placing the room in the middle of a neutron star would be enough to remove neutrino radiation too. :P
Not all radiation is the same.
That's true. We are talking about ionizing radiation of which there are several kinds too.
The stuff that can accumulate inside your body and slowly irradiate your organs for decades is much more dangerous than external radiation that can't penetrate the skin.
Well, yes but now you are talking about consuming radioactive particles, not kinds of radiation. Radiation in itself doesn't accumulate.
Besides, the issue of "hot spots", that is areas that have not been fully decontaminated, is only one of many problems preventing people returning to Fukushima.
If everything _could_ be decontaminated what other problem is there?
Worse it seems that nobody has tested these drives for the emission of charged particles.
Well, yes but there are many other confounding factors too. Both NASA Eagleworks and Dresden have measured forces in the 10 micronewton range. Problem is that the null test at Dresden gave an even larger force.
Which is why the authors of the Dresden paper essentially say they can't confirm or refute the effect. Compare that with what is widely "reported" on the Internet that it is a positive experiment verifying earlier ones.
20 micro newtons is TINY, and you somehow have to couple 700W into this thing without accidently coupling forces in magnetically or via thermal effects.
By way of example, You will feel 20 micronewtons of force is someone stands moderately close to you simply from gravitational effects.
It's very, very very hard to measure small forces on such a large object and especially so when high powers are involved.
Yes. While I hope this is some new effect that can increase our understanding of the world (don't care much about space travel) it is most likely measurement errors of one or more kind(s). But finding out if it is something real or not is proper science _and_ could improve measuring techniques as a side effect.
Coincidentally, I just came across this Ted talk from Alex Winter the other day. It was most excellent. (Sorry, I couldn't resist.) He made a very compelling argument for the value of privacy in the marketplace, why Dark Web vendors such as Silk Road (which he made a documentary on) and others are battling to protect it, and why privacy needs to be protected.
Right. The idea behind such sites are to make money by doing things that are illegal.
Are you happy right now with private businesses, credit bureaus, banks, and the government all logging, monitoring, and referencing your entire financial history? Would you like it any more if any of these institutions were hacked, and all your data was made public? If you aren't, then you should be mourning the loss of a private marketplace.
First: you are using a very specific meaning to the phrase "private marketplace", something that actually never existed except as a rendezvous between two (pseduo-)anonymous parties trading non-traceable goods. Even that case isn't private as the people involved can be traced and identified.
In reality what one can have is transactions that are reasonably private, limiting information sharing on a need-to-know basis.
A "no true AI" argument? This uses a neural learning system rather than a rule-based one, AFAIK those aren't commonly called expert systems.
However the new(?) thing is the design of the human-computer interaction, not the fact that it analyses log data.
LOL! Try to realize that people once complained about Mozart creating crap music and then realize whatever kind of music _you_ prefer actually is still created! In essence you think you are the arbitrator of what suck and not, just as every generation have thought the "new" kind of music worse/more immoral than the thing they grew up with.
I don't see how wasting of energy on non-essential things (most of the light you see at night is from deserted buildings, advertising etc.) is a positive trait. But maybe I misunderstood the point of your post?
Nice blurb. Of course it mentions FDA aproval otherwise it would be verboten.
Now if you or someone you know is sick with Cancer or another one of those "incurable" diseases my advice is: do not be afraid to search for a cure yourself.
They should - many of the so-called "cures" are dangerous in many ways. Some of them directly (as injecting poisons isn't healthy) and some indirectly (reducing effects of medical treatment). Some are "harmless", assuming the patient doesn't think they should replace real, proven effective treatment with whatever snake-oil they choose. Those in the third category can even have positive effects just as any other placebo.
The very idea of a cancer cure is idiotic as it is a wide spectrum of different kinds of cellular malfunction. That's the reason there are a lot of different drugs and treatments as something effective for one of the cancers will not be effective for another kind.
Yes, a cure. I'm sure it's a crazy concept for many people stuck with approved science but until you have direct, personal experience with an option you can't dismiss it anymore than you can dismiss mainstream-approved chemoterapy and radiotherapy, which by the way are bigger killers than the cancer itself.
And that's bullshit spread by ignorant fools and people wanting to make money on peoples fears and hopes. How do I know? Science, medical science.
Yes there are people that dies of the cancer treatment, most commonly by a fragile body overdosing on painkillers. It isn't talked about much but is a reality. But how should those deaths be avoided? Many terminal cancer cases are extremely painful and not giving them large amounts of painkillers would be torture of people not (even if they'd want to) capable of ending their own lives, even with the Hippocratic ideals in mind allowing the patients to be tortured by their own decaying bodies for a few extra days of "life" in agony isn't a realistic choice.
Mind you I'm not saying there aren't charlatans out for desperate people.There are a lot... in the medical establishment as well as outside of it. Caveat emptor.
I can count 6 people I know of (having read their sites, articles etc.) that thought they knew a cure for cancer. They all died of the cancer they were sure to be cured. Some of them just "knew" the cure(s), some of them left a huge pile of robbed corpses.
There are people that claim to have been cured by something, the thing in common is that they either was self-diagnosed or diagnosed by quacks.
If someone told me or anybody else I know that I/he/she have terminal cancer I'd seek a second opinion (not expecting any better news) and then just accept palliative care trying to make my/his/her last days as comfortable as possible.
I'll end by noting that you didn't say what any of the "cures" are.
Of course it does harm - the reason copyright was invented was to encourage production of art like books, plays, music etc. It costs money and effort to produce, how could removal of the encouragement be without harm?
That would be trivial to understand if you'd know what treason is defined to be. Go google it.
Maybe you shouldn't drink soda when working on your computer? That's the main reason keys are sticky...
That stuff fails to work even when new is well known and is the same for software, hardware and people. And that isn't relevant as we were talking about keyboards failing mechanically, implying that the (normal) use of keyboards will commonly kill them. Which isn't true in my experience, not even for bargain-basement crap.
Sure if one uses _any_ mechanical component long enough it will fail, fact of life. Even ICs can fail from mechanical stress (electromigration, bound wires cracking etc.), still doesn't make the post I replied to any near correct.
Well IMHO at least he has a pretty cool name, that counts for a lot.
In this case the inverse of trans, more generally: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...