I think it is probably large because it is a prototype. If they get a manufacturer to mass produce it, the Fab can do a lot to reduce size.
Also, they probably have to hook into a users insurance because there might be liability claims since this deals with a persons health. The main limit to this device's adoption most definitely will be liability.
Since England is about the size of one of our medium to small states, it is hard to blanket every acre with a cell-phone tower.
A warning transmission could be sent with "burst mode" from a watch like this anywhere in North America. I was knew this gentleman who was trying to patent a similar watch for boats. It used a range finder to sound an alarm if someone was too far from the receiver (overboard). The watch itself used a standard battery, but a capacitor could be charged to send a burst signal to satellite every 15 minutes from just about anywhere in the world.
Since that was 20 years ago, I'm sure we could do better. I would be surprised if this device doesn't have some way of getting around the 2 mile cell tower issue in case of emergency. If not, it would be much easier to add than 500,000 more cell phone towers to the country.
Besides, the range and technology of cell phones should improve a lot. So investing so heavily in a cell phone infrastructure is short-sighted. Personally, I am a big proponent of infrastructure that helps everyone--but you have to pick and choose wisely. I'd much rather have high-speed trains everywhere.
How is this good? An electronics company would definitely want "un-noisy power". After spending lots of money to add signals to the transmission, people will have to spend even more to get it back out.
And does anyone know the capacity? Broadband and DSL are retrofits to technologies that already carried signals. But this seems like an expensive rig to me.
Won't it be cheaper and better to just support Wi-Max? This whole thing smacks as a nice way for utilities to get government money for a half-assed technology.
Won't this also interfere with X-11 in the home, or is it basically killed by down-converting the Volts to 110?
I'd like to point out that the previous post is a reasonable criticism of the idea of adding MegaFauna to North America. Rather than the knee-jerk reactions of Tree-Biters who take it as a personal insult towards mankind.
But, I think that having a lot more National Preserves, rather than just zoos, is perhaps a better idea--not letting these animals roam free, but having large areas set aside and fenced in. An elephant isn't going to accidentally sprout up in your back yard like GM corn. Besides, that was agri-business doing stupid things.
People are talking about saving the MegaFauna from being erased from the earth, and somehow you guys get personally offended.
Nobody is talking about Evil. But undoing some of humanity's impact on the earth seems sensible to me. I don't have to guess about "Shotgun's" thoughts on global warming.
I'd like to see elephants around. Just shield your eyes and pretend the offensive animals aren't there--it works with Global Warming, doesn't it? How is this going to hurt you? Whiners! Boo-hoo, somebody is criticizing humanity! The bible said we could piss on everything... boo-hoo!
The Tree-huggers are a little radical, but you Tree-Biters are downright idiots.
I think that we will go back to the theory of the "aether". If you look at theories behind "null space engergy" the concept is premised that all vacuum is flooded by all possible energy, and that the little bit of heat created by two conducting plates in close proximity with a vacuum between them is caused by blocking this energy. So, you might consider the "motes" that make up the particles in our dimension as actually holes from other "filled" dimensions. Or, that the universe is solid, and what we experience is the space between. Of course, since we experience existence, it doesn't really matter if we are the mass or the missing mass. The concept of solid space functions just the same as a concept of absolute vacuum from our perspective. I'll go with the vacuum notion because it gets rid of the idea of discreet bits of matter and makes it somewhat simpler.
Here is an interesting thought experiment to conduct at a party. Ask someone to tell you what they are aware of in the room. They will say things like; "light, people, air, floor, etc." Turn on your cell phone or a radio and mention that there are at least a thousand other unseen signals passing through everyone's body that they are not aware of until they have the right tools. The space between the bits that make up the molecules in their body is as empty as the space between the planets in the solar system... yet we think of ourselves as solid.
Science is just people being aware of their little spark in the darkness. Religion is about everything that isn't in view of the light.
We are all made of star stuff and as ephemeral as the mist... yet we dream.
Unfortuneatly, some want to put religion and science at odds. Not that the ideas of evolution are blasphemous, but for reasons of power. I think the objective is to annoint some as the "speaker of truth". A move to absolutism to PROVE you are a good Christian.
The people getting the most critism seem to me to be the people who say they are open minded and are willing to change their minds if better information is presented. I think some want us to argue with eachother over useless things while our pockets get picked.
In the end, it matters more how we treat our fellow man. There are no good excuses or theories to spread hate. I'm very glad to see more Christians on the blog saying that they have open minds. I'm not interested in everyone thinking the same way. Just harmony and good debate.
Now, it is common to look at the 1950's as the "good old days", but there were lot of inequities. It was really only "good" for white males, middle class and up.
The power brokers have always been about "making a buck". But my dads generation did not lie awake at night thinking of being billionaires. The dream of a lot of people was being a hero, flying around the world like other great explorers or eventurers, hitting a home run, shooting for the stars.
The 1950's to 1970's saw a lot of people dreaming to be great scientists.
I'm a bit cynical myself--but I know that the "common man" of the previous generations America really held some good myths. They dreamed of better things. You can only have so many flat panel TVs in the house. At some point in your life-- you will grow up and realize that money isn't all that special. At that point you will become depressed. Start doing charity. Or look for a better dream.
Really, it may be an illusion, but friends, family and dreams are the only efforts that are never a waste.
I still want to make enough money so that I don't have to worry about money. But I don't dream of wealth. Maybe that's just me. But I really doubt it. Ask anyone who motivates others.
If you think about it, 1850 that wasn't too long ago. It seems that humanity has been full of sh%t for most of history. It points to the importance of keeping facts only if you understand the underlying theories behind them. A good mind is ready to discard "Facts" when a new and better theory comes along. Beware all dogma. These old science books had a lot of Facts but little real science. Maybe future generations will look at the 1900s as a true "second rennaissance" where science was actually first adopted by the masses and that America was a champion of human rights -- I think that the Freedom and Free thinking are intertwined. We take these for granted as though they have always existed -- but in fact, they are highly inconvenient principles for Governments.
I guess we can't expect this momentary lapse of lucidity to continue. Four more years and we will be fighting "noxious swamp humours" that cause tuberculosis with good feelings.
Well, it is a Bogus, alternate future. I didn't rule out licensing in this alternate universe entirely. Just that companies could totally control their patents. Hence, if Apple owned the only useful GUI, and patent/copyright were as broad as some that allowed Amazon the "single-click" sale and Microsoft's "great luck" with patents, then they would have an interest in NOT allowing anyone else to "do a GUI" (hard to get away from a window and click metaphor). You could follow this ad-infinitum and have Xerox NOT license the laser printer technology to Canon. But Canon might have used an ion gun like in a TV.
Anyway, when you get into an alternate reality, its kind of hard to apply any logic you know. Its just belaboring the point that allowing patents to become instant monopolies helps nobody--but the monopoly.
I was looking to patent an idea like this. I created a liquid lense with oil and Iron-Oxide -- nothing really exotic, Ferro-fluids have been used for quite a while. In my design I used a combination of ionization and magnetism to shape the lense. It was only part of a more complicated idea--I didn't think the lense was worth a patent by itself--kind of obvious. The only reason this is useful now is that we have new technologies in video that can actually use such a tiny lense.
I was actually using this to move a laser to boost radio signals. I kind of gave up on the whole thing because I didn't have a job and didn't have any idea how to get the ball rolling. I'm an idea synthesizer-- not a lawyer. Anyway, I could have had about five patents out of this.
So, in short, this lense may possibly be as simple as mineral oil and rust surrounded by water between two pieces of glass (I haven't been able to read the article due to the "slashdot effect"). Inside the small area of water, surface tension works to hold the shape and relax the effects of gravity--It's best to have an oil of the same specific gravity as water (most are lighter) so that motion will not pull one liquid more than another. Still, unless you used a strong magnetic field on the ferro-fluid, motion would change its shape-- so no long exposures. The difference in light distortion between the water and the oil will allow for your lense to focus. My idea was to use two lasers--one as a reference beam to calculate unwanted distortions. I'm guessing there is going to have to be some feedback mechanism to determine what the spherical abberation of the resulting liquid lense would be. I wouldn't want to say anymore because it would then be easy to guess the tricks I figured out. Since I have nothing but a love of science and no degrees in the material sciences, the actual fabrication of this device would not be my forte.
On an aside, I still think it would be a nice idea to spin water in space to create a large lense for telescopic or sunlight collection purposes. About 30 years ago, when fiber optics first came out, I played with a lot of ideas for uses-- things like piping sunlight into the house, using it to peer inside the body and lase out blockages (I used a parasol design to stop blood flow and expand arteries--rather than a more obvious and more elegant balloon). It amazes me that things as obvious as a liquid lense can still find patentable uses.
I actually submitted this as an idea to a company that says it helps people with Inventions. When I got a follow call asking for $1200 more than the original $500 I realized it was a scam (sigh). If these scumbags realize they have prior art--I'm guessing they won't, since they are about scamming more than actually understanding any technology that people submit. Well, lessons learned. Nobody is going to "discover" your brilliance in life--everyone has to do their own leg work.
One of these days, I'd love to get back to inventing.
I've already read about good techniques for this. Basically on the board you create sticky points and dip the board into the nanotubes like ice cream into a bowl of sprinkles. Lithography or bacteria or whatever could be used to create special adhesive sights to orient the nanotube. I'm guessing you could dope them with an iron molecule at one end. Sort out correctly oriented nanotubes. Put the lot into a strong magnetic field and create a thin film of evenly spaced particles by using an ultrasonic resonance frequency corresponding to the radius of the nanotube. You then create networks of connections by repeatedly adding adhesive points and dipping the board into a layer of oriented nanotubes.
The same iron-doping you use to orient the tubes (use gas-deposition for the iron, not the carbon) can be used to create a handle to add a "sticky point" on a nano-tube.
Better yet, create a uniform circuit structure and use some IBM technologies that allow for software to re-route logic gates (see the IBM patent on self-forming or healing CPUs).
Anyway, I want the right for Prior art on the patent. Even if this is a pretty obvious use of nanotubes.;-)
I've heard that NASA has done some experiments with ultrasonics on a Turkey that seems to work. The vibration is seen as stress on the bone by the body--though probably not as targeted as gravity, a combination of ultrasonics and exercise is probably already used by "extended stay" astronauts. I don't know if cosmonauts are doing this.
The end result was that 999 large, sweaty and obnoxious people got a good deal on an iBook. Order in the Universe has been preserved.
For balance, we need to give 10,000 people a free cruise; First Come, First Served. At the end of the trip, they get stranded in the middle of the Atlantic... I vote for the Sargasso Sea
If it were On Topic, I could provide you links for all the bills I'm talking about. Then I could spend an hour on each one to tell you how it screws you and helps a campaign donater. My perspective has a bit to do with information--and not just "feelings".
Here is a quick preview; Energy Bill of 2005 -- this wonderful bill gives about $14 billion to oil companies, just so companies like Exxon will continue to give us oil while bringing in $64 Billion in the last quarter alone. The Energy bill was written by energy Lobbyists. The rest goes to Nuclear and a pittance to some alternative technology which is just keeping up with previous government support, just rolled into a nice steaming piece of pork.
The recent Healthcare reform act spends tax money to pay drug companies to give an ~ 17% discount to seniors, depending if they got the correct discount card among 75 options. Before this bill went into action, drug providers raised their rates about 20%--just in time. By the way, they also are having record profits, reporting double digit year over year growth for the most part. All for a mere $450 Billion (projected). Wonder why kids in your neighborhood beg door to door for school books now?
Science. The science advisor now reports to an intern, in case any real science actually came out to refute all the good "there is no global warming" science paid for by Exxon, et al. This administration has been critisized (first in history) by over 2000 scientists (I forget the petition they signed). Of course, if you stop believing in science, theory holds that it will "just go away". We'll see. If the Intelligent Design crap didn't convince you of an anti-science stance...
Defense... did you not notice a few things we have been doing? Our security is FUBAR but at least this is keeping up employment and exports. Once they add it to the balance sheet, the fantasy economic numbers might look even worse or need more fantasy adjustments.
Bankruptcy Reform Act. Written by Credit Card Lobbyists (forgot the name of the guy, but he bragged about writing it whole cloth--I suppose for his resume). The Dems couldn't get a limit of 40% interest for Credit Card issuers. It makes it more difficult and expensive (ironic, no?) to declare bankruptcy. Most bankruptcy is due to health care expenses of people who actually have insurance. Credit Card companies are experiencing record profits.
Search and Seizure--um Patriot Act I & II. Heard of it?
Privacy. Homeland security; Much of what they do is tantamount to domestic spying. Didja know, that Tom Delay used them to find house members to vote for redistricting in Texas? Also good source for direct marketing. Too tired to do more research. Google; Herbert Hoover, big jerk. For fun, look for parallels.
Just because I'm paranoid doesn't make me wrong. This is OT but it is important.
Funny, but did you know that the Federal Reserve, IRS and other parts of government are listed as corporations (I think in Delaware). Many are listed as recently as some time in the 1990s. I was reading and arguably tin-foil hat theory that the US is still owned by Great Britain and that we only won independence of self rule, not from our monetary duties to the crown. I followed some of the "evidence" and it was all right there. I don't know what it means in real-life terms, but it just makes you go "hmmmm".
The incorporation of various branches of government might be to allow them to interact better with the rest of US institutions and it might allow for the use of corporate structures to allow for more accountability. But, if you assume greed and corruption with a touch of incompetence, it will at least give you the satisfaction of being right more often than not.
could go to the store and buy some amazing device, notice it doesn't have patent protection, patent the device myself, then sue the original designer out of business.
Very easy to do with a time machine. You don't happen to work for the Hitchhikers Guide do you?
OK. That is dead ground. XEROX had some great ideas. Jobs paid money to tour their facilities. Apple diverged markedly from the "look and feel" and didn't use many of the "ideas" until after 1990.
But if XEROX had cared, they could have patented most all of these ideas. Depending upon how broad the concept of a "window" could be copyrighted... I don't know.
There is a lot more overlap in Windows 1 through 3 with the original Mac than Apple had with Xerox. The fact that Apple actually allowed Microsoft to copy their interface helped Microsoft have the greatest windfall ever.
The issue is, that this is just an arbitrary system that provides the rules that businesses play by. But it has been very arbitrary and favors big, monied companies over small companies and actual innovators.
I agree with parent. If Apple would have been better at protecting patents, there would be no other GUI desktops until last year--and possibly not even DOS. There would be one word processor "MacWrite" (no, not WordPerfect), one spreadsheet "VisiCalc" one networking technology "Novell" one digital painting application "MacPaint" one laser printer, Canon with Adobe Postscript one Database [maybe] IBM DBase. Of course, Bill Gates would own BASIC, because he patented that out from under the creators who freely shared it in the early user groups he attended. But, of course, he'd have to license Assembler from somebody else, taking all the profit out of his "patent".
Which ONE chip would we have? UNYSIS, IBM or Motorolla, maybe Sperry/Rand? Would it be 16 hz yet? Because without competition from what has so far been a pretty free market, that's about all we'd have right now.
The merits of this patent aside, you have an odd take on "obvious".
Buttered bread = obvious
I don't think that a compact device with tiny complex electronic components that stores and plays back audio files quite fits that same definition.
This patent doesn't cover the electronic components or even the thumb slider. The Microsoft patent covers the way you move the selection through the menu. Right arrow allows you to expose more options under the selected row, and up and down allow you to move through them. One finger can travel an entire list.
Really, if it is the first time you ever buttered bread, it would be actually more complicated. If it is the first time you saw bread and butter, perhaps it wouldn't be so obvious. You could say, place the knife on the bread and keep the butter in its tub on top of the knife. This alone is worth $10 Million. The rest of us should just keep our nose to the grindstone so that we can keep our innovators rewarded properly.
This is not really a prior art case. It's kind of a U.S. corruption to steal God's prior art. You'll see genetics and drugs treated differently because it helps American corporations. There are a lot of companies trying to patent genes all the time.
A lot of drugs are synthetic versions of compounds you can find in the health food store (albeit often stronger but with more side effects). The CAFTA bill has a rider to start regulating supplements. Of course, so that we can protect people who are getting damaged in the tens by this unregulated industry. Compared to the 30,000+ who die from prescription drugs every year--but they die in a "regulated" and therefore acceptible way.
Sorry, I just have to interject my outrage over the deluge of corruption and bad legislation I have witnessed the past few years.
So, unless you get GeneCorps permission, stop reproducing. You are in violation of their patent # 123456789.
Yeah, this congress hasn't F'd up everything under the sun yet. So much yet to ruin.
Energy, Healthcare, Science, Defense, Bankruptcy, Search and Seizure, Privacy.
Privatizing water and air is next. Some much left to do. Evil work never ends.
Backround checks and a license to protest are next. Seems we need to know more about people who complain than we get to know about public servants. Know what I mean?
I was working with a company that would get a $1500 bill for a FAX of some boiler plate work that we didn't ask for. If we didn't use him for a while, we'd get a damn FAX. 20-25% of our start-up costs were on legal fees.
I'm sure we could have at least 400 entries of anectdotal evidence of Lawyer over billing.
I think the hidden truth behind some of this "sloppy work" and other rediculous rulings (including the Supreme Court) might be a little "something something" on the side. Or a job for a Nephew for 6 figures. Sure there is a lot of incompetence or it might be Apple didn't file correctly or the description was too broad (but what about all the REALLY BROAD crap M$ patented for C#?), but the iPod was pretty well known before the Microsoft patent came about and the whole thing smells of "something on the side". I think a good alternate job for me would be to do background checks of judges and patent agents whenever something this screwy comes about--make my living as a whistle-blower. If I had any skill at detective work, that is.
The "First-to-File" system seems really bad to me. It is good in that it gets rid of the "guess work" but it also makes Legal work more imporant than innovation. It invalidates the whole point for society to even have patents. Just look at all the cyber-squatters who make a living selling domain names... just imagine if an advanced, skilled and well trained American Lawyer Leach (ALL) made its way into the innocent European courts... all day long the ALL could patent things that innovators missed and sit back and collect royalties on things the ALL can barely spell. It is kind of innevitable.
Slashdot Mirror
I think it is probably large because it is a prototype. If they get a manufacturer to mass produce it, the Fab can do a lot to reduce size.
Also, they probably have to hook into a users insurance because there might be liability claims since this deals with a persons health. The main limit to this device's adoption most definitely will be liability.
Since England is about the size of one of our medium to small states, it is hard to blanket every acre with a cell-phone tower.
A warning transmission could be sent with "burst mode" from a watch like this anywhere in North America. I was knew this gentleman who was trying to patent a similar watch for boats. It used a range finder to sound an alarm if someone was too far from the receiver (overboard). The watch itself used a standard battery, but a capacitor could be charged to send a burst signal to satellite every 15 minutes from just about anywhere in the world.
Since that was 20 years ago, I'm sure we could do better. I would be surprised if this device doesn't have some way of getting around the 2 mile cell tower issue in case of emergency. If not, it would be much easier to add than 500,000 more cell phone towers to the country.
Besides, the range and technology of cell phones should improve a lot. So investing so heavily in a cell phone infrastructure is short-sighted. Personally, I am a big proponent of infrastructure that helps everyone--but you have to pick and choose wisely. I'd much rather have high-speed trains everywhere.
How is this good? An electronics company would definitely want "un-noisy power". After spending lots of money to add signals to the transmission, people will have to spend even more to get it back out.
And does anyone know the capacity? Broadband and DSL are retrofits to technologies that already carried signals. But this seems like an expensive rig to me.
Won't it be cheaper and better to just support Wi-Max? This whole thing smacks as a nice way for utilities to get government money for a half-assed technology.
Won't this also interfere with X-11 in the home, or is it basically killed by down-converting the Volts to 110?
I'd like to point out that the previous post is a reasonable criticism of the idea of adding MegaFauna to North America. Rather than the knee-jerk reactions of Tree-Biters who take it as a personal insult towards mankind.
But, I think that having a lot more National Preserves, rather than just zoos, is perhaps a better idea--not letting these animals roam free, but having large areas set aside and fenced in. An elephant isn't going to accidentally sprout up in your back yard like GM corn. Besides, that was agri-business doing stupid things.
People are talking about saving the MegaFauna from being erased from the earth, and somehow you guys get personally offended.
Nobody is talking about Evil. But undoing some of humanity's impact on the earth seems sensible to me. I don't have to guess about "Shotgun's" thoughts on global warming.
I'd like to see elephants around. Just shield your eyes and pretend the offensive animals aren't there--it works with Global Warming, doesn't it? How is this going to hurt you? Whiners! Boo-hoo, somebody is criticizing humanity! The bible said we could piss on everything... boo-hoo!
The Tree-huggers are a little radical, but you Tree-Biters are downright idiots.
I think that we will go back to the theory of the "aether". If you look at theories behind "null space engergy" the concept is premised that all vacuum is flooded by all possible energy, and that the little bit of heat created by two conducting plates in close proximity with a vacuum between them is caused by blocking this energy. So, you might consider the "motes" that make up the particles in our dimension as actually holes from other "filled" dimensions. Or, that the universe is solid, and what we experience is the space between. Of course, since we experience existence, it doesn't really matter if we are the mass or the missing mass. The concept of solid space functions just the same as a concept of absolute vacuum from our perspective. I'll go with the vacuum notion because it gets rid of the idea of discreet bits of matter and makes it somewhat simpler.
Here is an interesting thought experiment to conduct at a party. Ask someone to tell you what they are aware of in the room. They will say things like; "light, people, air, floor, etc." Turn on your cell phone or a radio and mention that there are at least a thousand other unseen signals passing through everyone's body that they are not aware of until they have the right tools. The space between the bits that make up the molecules in their body is as empty as the space between the planets in the solar system... yet we think of ourselves as solid.
Science is just people being aware of their little spark in the darkness. Religion is about everything that isn't in view of the light.
We are all made of star stuff and as ephemeral as the mist... yet we dream.
Unfortuneatly, some want to put religion and science at odds. Not that the ideas of evolution are blasphemous, but for reasons of power. I think the objective is to annoint some as the "speaker of truth". A move to absolutism to PROVE you are a good Christian.
The people getting the most critism seem to me to be the people who say they are open minded and are willing to change their minds if better information is presented. I think some want us to argue with eachother over useless things while our pockets get picked.
In the end, it matters more how we treat our fellow man. There are no good excuses or theories to spread hate. I'm very glad to see more Christians on the blog saying that they have open minds. I'm not interested in everyone thinking the same way. Just harmony and good debate.
I don't agree.
Now, it is common to look at the 1950's as the "good old days", but there were lot of inequities. It was really only "good" for white males, middle class and up.
The power brokers have always been about "making a buck". But my dads generation did not lie awake at night thinking of being billionaires. The dream of a lot of people was being a hero, flying around the world like other great explorers or eventurers, hitting a home run, shooting for the stars.
The 1950's to 1970's saw a lot of people dreaming to be great scientists.
I'm a bit cynical myself--but I know that the "common man" of the previous generations America really held some good myths. They dreamed of better things. You can only have so many flat panel TVs in the house. At some point in your life-- you will grow up and realize that money isn't all that special. At that point you will become depressed. Start doing charity. Or look for a better dream.
Really, it may be an illusion, but friends, family and dreams are the only efforts that are never a waste.
I still want to make enough money so that I don't have to worry about money. But I don't dream of wealth. Maybe that's just me. But I really doubt it. Ask anyone who motivates others.
If you think about it, 1850 that wasn't too long ago. It seems that humanity has been full of sh%t for most of history. It points to the importance of keeping facts only if you understand the underlying theories behind them. A good mind is ready to discard "Facts" when a new and better theory comes along. Beware all dogma. These old science books had a lot of Facts but little real science. Maybe future generations will look at the 1900s as a true "second rennaissance" where science was actually first adopted by the masses and that America was a champion of human rights -- I think that the Freedom and Free thinking are intertwined. We take these for granted as though they have always existed -- but in fact, they are highly inconvenient principles for Governments.
I guess we can't expect this momentary lapse of lucidity to continue. Four more years and we will be fighting "noxious swamp humours" that cause tuberculosis with good feelings.
Well, it is a Bogus, alternate future. I didn't rule out licensing in this alternate universe entirely. Just that companies could totally control their patents. Hence, if Apple owned the only useful GUI, and patent/copyright were as broad as some that allowed Amazon the "single-click" sale and Microsoft's "great luck" with patents, then they would have an interest in NOT allowing anyone else to "do a GUI" (hard to get away from a window and click metaphor). You could follow this ad-infinitum and have Xerox NOT license the laser printer technology to Canon. But Canon might have used an ion gun like in a TV.
Anyway, when you get into an alternate reality, its kind of hard to apply any logic you know. Its just belaboring the point that allowing patents to become instant monopolies helps nobody--but the monopoly.
I was looking to patent an idea like this. I created a liquid lense with oil and Iron-Oxide -- nothing really exotic, Ferro-fluids have been used for quite a while. In my design I used a combination of ionization and magnetism to shape the lense. It was only part of a more complicated idea--I didn't think the lense was worth a patent by itself--kind of obvious. The only reason this is useful now is that we have new technologies in video that can actually use such a tiny lense.
I was actually using this to move a laser to boost radio signals. I kind of gave up on the whole thing because I didn't have a job and didn't have any idea how to get the ball rolling. I'm an idea synthesizer-- not a lawyer. Anyway, I could have had about five patents out of this.
So, in short, this lense may possibly be as simple as mineral oil and rust surrounded by water between two pieces of glass (I haven't been able to read the article due to the "slashdot effect"). Inside the small area of water, surface tension works to hold the shape and relax the effects of gravity--It's best to have an oil of the same specific gravity as water (most are lighter) so that motion will not pull one liquid more than another. Still, unless you used a strong magnetic field on the ferro-fluid, motion would change its shape-- so no long exposures. The difference in light distortion between the water and the oil will allow for your lense to focus. My idea was to use two lasers--one as a reference beam to calculate unwanted distortions. I'm guessing there is going to have to be some feedback mechanism to determine what the spherical abberation of the resulting liquid lense would be. I wouldn't want to say anymore because it would then be easy to guess the tricks I figured out. Since I have nothing but a love of science and no degrees in the material sciences, the actual fabrication of this device would not be my forte.
On an aside, I still think it would be a nice idea to spin water in space to create a large lense for telescopic or sunlight collection purposes. About 30 years ago, when fiber optics first came out, I played with a lot of ideas for uses-- things like piping sunlight into the house, using it to peer inside the body and lase out blockages (I used a parasol design to stop blood flow and expand arteries--rather than a more obvious and more elegant balloon). It amazes me that things as obvious as a liquid lense can still find patentable uses.
I actually submitted this as an idea to a company that says it helps people with Inventions. When I got a follow call asking for $1200 more than the original $500 I realized it was a scam (sigh). If these scumbags realize they have prior art--I'm guessing they won't, since they are about scamming more than actually understanding any technology that people submit. Well, lessons learned. Nobody is going to "discover" your brilliance in life--everyone has to do their own leg work.
One of these days, I'd love to get back to inventing.
I've already read about good techniques for this. Basically on the board you create sticky points and dip the board into the nanotubes like ice cream into a bowl of sprinkles. Lithography or bacteria or whatever could be used to create special adhesive sights to orient the nanotube. I'm guessing you could dope them with an iron molecule at one end. Sort out correctly oriented nanotubes. Put the lot into a strong magnetic field and create a thin film of evenly spaced particles by using an ultrasonic resonance frequency corresponding to the radius of the nanotube. You then create networks of connections by repeatedly adding adhesive points and dipping the board into a layer of oriented nanotubes.
;-)
The same iron-doping you use to orient the tubes (use gas-deposition for the iron, not the carbon) can be used to create a handle to add a "sticky point" on a nano-tube.
Better yet, create a uniform circuit structure and use some IBM technologies that allow for software to re-route logic gates (see the IBM patent on self-forming or healing CPUs).
Anyway, I want the right for Prior art on the patent. Even if this is a pretty obvious use of nanotubes.
I've heard that NASA has done some experiments with ultrasonics on a Turkey that seems to work. The vibration is seen as stress on the bone by the body--though probably not as targeted as gravity, a combination of ultrasonics and exercise is probably already used by "extended stay" astronauts. I don't know if cosmonauts are doing this.
The end result was that 999 large, sweaty and obnoxious people got a good deal on an iBook. Order in the Universe has been preserved.
For balance, we need to give 10,000 people a free cruise; First Come, First Served. At the end of the trip, they get stranded in the middle of the Atlantic... I vote for the Sargasso Sea
If it were On Topic, I could provide you links for all the bills I'm talking about. Then I could spend an hour on each one to tell you how it screws you and helps a campaign donater. My perspective has a bit to do with information--and not just "feelings".
Here is a quick preview;
Energy Bill of 2005 -- this wonderful bill gives about $14 billion to oil companies, just so companies like Exxon will continue to give us oil while bringing in $64 Billion in the last quarter alone. The Energy bill was written by energy Lobbyists. The rest goes to Nuclear and a pittance to some alternative technology which is just keeping up with previous government support, just rolled into a nice steaming piece of pork.
The recent Healthcare reform act spends tax money to pay drug companies to give an ~ 17% discount to seniors, depending if they got the correct discount card among 75 options. Before this bill went into action, drug providers raised their rates about 20%--just in time. By the way, they also are having record profits, reporting double digit year over year growth for the most part. All for a mere $450 Billion (projected). Wonder why kids in your neighborhood beg door to door for school books now?
Science. The science advisor now reports to an intern, in case any real science actually came out to refute all the good "there is no global warming" science paid for by Exxon, et al. This administration has been critisized (first in history) by over 2000 scientists (I forget the petition they signed). Of course, if you stop believing in science, theory holds that it will "just go away". We'll see. If the Intelligent Design crap didn't convince you of an anti-science stance...
Defense... did you not notice a few things we have been doing? Our security is FUBAR but at least this is keeping up employment and exports. Once they add it to the balance sheet, the fantasy economic numbers might look even worse or need more fantasy adjustments.
Bankruptcy Reform Act. Written by Credit Card Lobbyists (forgot the name of the guy, but he bragged about writing it whole cloth--I suppose for his resume). The Dems couldn't get a limit of 40% interest for Credit Card issuers. It makes it more difficult and expensive (ironic, no?) to declare bankruptcy. Most bankruptcy is due to health care expenses of people who actually have insurance. Credit Card companies are experiencing record profits.
Search and Seizure--um Patriot Act I & II. Heard of it?
Privacy. Homeland security; Much of what they do is tantamount to domestic spying. Didja know, that Tom Delay used them to find house members to vote for redistricting in Texas? Also good source for direct marketing. Too tired to do more research. Google; Herbert Hoover, big jerk. For fun, look for parallels.
Just because I'm paranoid doesn't make me wrong. This is OT but it is important.
Funny, but did you know that the Federal Reserve, IRS and other parts of government are listed as corporations (I think in Delaware). Many are listed as recently as some time in the 1990s. I was reading and arguably tin-foil hat theory that the US is still owned by Great Britain and that we only won independence of self rule, not from our monetary duties to the crown. I followed some of the "evidence" and it was all right there. I don't know what it means in real-life terms, but it just makes you go "hmmmm".
The incorporation of various branches of government might be to allow them to interact better with the rest of US institutions and it might allow for the use of corporate structures to allow for more accountability. But, if you assume greed and corruption with a touch of incompetence, it will at least give you the satisfaction of being right more often than not.
could go to the store and buy some amazing device, notice it doesn't have patent protection, patent the device myself, then sue the original designer out of business.
Very easy to do with a time machine. You don't happen to work for the Hitchhikers Guide do you?
OK. That is dead ground. XEROX had some great ideas. Jobs paid money to tour their facilities. Apple diverged markedly from the "look and feel" and didn't use many of the "ideas" until after 1990.
But if XEROX had cared, they could have patented most all of these ideas. Depending upon how broad the concept of a "window" could be copyrighted... I don't know.
There is a lot more overlap in Windows 1 through 3 with the original Mac than Apple had with Xerox. The fact that Apple actually allowed Microsoft to copy their interface helped Microsoft have the greatest windfall ever.
The issue is, that this is just an arbitrary system that provides the rules that businesses play by. But it has been very arbitrary and favors big, monied companies over small companies and actual innovators.
I agree with parent. If Apple would have been better at protecting patents, there would be no other GUI desktops until last year--and possibly not even DOS. There would be one word processor "MacWrite" (no, not WordPerfect), one spreadsheet "VisiCalc" one networking technology "Novell" one digital painting application "MacPaint" one laser printer, Canon with Adobe Postscript one Database [maybe] IBM DBase. Of course, Bill Gates would own BASIC, because he patented that out from under the creators who freely shared it in the early user groups he attended. But, of course, he'd have to license Assembler from somebody else, taking all the profit out of his "patent".
Which ONE chip would we have? UNYSIS, IBM or Motorolla, maybe Sperry/Rand? Would it be 16 hz yet? Because without competition from what has so far been a pretty free market, that's about all we'd have right now.
This patent doesn't cover the electronic components or even the thumb slider. The Microsoft patent covers the way you move the selection through the menu. Right arrow allows you to expose more options under the selected row, and up and down allow you to move through them. One finger can travel an entire list.
Really, if it is the first time you ever buttered bread, it would be actually more complicated. If it is the first time you saw bread and butter, perhaps it wouldn't be so obvious. You could say, place the knife on the bread and keep the butter in its tub on top of the knife. This alone is worth $10 Million. The rest of us should just keep our nose to the grindstone so that we can keep our innovators rewarded properly.
This is not really a prior art case. It's kind of a U.S. corruption to steal God's prior art. You'll see genetics and drugs treated differently because it helps American corporations. There are a lot of companies trying to patent genes all the time.
A lot of drugs are synthetic versions of compounds you can find in the health food store (albeit often stronger but with more side effects). The CAFTA bill has a rider to start regulating supplements. Of course, so that we can protect people who are getting damaged in the tens by this unregulated industry. Compared to the 30,000+ who die from prescription drugs every year--but they die in a "regulated" and therefore acceptible way.
Sorry, I just have to interject my outrage over the deluge of corruption and bad legislation I have witnessed the past few years.
So, unless you get GeneCorps permission, stop reproducing. You are in violation of their patent # 123456789.
Yeah, this congress hasn't F'd up everything under the sun yet. So much yet to ruin.
Energy, Healthcare, Science, Defense, Bankruptcy, Search and Seizure, Privacy.
Privatizing water and air is next. Some much left to do. Evil work never ends.
Backround checks and a license to protest are next. Seems we need to know more about people who complain than we get to know about public servants. Know what I mean?
I was working with a company that would get a $1500 bill for a FAX of some boiler plate work that we didn't ask for. If we didn't use him for a while, we'd get a damn FAX. 20-25% of our start-up costs were on legal fees.
I'm sure we could have at least 400 entries of anectdotal evidence of Lawyer over billing.
I think the hidden truth behind some of this "sloppy work" and other rediculous rulings (including the Supreme Court) might be a little "something something" on the side. Or a job for a Nephew for 6 figures. Sure there is a lot of incompetence or it might be Apple didn't file correctly or the description was too broad (but what about all the REALLY BROAD crap M$ patented for C#?), but the iPod was pretty well known before the Microsoft patent came about and the whole thing smells of "something on the side". I think a good alternate job for me would be to do background checks of judges and patent agents whenever something this screwy comes about--make my living as a whistle-blower. If I had any skill at detective work, that is.
The "First-to-File" system seems really bad to me. It is good in that it gets rid of the "guess work" but it also makes Legal work more imporant than innovation. It invalidates the whole point for society to even have patents. Just look at all the cyber-squatters who make a living selling domain names... just imagine if an advanced, skilled and well trained American Lawyer Leach (ALL) made its way into the innocent European courts... all day long the ALL could patent things that innovators missed and sit back and collect royalties on things the ALL can barely spell. It is kind of innevitable.