I don't care if or what they conspired to steal or did steal. Intellectual Property is bad and it's just a matter of time before everyone can have it and use it...
I must disagree. Intellectual Property (IP) is good, and here I think you are referring to just Patents, so will discuss those. Patents expire after 20 years, leaving the invention thereafter free for the world to use.
I own several "Utility" Patents (as an expert in a field). Even in this case, with my Patents known, several large companies are trying to steal (use) my inventions, and to leave me with nothing. As an individual, R&D is self-funded and slow, so I've pitched licensing to several of companies. All they do is carbon-copy my patents, hoping I'll die or not notice their thievery. My only resort, then, is to sue them for the money I deserve for inventing the thing that they are making money off of.
It is crap, and I have held-off on disclosing several marketable inventions because I know the amount of thievery that goes on. Without patents, I would never recoup my investment of time and money. Even with patents, it is a battle.
It is also stupid of the IP thieves. There have been times where I was inclined to license an invention for a mere $50k, but was bluntly refused when I mentioned licensing. A few years later, they are making $1M's using the core, enabling invention of mine. So, now, I use my only option, and have my attorneys go after them for $100k's of $1M's instead. In the end, it's almost as if they willingly did the R&D and marketing for me for free, because there is now a product on the market rolling in money. They capitulate and cough-up.
Without intellectual property (patents), creators and inventors would indeed hold-back their inventions, to the detriment of society. We already do, even with the protections that patents afford us. As I said already, I do it in the current climate.
I just defended "Utility Patents." There are other types of patents – "Business Method Patents" and "Software Patents" – they are entirely different beasts, are inherently bad, should never have existed, and need to go away.
. Both Uber and Levandowski should spend some serious jail time
You can't throw a company in Jail....
The fix for corporate malfeasance isn't fining a company, but... corporate death penalty, by revoking the Corporation's charter. Leave the investors hanging onto worthless stock, and corporate culture will change.
A corporate death penalty is indeed logical and ethical, considering that corps. are afforded the protections of being persons. Unfortunately, I don't think any legislator would ever vote for a bill creating a corporate death penalty. Why? People (the 1000's of worker employees) would lose their jobs in such a case. And people vote.
There have been cases of operating licenses being revoked, but as I recall, they were probationary with re-licensing being predicated on making some kind of change in practices. Meaning, operations continue, but there are stipulations and a fine.
Anyone with a clearer or more accurate answer – please correct me.
During lawsuits parties can demand the other turn over relevant documents.
And if a judge allows this demand, the other party is obligated to fully and completely comply with the "discovery" request.
The penalties for violating a discovery demand are severe. Every of the many attorneys I've discussed this with assert that.
How severe? IANAL, so I don't know, but one friend suggested that it could blow your entire case if you didn't comply, and that fact was uncovered later. I'd also bet that Contempt of Court would also be in the mix.
It will (probably) be appealed, and if so over-turned by a higher court. If not, some other phone-PIN case will come up in a higher court, rendering this one decision moot.
Obtaining stuff by regular warrants still applies. But regular warrants are very specific, not licenses for 'fishing expeditions', which a smartphone PIN would effectively be.
I swear the computers are training us more than we're training them though. Natural language is changing, even my kids change the way the talk when they are talking to the amazon dot.
That's because they've figured out that the voice recognition is very limited in its capability.
If everyone starts speaking "flat" English to these things, the manufacturers will have little motivation to ever improve the voice recognition.
I just watched the pilot of the Leftovers. Bo-o-o-oring!
And it coming from the guy who was responsible for "Lost", all Haley's dream, is three strikes against it already. Bringing in the supernatural once you've painted yourself into a corner is lazy writing.
I threw the rest of the Leftovers into the garbage disposal.
It means that it's a place that I usually fly over to get to one of the two more civilized places in the US. There's really nothing in the middle of the US except for Chicago and a few sized-cities. There's little culture, economy, or population to speak of.
I grew up in flyover territory, but have lived on both coasts, as well as in Chicago.
The poster is correct. The mid-west is a barren landscape as far as culture goes. Even in the cities.
Oak Ridge National Laboratory in TN receives federal money for an employee working offsite CA. TN gets dinged for the receiving tax dollars. CA gets to claim the employees federal taxes as paid to the government.
You have no idea how things work.
No ORNL employee would be working off-site in CA. They might go to a conference for a few days each year, but that's about it. ORNL has facilities, and ORNL staff use and maintain them. In Tennessee.
You want high presure (relatively) below the wing, and low pressure above the wing. With impellers blowing/sucking air over the upper surface this is achived.
So the airfoil shape of the long, narrow "hat" on the main-wing impellers is just for decoration? Or, effectively close to it, as pressure underneath them will have a 'seagull'-like shape in lift versus distance along the axial direction of the craft? (That is, the nacelles have v. low pressure in front, and v. high pressure behind, so an airfoil on top is a waste of material. No?)
While geoengineering absolutely calls for a high standard of knowing what we're doing, equating it with global warming is like saying swords kill people so surgery is stupid.
Please try to keep it straight:
Swords don't kill people. People with swords kill people.
If you were willing to dig into the obscure commands, which I was, you'd have found it very powerful. When I say dig, I mean the specs of your hardware rig, too. My first was BASIC – 1st on an Apple IIe, and later on an IBM PCjr.
Using just BASIC, I was able to write polyphonic music, cartoons, games, multiple-screen programs, and even a Photoshop-like drawing program (in 1987) that let you save and re-open files later for more editing. Last, I almost constructed a robotic CD-player, with playlists being columns checked or not, but then along came college.
BASIC was powerful if you were willing to really dig deep into the manual. Of course, once things came to data structures, you were basically out-of-luck.
Oh and your supporting argument for regulatory capture is batshit insane. "The FAA would require so many...- heavy parts)" but you claim that's regulatory capture from the airlines that are desperate to reduce weight to improve fuel efficiency.
If I were an airline, I would want this up-start competitor to be saddled with as much weight as possible. Otherwise, they could be competition for me, the airline, which has the FAA in its pocket.
In that case, would the lift from the airframe moving forward would be much more than an equivalent helicopter and thus the range would be much better?
... This issue could be somewhat fixed by changing the forward ducted fan assembly into a real canard as in the concept animation, but with all the junk attached it would be a contender for world's least efficient canard wing, and fragile to boot.
Just add plain airfoil canards on the outer ends of the forward nacelles and you will have an aircraft with fully functional canards.
IAAEngineer. On the Lilium website, the images show the "flight mode" having all of the impellers on the top of the wings, instead of the bottom. They are all sitting on the portion of the wing where aerodynamic lift is generated. There's a wing-surface on top of the nacelles, but the design still looks like it would have negative lift. Anyone who knows how a wing generates lift will understand.
The impellers, necessarily pushing air through faster than the vehicle is traveling, would create a low-pressure zone right in front of them, where flowing air is supposed to be compressed. It's the lower air-pressure over the back of a wing that generates lift. The nacelles are sitting right in the way.
Or does their design position the front-face of the impellers right in that spot. They would have a lower relative air pressure just in front of them, of course. It's hard to tell from the few images the exact positioning, but can an Aeronautical Engineer chime in?
This thing had better fly at less than 500 ft in altitude, to avoid ever entering FAA-controlled airspace & corridors.
The FAA would require so many over-engineered (high engineering margins=heavy parts) and triply redundant systems that it would be too heavy to fly anywhere with controlled airspace (cities), once the FAA got done bulking it up.
FYI, the FAA long ago taken over by regulatory capture from the airline and aircraft industries. The company in the article would probably never be able to get all of the proper approvals because the in-place air-transport players would use the FAA like a bludgeon.
This flying car won't fit in my garage, won't travel down the highway (or any road for that matter), won't land at the grocery store and pick up milk.
It only works if you live at an airport and your house backs up to the runway.
Unfortunately, this is going to be like an autonomous taxi. We probably won't be able to get one.
I've come to the conclusion, finally, that few-passenger air transport like this or flying cars must be entirely computer-controlled. Humans are idiots. Plus, the extra weight of a steering console would eat into range. GPS-based point-to-point, with landing pads sprinkled throughout a city, is the only sane way to go. And it's looking more viable with this aircraft.
Slashdot Mirror
There, I said it.
Anonymously...
I don't care if or what they conspired to steal or did steal. Intellectual Property is bad and it's just a matter of time before everyone can have it and use it...
I must disagree. Intellectual Property (IP) is good, and here I think you are referring to just Patents, so will discuss those. Patents expire after 20 years, leaving the invention thereafter free for the world to use.
I own several "Utility" Patents (as an expert in a field). Even in this case, with my Patents known, several large companies are trying to steal (use) my inventions, and to leave me with nothing. As an individual, R&D is self-funded and slow, so I've pitched licensing to several of companies. All they do is carbon-copy my patents, hoping I'll die or not notice their thievery. My only resort, then, is to sue them for the money I deserve for inventing the thing that they are making money off of.
It is crap, and I have held-off on disclosing several marketable inventions because I know the amount of thievery that goes on. Without patents, I would never recoup my investment of time and money. Even with patents, it is a battle.
It is also stupid of the IP thieves. There have been times where I was inclined to license an invention for a mere $50k, but was bluntly refused when I mentioned licensing. A few years later, they are making $1M's using the core, enabling invention of mine. So, now, I use my only option, and have my attorneys go after them for $100k's of $1M's instead. In the end, it's almost as if they willingly did the R&D and marketing for me for free, because there is now a product on the market rolling in money. They capitulate and cough-up.
Without intellectual property (patents), creators and inventors would indeed hold-back their inventions, to the detriment of society. We already do, even with the protections that patents afford us. As I said already, I do it in the current climate.
I just defended "Utility Patents." There are other types of patents – "Business Method Patents" and "Software Patents" – they are entirely different beasts, are inherently bad, should never have existed, and need to go away.
. Both Uber and Levandowski should spend some serious jail time
You can't throw a company in Jail. ...
The fix for corporate malfeasance isn't fining a company, but ... corporate death penalty, by revoking the Corporation's charter. Leave the investors hanging onto worthless stock, and corporate culture will change.
A corporate death penalty is indeed logical and ethical, considering that corps. are afforded the protections of being persons. Unfortunately, I don't think any legislator would ever vote for a bill creating a corporate death penalty. Why? People (the 1000's of worker employees) would lose their jobs in such a case. And people vote.
There have been cases of operating licenses being revoked, but as I recall, they were probationary with re-licensing being predicated on making some kind of change in practices. Meaning, operations continue, but there are stipulations and a fine.
Anyone with a clearer or more accurate answer – please correct me.
During lawsuits parties can demand the other turn over relevant documents.
And if a judge allows this demand, the other party is obligated to fully and completely comply with the "discovery" request.
The penalties for violating a discovery demand are severe. Every of the many attorneys I've discussed this with assert that.
How severe? IANAL, so I don't know, but one friend suggested that it could blow your entire case if you didn't comply, and that fact was uncovered later. I'd also bet that Contempt of Court would also be in the mix.
It will (probably) be appealed, and if so over-turned by a higher court. If not, some other phone-PIN case will come up in a higher court, rendering this one decision moot.
Obtaining stuff by regular warrants still applies. But regular warrants are very specific, not licenses for 'fishing expeditions', which a smartphone PIN would effectively be.
I swear the computers are training us more than we're training them though. Natural language is changing, even my kids change the way the talk when they are talking to the amazon dot.
That's because they've figured out that the voice recognition is very limited in its capability.
If everyone starts speaking "flat" English to these things, the manufacturers will have little motivation to ever improve the voice recognition.
So, you are right.
Poster forgot to include that modern languages are verbose.
For example, Javascript is insanely verbose for even the simplest of things.
Apk made his engine. People like and use it.
The 3 users like it very much!
APK
P.S. - I suck cocks.
Don't their talons cut-up your face?
Not a show that is already spent. ;)
I just watched the pilot of the Leftovers. Bo-o-o-oring!
And it coming from the guy who was responsible for "Lost", all Haley's dream, is three strikes against it already. Bringing in the supernatural once you've painted yourself into a corner is lazy writing.
I threw the rest of the Leftovers into the garbage disposal.
In Persian it does.
I'm only accepting Aryans in my house. Exceptions can be made for attractive females of other races.
The word "Aryan" refers to a person of Persian descent.
The more you know...
Of course there's discrimination. I'll rent to who I want, fuck you!
There are laws against that. Lots of them.
It means that it's a place that I usually fly over to get to one of the two more civilized places in the US. There's really nothing in the middle of the US except for Chicago and a few sized-cities. There's little culture, economy, or population to speak of.
I grew up in flyover territory, but have lived on both coasts, as well as in Chicago.
The poster is correct. The mid-west is a barren landscape as far as culture goes. Even in the cities.
Oak Ridge National Laboratory in TN receives federal money for an employee working offsite CA. TN gets dinged for the receiving tax dollars. CA gets to claim the employees federal taxes as paid to the government.
You have no idea how things work.
No ORNL employee would be working off-site in CA. They might go to a conference for a few days each year, but that's about it. ORNL has facilities, and ORNL staff use and maintain them. In Tennessee.
You want high presure (relatively) below the wing, and low pressure above the wing.
With impellers blowing/sucking air over the upper surface this is achived.
So the airfoil shape of the long, narrow "hat" on the main-wing impellers is just for decoration? Or, effectively close to it, as pressure underneath them will have a 'seagull'-like shape in lift versus distance along the axial direction of the craft? (That is, the nacelles have v. low pressure in front, and v. high pressure behind, so an airfoil on top is a waste of material. No?)
...at least 20% of the reef died and more than 90% of it was damaged.
Leaving -10% of the coral reef in good shape.
R U Seriously?
They're counting "death" as a sub-category of "damaged". Duh. This means that only 10% was measurably unhurt.
While geoengineering absolutely calls for a high standard of knowing what we're doing, equating it with global warming is like saying swords kill people so surgery is stupid.
Please try to keep it straight:
Swords don't kill people.
People with swords kill people.
If you were willing to dig into the obscure commands, which I was, you'd have found it very powerful. When I say dig, I mean the specs of your hardware rig, too. My first was BASIC – 1st on an Apple IIe, and later on an IBM PCjr.
Using just BASIC, I was able to write polyphonic music, cartoons, games, multiple-screen programs, and even a Photoshop-like drawing program (in 1987) that let you save and re-open files later for more editing. Last, I almost constructed a robotic CD-player, with playlists being columns checked or not, but then along came college.
BASIC was powerful if you were willing to really dig deep into the manual. Of course, once things came to data structures, you were basically out-of-luck.
Oh and your supporting argument for regulatory capture is batshit insane. "The FAA would require so many ...- heavy parts)" but you claim that's regulatory capture from the airlines that are desperate to reduce weight to improve fuel efficiency.
If I were an airline, I would want this up-start competitor to be saddled with as much weight as possible. Otherwise, they could be competition for me, the airline, which has the FAA in its pocket.
In that case, would the lift from the airframe moving forward would be much more than an equivalent helicopter and thus the range would be much better?
... This issue could be somewhat fixed by changing the forward ducted fan assembly into a real canard as in the concept animation, but with all the junk attached it would be a contender for world's least efficient canard wing, and fragile to boot.
Just add plain airfoil canards on the outer ends of the forward nacelles and you will have an aircraft with fully functional canards.
IAAEngineer. On the Lilium website, the images show the "flight mode" having all of the impellers on the top of the wings, instead of the bottom. They are all sitting on the portion of the wing where aerodynamic lift is generated. There's a wing-surface on top of the nacelles, but the design still looks like it would have negative lift. Anyone who knows how a wing generates lift will understand.
The impellers, necessarily pushing air through faster than the vehicle is traveling, would create a low-pressure zone right in front of them, where flowing air is supposed to be compressed. It's the lower air-pressure over the back of a wing that generates lift. The nacelles are sitting right in the way.
Or does their design position the front-face of the impellers right in that spot. They would have a lower relative air pressure just in front of them, of course. It's hard to tell from the few images the exact positioning, but can an Aeronautical Engineer chime in?
I wonder what the glide path of this thing is. That is, in case of a major power loss, could it safely land?
This thing had better fly at less than 500 ft in altitude, to avoid ever entering FAA-controlled airspace & corridors.
The FAA would require so many over-engineered (high engineering margins=heavy parts) and triply redundant systems that it would be too heavy to fly anywhere with controlled airspace (cities), once the FAA got done bulking it up.
FYI, the FAA long ago taken over by regulatory capture from the airline and aircraft industries. The company in the article would probably never be able to get all of the proper approvals because the in-place air-transport players would use the FAA like a bludgeon.
This flying car won't fit in my garage, won't travel down the highway (or any road for that matter), won't land at the grocery store and pick up milk.
It only works if you live at an airport and your house backs up to the runway.
Unfortunately, this is going to be like an autonomous taxi. We probably won't be able to get one.
I've come to the conclusion, finally, that few-passenger air transport like this or flying cars must be entirely computer-controlled. Humans are idiots. Plus, the extra weight of a steering console would eat into range. GPS-based point-to-point, with landing pads sprinkled throughout a city, is the only sane way to go. And it's looking more viable with this aircraft.
36 jet engines? That sounds like a really loud bird.
BTW, they are not jets (which burn fuel). They are ducted electric impellers.
Very cool, tho. It just jumped off of the ground in the test video.