> Relying on Trade Secrets for this kind of invention is the #1 indicator of fraud. A proper patent would make him rich beyond his imagination. A Trade Secret is only good for fleecing investors.
Spot on. This is why I like slashdot. A lot of people have been ignoring this point. Rossi does not appear to have a sustainable business model. Once a trade secret is found out (and it will be eventually), it is fair game for everyone. The lack of visibility into what material he is using also prevents any true independent verification. The only one benefiting from that speculation now is Rossi.
General humanoid robots in mass production are going to happen; it's just a matter of when and there will be ridiculous prices for the first ones that work. This should happen in less than 40 years and I'm hoping much sooner. The iRobot CEO seems to think specialized robots are going to be the norm.
The Jade Rabbit is an awesome piece of scientific equipment, and it's on the moon. Let's hope if makes it through the night and continues to send data that will benefit all of humanity.
You should not separate the tech from it's intentions.
This rover wasn't sent up for the sake of tech, it was sent up because this is a step towards China's own national presence off planet.
I have read through both responses and there is no way identify what data is good or bad. For example Musk claims the battery was not fully charged, but the reporter mentioned "Charge complete". Both could be correct in this case. For the speed there could be a disparity between the driver reported speed and what Tesla's system is reporting. That the reporter called Tesla multiple times asking for advice is something Musk ignores while he makes the case for what happened with the data logs. I don't see any reporter taking out another Tesla though without their own recording equipment.
Do not look at electron as a sphere. Size and dimensions are reported as the maximum values we can observe. No one has measured a minimum size. All this study stays is that it is very spherically symmetric. The measured size is inconceivably small. It may measurably only be a point.
That said, I think the data conclusively shows free electrons are actually gigantic in size. It is like a wave on a pond, only the wave condenses to an end state. The double slit experiment is one example of this. Similar behavior exists in atoms. Electrons are not little balls moving around a nucleus, when they join an atom something new is formed that is best described as waves.
Negroponte was pushing the notion a $100 laptop for kids despite feedback the cost structure did not support the price. His comment was to the effect the volume would drive the price $100, and that indicated a clear lack of understanding of the cost problem as it relates to components and manufacturing. This still looks like a bunch of hype to drive money in their labs. If he pushed for driving the cost of tablets down vs this OLPC/XO thing I would have more respect for him, because that's the real way to enable low cost kid-tops.
People are totally forgetting or missing how Negroponte has been misleading people. This is all about supporting MIT groups instead of kids.
He oversold this as a $100 laptop with lots of MIT tech and totally missed it.
Now he's pissed about competition. Competition here is a *good* moral thing if we are talking about getting cheap laptops to kids. What should be happening is low cost screen tech going out to many laptops and
Also what obligations did Intel not meet?
I read the Negroponte interview and he's claiming software, not hardware, deliverables and didn't even state what these are.
It's all name trashing to me until I see the details.
Negroponte is a piece of work.
Here is a quote from him about the split: "They cannot compete with OLPC and be a partner. I think they violated their fiduciary responsibility as a board member constantly."
This is plain stupid. To him this is not about getting a laptop into every child's hands, it is about getting *his* laptop promoted.
Show me a specific example with music worth inhaling fully that has this problem, otherwise stop with the FUD.
I will give you an example of how screwed up the argument on this was from Rolling Stone. The author gave a Lily Allen version of Smile as an example. Problems:
#1: There were two versions, and the one he quoted sounded horrible on any piece of audio equipment, and that defeats the whole argument for loudness and iPod usage.
#2: Why the heck quote her anyway for a high quality audio discussion?
I'm pretty disappointed with the slashdot comments on this one.
The header for this is not correct:
It's legal to rip a cd onto your computer and use it.
It's not legal to share ripped cds on Kazaa or sell them again.
It's legal to copy audio tapes too and video tapes too.
Unfortunately people are forgetting the battles previously fought and now that all this HDCP crap now instigated with the cable companies owning the copy standards, when we go full digital people are going to be so pissed free copies can't be made congress will change the law to make it legal.
After reading through the article, I checked out the Hear it for Yourself section.
The Lilly Allen song picked sounds like crap on an iPod and that defeats his primary argument.
There are two versions on the album and he picked the rotten one.
For $100 you can get kick ass audio speakers on a PC that are better than most stereos 10 years ago.
Audiophiles are alive and well; you don't need to spend 2k to get great sound anymore.
They don't know it would be an embarrassment but they sure do think it will be. Going forward and having Bush and Cheney claim executive privilege would really be another black eye for this administration.
The lack of support for *free* listings on the myth boards sucks right now.
$60/yr is too much for a box that is not maintenance free. At least with Tivo or a cableco box they handle everything
Guess what - tons of people picked up WinTVs with encoders and those all came with software for use with a listing service that doesn't charge by the month. SO are you violating TOS if I bought a card for use with that service?
MS Media Center doesn't even change for TV listings although myth kicks its ass elsewhere. No QAM support on MCE??? No CableCard support for an upgraded box??? please
Maybe Apple can sort this crap out one day
'ponte was adamant about OLPC being $100 for a near term shipping device when he was pitching this idea to fund his MIT colleagues. That's was where the 'gadget' comment was directed.
What slipped under the wire was that it's $170 not $100 PC.
Guess what, that's ultra low end PC territory now.
People need to look through his whining and see him for the hype machine he is.
You have to realize that the correlation of data to what you may call fundamental laws is very compelling.
The claim being made as I read it is that this system can generate thrust from a closed system. This is bollocks.
Two forces are being generated at ends of the cavity with the ends being different sizes. That's ok. But saying a net force has been imparted on the whole system is the problem. Having a microwave resonator means this is a closed system so there is force acting on the walls of the device.
If he were claiming photons were being expelled that would help but that's not the claim.
The newscientist article is suprisingly very bad. For example there is a comment about microwave photons moving at near the speed of light. bzzzt. They are at the speed of light.
They at least have the source article up. One thing that looks bad is that he's calling it an open system and it can't be open or you wouldn't have it resonate.
http://www.newscientist.com/data/images/ns/av/shaw yertheory.pdf#search=%22thrust%20microwave%22
He's holding pro-education banners to mask the fact that this is a non-profit cash cow for his darling media lab. Having experience in high volume manufacturing and design in this area, I totally agree optimized systems can be knocked down in price, but they are pitching a way to rosy picture to everyone with respect to features, schedule, and cost.
The original releases were saying volume in 2006 targeting $100.
Notice how the cost is now listed as 'actually $135', less than $100 in 2008, and the magic crank dropped? Well wait and see cost goes up and features get dropped or schedules get pushed.
He's a master at vision and hype, and likely a master of getting away from the fan before reality hits it.
WiFi, cell phone-enabled, USB, 500MHz, 1GB ram, and what can a $1000 laptop do that the $100 version can't? Not much. The plan is for the $100 Laptop to do almost everything. What it will not do is store a massive amount of data, and the preliminary schedule is to have units ready for shipment by the end of 2006 or early 2007. All these are from MIT's site and I dare not leave out mention of figures showing tablet style pen input.
$100? Next year? For KIDs!?
Negreponte found his new cash cow, and it's a non-profit cow to boot.
MIT has some groovy stuff but this PR enticing crap really irks me. I do believe some of these claims could be met, but what is shown and claimed is way too much to do by late 2006 or even 2007 for $100.
If this is non-profit and it is shown that all these claims cannot be met, can Negreponte be sued?
You seem serious, so I'll bite. Do your research and look at what two of those three have already done.
I'll help you get started http://www.fortune.com/fortune/fsb/specia ls/innova tors/dubinsky.html
After you do that, research what 'hardcore computer science' people you can think of were doing before you would class them that way, and compare that to the grandfathers of the field.
These are creators, not followers, and this is more interesting to me than the regular MIT brainish work that has been in the popular news.
the flaw in your argument is assuming applications will not take advantage of the increases in performance.
believe it or not, most people don't think dual opterons with anything but a supermodel are sexy. they just want a computer to run their software well.
I have to use microsoft products for the bulk of my work needs, and a 1.5GHz processor is painful for me to use. 10 yrs ago that would have sounded crazy. All the comments around gaming primarily pushing the envelope indicate a major shift will happen that will drive the next technology boom. The software gurus just need to think big. How big? What do you think will be here in the next 10yrs - full time AI and voice recognition helping me with presentations, mail, and time and project management? I think so.
He said he used the 'popular' Jarod's guide to set up mythtv. I've never heard of it and I've had myth running for some time now.
I completely agree the old versions of mythtv were a pain to set up, but the new versions are very easy to set up and the instructions are pretty darned clear off the myth site. If he had just read the darned myth instructions and used Redhat 9 he should have made it ok.
bonehead move by the scifi channel to can it. yeah they may have had expensive episodes but I don't care, I watched their channel to see Farscape. now they added a half dozen shows I don't watch. get it, scifi channel?
my hopes for Enterprise involved the return miniskirts and the captain being clever in order to beat the big bad ships out there. but noooooo. and to top it off the theme really really sucks. berman has ruined star trek.
Any solid will flow. There are various mechanisms for this, but people usually refer to diffusion. Given sufficient time and temperature you can see any solid flow, and it doesn't have to melt into a liquid state for this to happen.
The big thing here is that this supersolid is not liquid and that's because it retains a crystalline structure. Unlike a liquid, supersolid He has a structure that is ordered.
Slashdot Mirror
> Relying on Trade Secrets for this kind of invention is the #1 indicator of fraud. A proper patent would make him rich beyond his imagination. A Trade Secret is only good for fleecing investors. Spot on. This is why I like slashdot. A lot of people have been ignoring this point. Rossi does not appear to have a sustainable business model. Once a trade secret is found out (and it will be eventually), it is fair game for everyone. The lack of visibility into what material he is using also prevents any true independent verification. The only one benefiting from that speculation now is Rossi.
General humanoid robots in mass production are going to happen; it's just a matter of when and there will be ridiculous prices for the first ones that work. This should happen in less than 40 years and I'm hoping much sooner. The iRobot CEO seems to think specialized robots are going to be the norm.
The Jade Rabbit is an awesome piece of scientific equipment, and it's on the moon. Let's hope if makes it through the night and continues to send data that will benefit all of humanity.
You should not separate the tech from it's intentions. This rover wasn't sent up for the sake of tech, it was sent up because this is a step towards China's own national presence off planet.
I have read through both responses and there is no way identify what data is good or bad. For example Musk claims the battery was not fully charged, but the reporter mentioned "Charge complete". Both could be correct in this case. For the speed there could be a disparity between the driver reported speed and what Tesla's system is reporting. That the reporter called Tesla multiple times asking for advice is something Musk ignores while he makes the case for what happened with the data logs. I don't see any reporter taking out another Tesla though without their own recording equipment.
Do not look at electron as a sphere. Size and dimensions are reported as the maximum values we can observe. No one has measured a minimum size. All this study stays is that it is very spherically symmetric. The measured size is inconceivably small. It may measurably only be a point. That said, I think the data conclusively shows free electrons are actually gigantic in size. It is like a wave on a pond, only the wave condenses to an end state. The double slit experiment is one example of this. Similar behavior exists in atoms. Electrons are not little balls moving around a nucleus, when they join an atom something new is formed that is best described as waves.
Negroponte was pushing the notion a $100 laptop for kids despite feedback the cost structure did not support the price. His comment was to the effect the volume would drive the price $100, and that indicated a clear lack of understanding of the cost problem as it relates to components and manufacturing. This still looks like a bunch of hype to drive money in their labs. If he pushed for driving the cost of tablets down vs this OLPC/XO thing I would have more respect for him, because that's the real way to enable low cost kid-tops.
People are totally forgetting or missing how Negroponte has been misleading people. This is all about supporting MIT groups instead of kids. He oversold this as a $100 laptop with lots of MIT tech and totally missed it. Now he's pissed about competition. Competition here is a *good* moral thing if we are talking about getting cheap laptops to kids. What should be happening is low cost screen tech going out to many laptops and Also what obligations did Intel not meet? I read the Negroponte interview and he's claiming software, not hardware, deliverables and didn't even state what these are. It's all name trashing to me until I see the details.
Negroponte is a piece of work. Here is a quote from him about the split: "They cannot compete with OLPC and be a partner. I think they violated their fiduciary responsibility as a board member constantly." This is plain stupid. To him this is not about getting a laptop into every child's hands, it is about getting *his* laptop promoted.
Show me a specific example with music worth inhaling fully that has this problem, otherwise stop with the FUD. I will give you an example of how screwed up the argument on this was from Rolling Stone. The author gave a Lily Allen version of Smile as an example. Problems: #1: There were two versions, and the one he quoted sounded horrible on any piece of audio equipment, and that defeats the whole argument for loudness and iPod usage. #2: Why the heck quote her anyway for a high quality audio discussion?
Have to call you out on that open ended comment. The reality is that only two of the six major studios support HD DVD. Dude, it's over.
I'm pretty disappointed with the slashdot comments on this one. The header for this is not correct: It's legal to rip a cd onto your computer and use it. It's not legal to share ripped cds on Kazaa or sell them again. It's legal to copy audio tapes too and video tapes too. Unfortunately people are forgetting the battles previously fought and now that all this HDCP crap now instigated with the cable companies owning the copy standards, when we go full digital people are going to be so pissed free copies can't be made congress will change the law to make it legal.
After reading through the article, I checked out the Hear it for Yourself section. The Lilly Allen song picked sounds like crap on an iPod and that defeats his primary argument. There are two versions on the album and he picked the rotten one. For $100 you can get kick ass audio speakers on a PC that are better than most stereos 10 years ago. Audiophiles are alive and well; you don't need to spend 2k to get great sound anymore.
They don't know it would be an embarrassment but they sure do think it will be. Going forward and having Bush and Cheney claim executive privilege would really be another black eye for this administration.
The lack of support for *free* listings on the myth boards sucks right now. $60/yr is too much for a box that is not maintenance free. At least with Tivo or a cableco box they handle everything Guess what - tons of people picked up WinTVs with encoders and those all came with software for use with a listing service that doesn't charge by the month. SO are you violating TOS if I bought a card for use with that service? MS Media Center doesn't even change for TV listings although myth kicks its ass elsewhere. No QAM support on MCE??? No CableCard support for an upgraded box??? please Maybe Apple can sort this crap out one day
'ponte was adamant about OLPC being $100 for a near term shipping device when he was pitching this idea to fund his MIT colleagues. That's was where the 'gadget' comment was directed. What slipped under the wire was that it's $170 not $100 PC. Guess what, that's ultra low end PC territory now. People need to look through his whining and see him for the hype machine he is.
Very bad article from the NY Times.
You have to realize that the correlation of data to what you may call fundamental laws is very compelling. The claim being made as I read it is that this system can generate thrust from a closed system. This is bollocks. Two forces are being generated at ends of the cavity with the ends being different sizes. That's ok. But saying a net force has been imparted on the whole system is the problem. Having a microwave resonator means this is a closed system so there is force acting on the walls of the device. If he were claiming photons were being expelled that would help but that's not the claim. The newscientist article is suprisingly very bad. For example there is a comment about microwave photons moving at near the speed of light. bzzzt. They are at the speed of light. They at least have the source article up. One thing that looks bad is that he's calling it an open system and it can't be open or you wouldn't have it resonate. http://www.newscientist.com/data/images/ns/av/shaw yertheory.pdf#search=%22thrust%20microwave%22
He's holding pro-education banners to mask the fact that this is a non-profit cash cow for his darling media lab. Having experience in high volume manufacturing and design in this area, I totally agree optimized systems can be knocked down in price, but they are pitching a way to rosy picture to everyone with respect to features, schedule, and cost. The original releases were saying volume in 2006 targeting $100. Notice how the cost is now listed as 'actually $135', less than $100 in 2008, and the magic crank dropped? Well wait and see cost goes up and features get dropped or schedules get pushed. He's a master at vision and hype, and likely a master of getting away from the fan before reality hits it.
WiFi, cell phone-enabled, USB, 500MHz, 1GB ram, and what can a $1000 laptop do that the $100 version can't? Not much. The plan is for the $100 Laptop to do almost everything. What it will not do is store a massive amount of data, and the preliminary schedule is to have units ready for shipment by the end of 2006 or early 2007. All these are from MIT's site and I dare not leave out mention of figures showing tablet style pen input. $100? Next year? For KIDs!? Negreponte found his new cash cow, and it's a non-profit cow to boot. MIT has some groovy stuff but this PR enticing crap really irks me. I do believe some of these claims could be met, but what is shown and claimed is way too much to do by late 2006 or even 2007 for $100. If this is non-profit and it is shown that all these claims cannot be met, can Negreponte be sued?
You seem serious, so I'll bite.
a ls/innova tors/dubinsky.html
Do your research and look at what two of those three have already done.
I'll help you get started
http://www.fortune.com/fortune/fsb/speci
After you do that, research what 'hardcore computer science' people you can think of were doing before you would class them that way, and compare that to the grandfathers of the field.
These are creators, not followers, and this is more interesting to me than the regular MIT brainish work that has been in the popular news.
like many before you, you have missed it.
the flaw in your argument is assuming applications will not take advantage of the increases in performance.
believe it or not, most people don't think dual opterons with anything but a supermodel are sexy. they just want a computer to run their software well.
I have to use microsoft products for the bulk of my work needs, and a 1.5GHz processor is painful for me to use. 10 yrs ago that would have sounded crazy. All the comments around gaming primarily pushing the envelope indicate a major shift will happen that will drive the next technology boom. The software gurus just need to think big.
How big?
What do you think will be here in the next 10yrs - full time AI and voice recognition helping me with presentations, mail, and time and project management?
I think so.
He said he used the 'popular' Jarod's guide to set up mythtv. I've never heard of it and I've had myth running for some time now. I completely agree the old versions of mythtv were a pain to set up, but the new versions are very easy to set up and the instructions are pretty darned clear off the myth site. If he had just read the darned myth instructions and used Redhat 9 he should have made it ok.
they are talking about fusion. matter to energy conversion
bonehead move by the scifi channel to can it. yeah they may have had expensive episodes but I don't care, I watched their channel to see Farscape. now they added a half dozen shows I don't watch. get it, scifi channel? my hopes for Enterprise involved the return miniskirts and the captain being clever in order to beat the big bad ships out there. but noooooo. and to top it off the theme really really sucks. berman has ruined star trek.
Any solid will flow. There are various mechanisms for this, but people usually refer to diffusion. Given sufficient time and temperature you can see any solid flow, and it doesn't have to melt into a liquid state for this to happen. The big thing here is that this supersolid is not liquid and that's because it retains a crystalline structure. Unlike a liquid, supersolid He has a structure that is ordered.