Tampilkan postingan dengan label technology. Tampilkan semua postingan
Tampilkan postingan dengan label technology. Tampilkan semua postingan

Jumat, 04 Oktober 2013

How To Brush Your Teeth in 6 Seconds

Invention often involves solving problems that many people might not think are problems until they see what a free-market developed solution for it might be.

A great example of that is flavored toothpaste. In the old Soviet Union, with its centralized economic planning, there was only one flavor of toothpaste, as the communists who ran the country saw no need for the government's toothpaste factories to produce any more than one flavor of toothpaste, viewing the idea of having more than one flavor as being extremely wasteful. That view is shared by many of today's college campus Marxists and many of Washington D.C.'s bureaucrats and elected officials who believe "one size fits all":

In the workshop "The Meaning of Marxism," Socialist Worker journalist Eric Ruder explained basic Marxist theory to a filled classroom.

He addressed the conundrum that most people today seem relatively well-off under capitalism.

"We're so much more productive as a society, literally thousands of times more so, except we let huge proportions [of people] actually die of starvation and material want, for no particular reason," he said. "It's a social problem, not one of material wealth."

Towards the end of the lecture, Ruder used toothpaste as an example of capitalism's inefficiencies.

"If you no longer have one section competing against another, you start to eliminate all kinds of waste," he said, referencing toothpaste brands Colgate and Crest.

Ruder then described the "wastefulness" of toothpaste's price: "About 90% of the price you pay for toothpaste goes into packaging, advertising, and profit, and 10% is the actual contents of the toothpaste."

"If you look into our economy as a whole, there is waste of that sort everywhere that you look," he said.

That's exactly the kind of progressive thinking they had in the Soviet Union, which they put into real world action. The Soviet Union's central economic planners made sure that just one kind of toothpaste would be manufactured waste-free in their government-owned toothpaste factories, which would all be done without profit.

The results were about what anybody with any real common sense would think. There were massive and chronic shortages of toothpaste, because there was no incentive for the government's toothpaste makers to produce enough toothpaste to meet their captive peoples' needs for it. As a result, their teeth suffered mightily.

And then it got even worse, because when don't have to ever improve a product or develop a new one to try to win consumers to earn a profit and continue doing business in a competitive market, you don't develop new and better technologies to meet the needs of the people whose needs you claim to satisfy, but aren't satisfying because you view the kind of marketing research and development it takes to do that as wasteful activity. Here's what that meant in the one-party-fits-all communist dictatorship:

Toothpaste meant whatever was available. Toothbrushes had hard bristles that cut the gums, sometimes doing more harm than good. Dental technologies were years behind those of the West; the 17-year-old who was crowned Miss USSR in 1990 flew to Philadelphia the same year to have the gap in her teeth closed and a few cavities filled.

Now, imagine yourself in that environment. Suppose that when you had the one glorious socialist toothpaste, you didn't like how it tasted, as you ripped your gums while brushing. How much incentive would you have to continue brushing your teeth?

As a result, in striving to prevent "wasteful" activity, the "know-it-alls" of the Soviet Union created an even worse level of waste. One measured by wasted teeth and health and lives. If only the Soviet socialists really cared more about people, but then, their answer to that was that the people wouldn't have to pay to go to the dentist to fix their teeth. Guess what else was in very short supply in the old Soviet Union, where the incentive to provide good dental health care just wasn't there....

Like the Soviet Union's central planners, today's progressives miss the fundamental lesson about toothpaste - it only works to fight the worse waste of tooth decay and other oral diseases when it's used. Having more than one flavor to choose from many means it's more likely that you'll find a toothpaste you are willing to use often. And for the trivial cost associated with the packaging of toothpaste to differentiate it from others so consumers can identify it on store shelves, consumers can have as much of the kind of toothpaste they want to have thanks to the incentive of profit for its producers and the marketing and advertising they did to help you to find the toothpaste solution that worked best for you.

And that brings us to what we really wanted to share with you today. Imagine a new kind of toothbrush that's so individualized for you that you can brush your teeth with it in just six seconds. It's called the "Blizzadent" (HT: Core77, who also provides a neat visual history of the technology of toothbrushes):

You can read more about how it works here, but basically, they take a 3-D scan of your teeth from your dentist to custom build a unique toothbrush for you, which optimizes the toothbrushing process by brushing all your teeth, and your gums, at the same time, using the optimal techniques for doing so - providing far better oral hygiene than you might ever be able to achieve using a regular toothbrush. You put some liquid toothpaste (oh no, another kind!) on your tongue to coat your upper teeth, then put Blizzadent toothbrush it in your mouth, then bite and grind your teeth on it 10-15 times, rinse it out, and you're done, having perhaps done the best job in brushing your teeth that you ever hope to do (at least, until a new invention comes along), all in about six seconds. What's more, Blizzadent claims their toothbrush can last an entire year.

We'll let you be the judge if it's worth the asking price, which you'll have to balance against the cost of regular toothbrushes, dental floss and potential dentistry expenses that you might now be able to avoid because you're using a tool that does a better job in promoting your dental health.

It's exactly the sort of capitalist-invented device that today's progressives and Marxists would view as wasteful. But then, they've already proven they don't really care about you, much less the condition of your health, so why should you listen to them or do what they tell you to do?

Jumat, 06 September 2013

The Past of Beer in Aluminum

We've previously explored the future of beer in aluminum, in which we considered how today's industrial designers are reshaping the aluminum beverage can to improve the beer drinking experience, but today, we're going to revisit the past to rediscover what the industrial designers of yore did to improve the beer drinking experience by bringing aluminum into the design of beverage cans in the first place!

Much like today's new college freshmen, who have no conception of a world without the Internet, entire generations of beer drinkers in America today have no conception of a time when beer couldn't be consumed from an aluminum can.

And yet, there was such a time. Before the early 1960s, most canned beer in the United States was contained within the same kind of tin-plated steel can that today is more familiarly found in the canned vegetable aisle at the grocery store.

And that was a problem for many beer drinkers, who had to rely upon using church key can openers to punch holes into the flat tops of their steel beer cans so they could consume the contents, because it required some physical strength to break through.

So yesterday's industrial designers went to work to improve the beer drinking experience of these consumers by replacing the old steel lid on top of the old-fashioned beer can with a new and improved aluminum lid design that was a lot easier to punch through with a church key opener. Here's an old Schlitz beer ad from the early 1960s trumpeting the new innovation (HT: Freakonomics):

Schlitz softop beer ad, early 1960s - Source: Freakonomics

RustyCans describes the history of the introduction of aluminum into the design of beer cans:

In 1960 Cincinnati's Burger Brewing Company tried an experiment to alleviate the complaints of people who found it difficult to punch a hole in the lid of the flat top cans with a churchkey. Flat tops cans had been the first beer cans used, starting in 1935, and you used a churchkey to open a triangular shaped hole in the steel/tin lid to pour out the beer.

As time went on cans had begun using thinner metal, including on the lids, but it still took a little bit of strength to use a churchkey. Cone top cans, which had a crown on the top like a bottle, had also come into use in 1935, but by 1960 only one or two brewers were still using them. Burger Beer, along with Cincinnati’s Heekin Can Company and Kaiser Aluminum decided to make the flat top can a bit more user friendly. Burger began using a aluminum lid which was much easier to punch into with a churchkey than the normal lids.

The idea was not new to Burger. European breweries had been using aluminum cans for several years and both Primo and Coors breweries had been using (with mixed success) all aluminum cans. Other breweries would soon follow. Burger, however, was the first US brewer (and maybe the first anywhere) to use the aluminum lid along with a normal "tin" can.

The new lid, named the "E-Z Open," was introduced in the Summer of 1960. (see August 2008 COM for details). The lids did prove popular. Many other breweries used them. Lone Star in Texas adopted them early. Schlitz Brewing was the first national brewery to adopt the new lids. They used other names besides “E-Z Open” including “Softop.” The lids also provided a space to include brewery logos, brand names, tax stamps, etc.

While the new lids were a success, they were short-lived. In 1962 Iron City began testing a pull top can that didn’t need a church key to open at all, the zip top (or pull tab). Schlitz adopted the pull tab in 1963 and by 1965 over three-quarters of all breweries were using them, including Burger. However, for a short time the E-Z Open lid was a popular feature on many cans as brewers fought for some sort of marketing advantage.

And thus, the modern age of beer drinking in America came to be!

Jumat, 30 Agustus 2013

Inventions in Everything: Turning Cans Into Sippy Cups

Toddler with Sippy Cup - Source: epa.gov

If you're the parent of a toddler, you know that life can get pretty messy. Especially when your toddler is attempting to drink something that isn't already in a sippy cup.

The problem is that creates somewhat of a hassle for today's busy parent, because that means you to go to the time and trouble of transferring some sort of drinkable liquid from its container into your toddler's sippy cup whenever it's empty and they're still thirsty. And if you're filling the cup with a different kind of beverage from what you previously filled it up with, that means that you'll have to fully rinse out both the cup and lid before you can even fill it with the new beverage.

That's a lot of extra steps just for getting fluids into a thirsty toddler!

That's the problem that inventor Ellyn Audrey Yacktman solved with her patented invention, the Sippy Cup Lid for a Beverage Can, as documented in U.S. Patent 8,286,827.

U.S. Patent #8,286,827: Figure 1

Yacktman's invention can convert a typical aluminum beverage can into a spillproof container. Fitting the tops of today's typical cans, Yacktman's lid would make it very easy to change out a toddler's beverage for a fresh one, with perhaps a quick rinse of just the lid when changing beverage types. Life for the busy parent gets both easier and simpler!

We can only imagine how New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg would react if he saw lots of toddlers in Central Park drinking straight from soda cans topped with the sippy cup lids. Or better yet, one of those big energy drink cans!...

We'd leave it there, but we can't help but notice that this particular invention also overlaps the innovations in canning technology taking place in the beer industry that we've recently featured.

We think that connecting the sippy cup lid to a can of beer has some potential beyond just the toddler market. We're thinking it would also be a good novelty item aimed at the college market, where we suspect that it will always find some sales. And then, it would also make a good gift item for that beer-drinking friend of yours who somehow always manages to spill some of it all over themselves and the things around them.

At the very least, once the sippy cup lid for cans hits the market, we think that Popular Mechanics might want to add the inventions to their list of 8 easy-drinking gadgets for the beer enthusiast!

Other Stuff We Can't Believe Really Exists

Jumat, 16 Agustus 2013

Inventions in Everything: Solid Rain

Do you remember the Stephen Wright joke about powdered water? The one that goes:

I bought some powdered water, but I don't know what to add to it.

Thanks to the efforts of chemical engineer Sergio Jésus Rico Velasco, who has spent years working to find a solution to the drought conditions faced by farmers in Mexico, we now know the answer to Stephen Wright's quandary. You need to add water!

Modern Farmer's Jesse Hirsch describes the innovation and the potential impact for agriculture in arid regions:

Solid Rain looks like sugar, and it sells for $25 a pound. And if you're a bit skeptical of its maker's claims, we understand. This Mexican product, which bills itself as a miracle powder that could solve the world's drought problems, seems like it belongs right alongside magic beans and Herbalife on the "I wasn't born yesterday" spectrum.

But rest assured: Solid Rain is very real, and very effective.

Solid Rain's creator, Sergio Jésus Rico Velasco, is a Mexican chemical engineer who spent decades trying to mitigate his country’s drought issues. His initial inspiration for Solid Rain was baby diapers, an item that absorbs lots of liquid in a minimal space.

That's the basic process used by Solid Rain — it's a highly absorbent polymer called potassium polyacrylate, which soaks in water up to 500 times its original size. A whole liter of water can be absorbed in just 10 grams of Solid Rain, which converts into a thick, translucent gel. The water is then retained for up to a year, and it will not evaporate, run off into the soil or go anywhere until it's consumed by a plant's roots. Think of it like a little powdered reservoir.

The innovation has demonstrated its ability to improve the yields of crops in dry regions over the past decade by keeping them much better hydrated throughout the year, and especially during the dry seasons. Interestingly, the material itself is safe for the environment because it's not itself soluble in water, so it stays in the soil and isn't absorbed into the roots of plants. Better still, it also appears to have the potential to improve crop yields by keeping soil nutrients from washing away when fields are irrigated, since it reduces the need to irrigate them frequently, with the result being that more nutrients make it into the plants being grown, which then helps them grow more quickly.

In a way, solid rain is potentially to agriculture what hydraulic fracturing (or "fracking") is proving to be for oil and gas production - a way to unlock much a greater production of resources than was previously possible due to small and systematic improvements in technology over time through human ingenuity.

(HT: Core77)

Previously on Political Calculations

Jumat, 26 Juli 2013

Inventions in Everything: Frog Umbrellas

This edition of our Inventions in Everything series is very different, because for the first time, the inventor isn't human....

Frog with Leaf Umbrella

And so, we add frogs to the growing list of animals that make tools to suit their own purposes. Core77's hipstomp and Rain Noe have some questions:

The amazing photos here, captured by Indonesia-based photographer Penkdix Palme, make you wonder: Was the umbrella's invention biomimetic in the sense that we saw an animal doing this and then emulated them? Or is it simply common sense that early man, caught in the rain, seeks to block it by holding a deflective object above their head?

Whichever you believe, there's no question that Palme's photos are stunning. Your initial reaction may be to assume that they're faked, but Palme's work is being shown by National Geographic, and I'd like to think they would've sniffed out any hijinks.

Previously on Political Calculations

Other Stuff We Can't Believe Really Exists

Jumat, 05 Juli 2013

How Long Should a Yellow Light Be?

Traffic Signal - Source: ConnectedVehicleChallenge.gov
If you've ever driven a car in a place that has installed red-light camera technology for traffic enforcement, you've probably noticed that the yellow lights at the intersections with those cameras are a lot shorter in duration than they are at non-monitored intersections.

The reason why is pretty straightforward. The state and local governments that generate revenue from issuing traffic tickets for people who violate red lights benefit if they can trap more drivers into entering an intersection after the traffic signal changes from yellow to red. And a very easy way to do that is to set the duration of the yellow caution signal at red-light camera intersections to be shorter than at other intersections, which makes it more difficult for drivers to anticipate how long they will have before the light may turn red.

But how long should a yellow light really be if what we really want is safe intersections? We've taken the math developed by the Institute of Traffic Engineers (ITE) and build the tool below to do it for you. You just need to enter the data that applies for your intersection of interest, and we'll do the rest!

(If you're reading this article on a site that republishes our RSS news feed, click here to access a working version of this tool!









Driving Data
Input Data Values
Velocity of Vehicles Approaching Intersection [miles per hour] - The 85th Percentile Velocity for traffic approaching the intersection, if known, or a speed that is greater than or equal to the Posted Speed Limit.)
Reaction Time to Brake [seconds] - The time needed to note the change in the traffic signal from Green to Yellow and to step on the brakes.)
"Safe and Comfortable" Deceleration Rate [ft/s²]
Road Grade [%] - The grade or slope of the road approaching the intersection (positive if uphill, negative if downhill.)




How Long Should a Yellow Light Be?
Calculated Results Values
Minimum Yellow Light Duration [seconds]

In the tool above, we've entered the median values measured for both the Reaction Time to Brake and the "Safe and Comfortable" Deceleration Rate, which are in close agreement with the values recommended for use by the Institute of Traffic Engineers.

Our tool then provides the minimum duration that a traffic signal should be yellow before switching to be red. If the traffic signal at your intersection of interest has a notably shorter yellow light, that's a pretty good indication that you might be dealing with a red light ticket trap.

Not to mention a potential traffic hazard, put in place by a government bureaucracy that cares more about getting money from traffic tickets than they do about the safety of the public.





Jumat, 31 Mei 2013

It's Not What You Think....

Want to take a Rorschach test? We've extracted the following illustrations from U.S. Patent 6,612,440 - we'll tell you what it is below the image....

US Patent #6612440, Figure 2 and Figure 3

If you saw spectacles looking at a banana-shaped object, you're probably not alone. Or far off, because fortunately for your psychological health assessment, bananas are indeed involved....

What you're looking at is a section view (Figure 2) and an isometric view (Figure 3) of half of a "Banana Protection Device". Because, well, you must store and transport your bananas carefully - even when they've been sliced in half lengthwise. The patent abstract explains:

A banana protective device for storing and transporting a banana carefully. The banana protective device includes a container having a first cover member and a second cover member being hingedly attached to the first cover member and being adapted to store a banana therein; and also includes pad members being securely disposed upon the first and second cover members for protecting and cushioning the banana; and further includes fastening members being attached to the first and second cover members for fastenably closing the first and second cover members together.

No, we're not making this up. The patent really says that.

And at least now you have something to carefully store and transport the cheapest thing you can buy outside of the food court at Costco....

Other Stuff We Can't Believe Really Exists

Jumat, 10 Mei 2013

Inventions in Everything: Soup Bowl Attraction

For a lot of U.S. families, there are only a handful of weeks left before their kids' school lets out for the year and they can finally get started on the serious business of going on a summer vacation!

Many will choose to visit a theme park, where they can ride ferris wheels and roller coasters and other entertaining attractions. Which brings us to what maybe is the strangest U.S. patent we've ever come across: U.S. Patent 6,168,531. Which features a simulated soup bowl entertainment attraction for theme parks.

Really. We can't make this stuff up. Here's what the inventors, William George Adamson and Donald Lewis Updyke, Jr., both of southern California, had to say about the peculiar problem their invention addresses:

Interactive entertainment attractions are generally in the nature of a video game apparatus in which a participant manipulates buttons and levers, or otherwise imparts physical movement of a device, to cause changing visual and audible effects.

Although video games differ in the visual and audible presentations, the methodology, i.e. activities of the participants, are predictable and remain basically the same, leading to familiarity, boredom and disinterest. Moreover, such entertainment attractions typically limit usage at any point in time to one or two participants.

Accordingly, there is a need in the art for an entertainment attraction alternative which departs from the usual button pushing, lever bending video game type of activity, and which permits several participants to take part in the attraction activity within a relatively short period of time.

And what better way could there be for several participants to interact with an alternative entertainment attraction in a relatively short period of time than for the main interface between participant and attraction to be a simulated bowl of soup? Complete with a fog generator to create the illusion of steam coming off the fluid inside!

A bowl shaped entertainment attraction is disclosed which includes a bowl shaped member having a top and a bottom. In addition, the attraction includes a fog generator which produces a fog layer in the bowl shaped member. Further, the attraction includes an image producer which produces an image within the bowl shaped member that is viewable through the fog layer.

More specifically, the present invention provides a bowl shaped entertainment attraction, comprising: a bowl shaped member having a top, a bottom, and an interior; a fog generator producing a fog layer within and/or at the top of the bowl shaped member; and an imaging device producing an image within the bowl shaped member.

Triggered by sensors that pick up the movements of the participants, the soup bowl attraction will change the image that is projected onto its simulated steamy soup surface and even play different sounds to make it a fully interactive experience.

Here's what the invention looks like:

U.S. Patent #6168531 - Soup bowl attraction Figure 1

In case you're wondering, Item 43 is the "visitor or guest participant", who is a vital component of the invention, as they provide the interactive element for the simulated soup bowl entertainment attraction.

But that's not even the strangest part of the patent. The thing that sends it over the top is that the invention is assigned to Japan's Sony Corporation (through its Burbank, California subsidiary Hyper Entertainment.)

What that means is that this idea was considered to be of great enough commercial value by a global corporation that it chose to go to the expense of filing and maintaining a patent on it, if for no other reason than to prevent its competitors from being able to go forward and produce their own simulated soup bowl entertainment attractions!

Sadly, that might explain why so many other global firms have not yet stepped forward to compete in this important new area for user-interface technology.

We did say that we're not making any of this up, right? But then, perhaps it was all just an excuse for sharing this classic Seinfeld clip:

Which makes it all worthwhile!

Stuff We Can't Believe Really Exists

Our Best Essays on the Topics of Technology and Innovation

Jumat, 22 Maret 2013

Inventions In Everything: Making Life More Difficult

Most inventions are meant to make life easier in some way. Even the Rube Goldberg-inspired contraption for removing the creme filling in Oreo cookie that we featured last week does that, in that it automates what might otherwise be a manual effort. It's a complicated way to do the intended task, but other than to load Oreos in and to unload the creme-filling free chocolate wafers out at the end is the only physical exertion required of the invention's user.

So what are we to make then of the following invention, which has been specifically developed to make a common physical task much more difficult to accomplish (HT: Core77):

Labyrinth Security Door Chain - Source: Core77

Here, the Labyrinth Security Door Chain makes the act of opening a restroom door much more complicated. But why?!

Believe it or not, the Labyrinth Security Door Chain solves a problem, and does in fact make life easier. Just not for the people who will be the most likely ones who will be directly challenged by the invention.

In this case, the people for whom this invention makes life easier are the owners and employees of establishments that serve lots of alcohol-based beverages. It helps them identify those customers who have had so much to drink that their ability to quickly solve the maze and enter the restroom has become significantly impaired, as has likely their ability to accomplish other tasks that might expose the establishment to liability, such as if they attempt to drive while under the influence of alcohol and get into an accident.

That information, in turn, allows the owners and staffs of alcohol-serving establishments to decide how to deal with the impaired customer, where options may range from changing the services being offered to them, say exchanging food service for drink items, to declining to continue serving them altogether and making arrangements for them to be driven home.

You have to admit - it's a simple and relatively inexpensive way to sort out which customers have a greater potential to expose the establishment to the risk of costly liability-related actions.



Jumat, 15 Maret 2013

Inventions in Everything: The Oreo Separator Machine

How much does a guy have to dislike the creme filling in delicious Oreo cookies that he is inspired to devise an invention as intricate as what you're about to see just to accomplish the desired task of removing the creme without coming into direct contact with any of it?

Now that's genius! (HT: Core77)

Rabu, 13 Maret 2013

In Which We Explain How Cuts in R&D Spending Can Affect GDP to President Obama

On Monday, 11 March 2013, President Obama[1] secretly asked us to explain the dynamics of how cuts in R&D spending might affect the nation's economic growth.

Here's the proof, as documented by StatCounter:

alt="StatCounter Detail 11 March 2013 - Executive Office of the President visit to Political Calculations' November 2009 post - The Link Between Intangible Investments and GDP" style="display: block; width: 600px; margin: 10px auto;" />

Here are the key points of what the President learned about how R&D cuts in the private sector can affect the economy, which we've tweaked from the material we originally presented for greater clarity:

In practice, when a company anticipates that it will not be able to afford its current level of new product development into the future, its management will begin a process of winnowing the list of research and development projects that it is willing to develop. That process occurs well in advance of the layoffs of the people who actually carry out the work involved with them.

Development projects are often reviewed and ranked according to their prospective return on investment (ROI) in that process. Here, projects that fail to meet a certain ROI threshold are discontinued, with the people engaged in those projects initially reallocated to other projects. In addition, the company's management may also kill a high ROI project, should they judge it to involve too much risk to continue developing in the fading economic climate it foresees.

Following this phase, the company's management evaluates its staffing needs to support the "winning" projects it will continue and this may lead to the resulting layoffs of its creative staff. Then the process repeats until whatever cost reduction target the company's leadership has set for its intangible investments has been met.

Before those layoffs occur however, it is the termination of the low ROI and high risk projects that may negatively impact GDP in the current timeframe, since the cancellation of the projects also terminates the relationships established between the company and its suppliers, vendors and customers to support them, to the extent that their businesses were relying upon the cancelled R&D projects for their revenue.

That change then ripples into the larger economy and also into the future, as the parties involved in these projects alter their own efforts to compensate for the loss. This contraction of economic activity then only subsides once sufficient new work makes it possible to reverse the process or when their costs have been brought in line to support their new level of revenue.

And from there, it's a question of whether those who might have been laid off have the skills needed for the new economy that forms. If there's a massive mismatch between the skills of the creative people who were let go and the opportunities available to them, the downturn for them can drag out for a very long time, especially for those employed in the industries that went from being the most high-flying to the most distressed.

Now, here is what the President has not yet learned, courtesy of MyGovCost, where the relative impact of government spending cuts and tax increases on the economy was recently discussed:

To understand why spending cuts like those of the sequester are considered to be so much less harmful to the economy than increasing taxes, let’s consider the real nature of government spending and taxes.

Here, when government raises taxes to support its discretionary spending, what it is doing is hurting a lot of people a little to benefit just a handful of politically-connected people, who just coincidentally happen to benefit a lot from government contracts (wink-wink). Because the harm is so widespread and the benefit limited to so few, the general economy suffers quite a bit as a result. Those effects are worse when the threat of additional tax increases remain after tax rate hikes are implemented.

But when a government cuts its spending, those dynamics work in reverse. Instead of lots of people being harmed a little, only a handful of people are. And since those people are significantly less likely to be engaged in sustainable economic activity in the first place, the economy at large is barely affected when their access to taxpayer money to fund their business income is reduced.

And that, in a nutshell, is why spending cuts are better for the economy than tax hikes for balancing a government’s budget.

The bottom line: Cuts in the U.S. government's R&D expenditures will have much less of an impact upon the U.S. economy than cuts in corporate R&D investments, thanks to the government's bizarre strategy of "investing" in wasteful, politically-driven, high-risk, low-return R&D efforts, such as those associated with "green" energy programs.

Notes

[1] Or more likely, one of the President's lowly minions trying to drum up arguments to oppose the spending cuts affecting government-funded R&D programs that are being negatively affected by the spending cuts mandated by President Obama's proposed budget sequester agreement from 2011.



Jumat, 14 Desember 2012

Air Shark!

There we were, surfing the web for ideas of what to get a certain 9-year old boy for Christmas, when we stumbled into something that made us suddenly sit up and say "That is so cool!"

That something is the Air Swimmer Remote Control Inflatable Flying Shark. Here's a Youtube video of it in action:

We like it because it combines a boy's love of flying R/C vehicles with nature's perfect predator! And as an added bonus, it echoes some of the more fun scenes from the 2010 Doctor Who Christmas special, many of which were excerpted and remixed with appropriate music in the following video preview:

The real preview for the 2010 Doctor Who Christmas special is available here. The episode is simply brilliant, with one of the best twists ever in retelling Charles Dickens' classic Christmas Carol story. Very highly recommended!

And at the very least, we've also answered Mark Cuban's problem of what to get his fellow multi-millionaire venture investors on Shark Tank for Christmas this year!



Jumat, 19 Oktober 2012

Markets in Everything: Stormtrooper Motorcycle Suits

As the marketing tag says, "Welcome to a Galaxy where Leather Rules"....

The Star Wars Stormtrooper motorcycle armor is available in both Shadow Trooper Black and Stormtrooper White. Unfortunately, there's no word on when Boba Fett-style armor might become available.

Meanwhile, Core77's hipstomp and Rain Noe offer the following invaluable insights:

Folks, I don't doubt that there's some overlap between the motorcycle-riding and Star-Wars-watching subcultures, but isn't this kind of asking for an ass-kicking? Maybe I've been watching too much Sons of Anarchy, but would you not be worried about a gang of thugs pushing each other out of the way in their haste to get to you, eager to win first boasting rights of "I beat the crap out of a Stormtrooper?"

The real rub is that the helmet isn't an actual motorcycle safety helmet. But I can't say what would be more dangerous—riding around with no helmet, or wearing this get-up to Sturgis.

And no, we're not making this up!

Jumat, 28 September 2012

The Bike That Rides You

Are you looking for the next great fitness and personal transportation craze? If so, meet the Fliz concept bike, a contender for this year's James Dyson Award (HT: Core77)!



That's going pretty far to avoid the pain and discomfort associated with the typical bicycle seat! More thoughts here from The Droid Guy's Phalgun Shenoy....

Jumat, 24 Agustus 2012

One Inventor's Stick-to-itiveness

Over the last several months, we've been featuring a number of patents that, well, can only be described as "unusual". Our list so far includes:

What all these patents have in common is that they involve some degree of unique creativity by their inventors. Our unusual patent today however involves just about absolutely no creativity on the part of the individual who filed the patent, except perhaps for their ability to convince the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office to issue them a patent for their "invention" in the first place.

To see why, just consider Figure 1 from U.S. Patent Number 6,360,693, which was issued on 26 March 2002 to Ross Eugene Long III of Oakland, California, for what he titled an "Animal toy":

U.S. Patent 6,630,693 Figure 1

Yes, someone actually convinced the U.S. Patent Office to issue them a patent for a stick. Really. We're not making this up. Here's the patent's abstract:

An apparatus for use as a toy by an animal, for example a dog, to either fetch carry or chew includes a main section with at least one protrusion extending therefrom that resembles a branch in appearance. The toy is formed of any of a number of materials including rubber, plastic, or wood including wood composites and is solid. It is either rigid or flexible. A flavoring (scent) is added, if desired. The toy is adapted to float by including a material therein that is lighter than water or it is adapted to glow in the dark, as desired, by the addition of a fluorescent material that is either included in the material from which the toy is made or the flourescent [sic] material is applied thereto as a coating. The toy may be segmented (i.e., notched) so as to break off into smaller segments, as is useful for smaller animals or, alternatively, to extend the life of the toy. Various textured surfaces including camouflage colorings are anticipated as are straight or curved main sections. The toy may be formed of any desired material, as described, so as to be edible by the animal.

We really like the part where inventor Ross Eugene Long III allows that the "apparatus" might be made from wood. But really, the genius of the patent lies in describing the field of the invention:

The present invention, in general relates to animal toys and, more particularly, to devices that a dog can chew and carry in its mouth.

Dog chew toys are well known and include a wide variety of devices, some of which rapidly disintegrate--as is well known to most dog owners.

Other dog chew toys are sometimes used in fetching training exercises or simply for play but they may be difficult for the dog to pick up off of the ground. If tossed onto a body of water, they may sink. Furthermore, while a dog may see the toy at night or in dim light, the owner is unable to do so and therefore the toy cannot be used in dim light.

Other variations, such as it being edible or chewable (to relieve the natural tendency dogs have to chew) are also desirable features to incorporate in any dog chew toy design.

It is a natural tendency for dogs to chew and they often make inappropriate selections as to what they will chew. A scented or flavored animal toy that encourages a dog to chew, and possibly to consume it, would be useful.

When training dogs, especially hunting dogs, to fetch or when deciding which dog is especially good for the scent discrimination purpose, it is necessary to asses their ability to detect objects based solely on scent. Therefore an animal toy that is camouflaged would be useful in training and determining a dog's ability to locate hard to find objects based solely on scent.

Accordingly there exists today a need for an animal toy that floats, is easy to pick up off of the ground, can be seen in dim light, is made from a variety of possible materials, and which dogs may chew.

Clearly, such an apparatus would be a useful and desirable device.

Clearly, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office agreed, and that's what makes inventor Ross Eugene Long III a true patent pioneer!

Unfortunately for our hero, he failed to make his first patent maintenance fee payment and as a result, the patent fell into the public domain on 26 March 2010. Now, anyone can produce a stick and profit from it!

We did say we're not making any of this up, right?

Jumat, 10 Agustus 2012

Twenty Quick and Simple Household Life Hacks

Via Core77, Dylan (Household Hacker), shares his tips for how to deal with all those pesky little problems of everyday life in this two-part (so far) YouTube video series!

Part 1



What we learned how to do in Part 1:

  1. Remove a screw with a stripped head.

  2. Make a stylus for your smart phone.

  3. Remove spray paint from your hands.

  4. Unclog calcium buildup from your shower heads.

  5. Out of window cleaner? Clean your windows with cola instead!

  6. Better trash bag storage.

  7. Open and reuse very recently sealed envelopes.

  8. Make bug repellent from dryer sheets.

  9. Clean and destink sink pads.

  10. Easily clean your toilet bowl (plop plop fizz fizz)!

Part 2



    What we learned how to do in Part 2:

  1. Make a smaller battery work in space for larger battery.

  2. Destink your sneakers.

  3. Measure the amount of propane remaining inside a closed tank.

  4. Easily open blister packaging.

  5. Pack maximum clothes with minimum wrinkles.

  6. Watch YouTube videos while doing other things on your computer.

  7. Convert a lamp into an air freshener.

  8. Keep writing after running out of ink.

  9. Open a jar with a stuck lid.

  10. Fill a pot that won't fit in your sink.

Jumat, 20 Juli 2012

High Five!

Just when we thought U.S. patents couldn't get any sillier, we found a patented invention for an "Apparatus For Simulating a 'High Five'"!

Issued to Albert Cohen of Troy, New York on 18 October 1994, U.S. Patent 5,356,330 solves the following problems:

...the hand-arm configuration of the invention allows a user to simulate a "high-five" in celebration of a positive event, thereby providing the user with a convenient outlet for the release of excitement. Further, the hand-arm configuration synergistically improves the hand-eye coordination of a user and/or, depending upon specific placement, provides an exercise device for enhancing the jumping skills of a user. More specifically, when the hand-arm configuration is mounted at a sufficient height above the normal reach of a user, the user must jump upwards to strike the simulated hand, thereby simulating many of the jumping drills commonly practiced by basketball players. As such, the leg strength and coordination of a user may be improved through the practice of the present invention.

No, we're not making this up! Here's what the invention looks like:

U.S. Patent 5,356,330

Here's hoping you have a positive event to simulate with a convenient outlet for your excitement this weekend!

And if it helps, here's an old clip of the "High Five'n White Guys" as they go site-seeing in Seattle (and yes, that really is a young Bill Nye)!

Jumat, 13 Juli 2012

Old Technology, Finding New Life

Hundreds of years ago, Spanish settlers in the dry regions of the Americas developed a unique method for irrigating plants: burying terracotta pots next to their plants, which they would fill with water. Since unglazed ceramics like terracotta are porous, allowing water to slowly pass through their walls, the plants next to these buried pots would receive a steady flow of water.

Called ollas, this technology was used for hundreds of years up until the introduction of modern irrigation technology. And though some horticulturalists are trying to reintroduce the olla to modern gardens, it's an idea that few know.

That may change if designer Joey Roth's new planter design is any indication (HT: Core77). He's taken the basic idea of the olla and integrated it into a stylish pot:

Joey Roth Planter

The olla is integrated in the center, with the surrounding pot filled with soil and plants:

Joey Roth Planter - Cutaway View

The water only moves out from the center when the soil around it becomes dry, which happens as the plant place in the outer section draw the water in the soil into their roots. The result is extremely efficient watering, with the plant getting just as much water as it needs when it needs it.

It occurred to us though that Joey Roth's planter design could easily be converted into a zeer pot, where one could fill the outer portion of the container with sand and water, which would then cool the inner container through the effect of evaporative cooling.

That's something that would come in really handy during the summer when entertaining outdoors. And to give credit where it's due, Joey Roth's design is a lot more stylish than the flower pot-in-flower pot contraption most greenies might put together!