It's only "free" for academia.

Not even them. This is a lure for universities to create tech that they are not allowed to produce in hardware, but the company that provided the original tech can monetize.

The patent terms are whatever they want them to be. In general "reasonable" and "patent" don't happen together much. And "tiny", well I really doubt it.

Having a company provide funds for a research grant and then reap the patent royalties isn't in general a good thing for society. The student researchers get paid like slave labor (if they get paid at all) and put what may be the best idea of their lives in some company's pockets.

It's very common these days for companies to allow universities to use their technology at the cost of tying the company into the university's patent revenue. And of course this is often publicly-funded research, so not only is the taxpayer paying for the development of patents used to sue that same taxpayer, the patents go directly to a company from academia.

The net effect is to feed intellectual property centered companies at the expense of the technology sector in general and small technology companies in particular.

If you submit a video and we run it, it would show up in the feed, too. I haven't seen this behavior myself, but I'll try to replicate it. Thanks for the heads-up.

I've had problems logging in and sometimes can't post as other than AC even when logged it, too. Try emailing feedback@slashdot.org. That should bring your comment to the attention of people who can help. (I'm can't help because I'm an old retired guy now, and do a little work on Slashdot videos as a contractor.)

This is a "don't give me any ideas" idea. I don't live in Comcast territory myself, but could moderate/narrate. Get some people who have webcams and speaker phones *and* have Comcast, and.... email robin at roblimodotcom and we'll see if we can make it happen

If you don't want to watch Slashdot videos, don't. If you want the *information* in them, read the verbatim transcripts we include with almost every one. And if you don't like the info in our videos, Don't click on them.

  Believe it or not, many different people look at Slashdot every day. Some want to read about *BSD, some want science news. Some -- usually many thousands -- watch the videos, while 10 (on average) complain about them. I learned long ago that not every story on Slashdot is going to please everyone. Such is life.

AND if you think you can do better or more informative videos than we do, XLNT! Submit a video -- or maybe an idea for one, along with links to videos you've done elsewhere. We stay simple on purpose, because our job in these videos is to introduce you to the people in them, often with a "you are there" feel at conferences and shows where background noise is part of the environment. Remember that we are not looking for star wipes and such. We can do them as well as anyone else, but we know that just because you *can* do something doesn't mean you *should*.

Something that happened all the way back in 2000: We did a reader-generated questions interview with Metallica drummer Lars Ulrich. He'd been complaining that nobody was ever fair to him; that they edited his words to twist their meanings. So, being us, Timothy talked to Lars for hours because Lars said it would have to be verbal, that he wasn't going to do all that typing. So Timothy transcribed every word of that interview verbatim, including every "uh" and mumble and obscenity.

Lars was not thrilled to be quoted verbatim even though that's what he said he wanted. But that interview gave Slashdot people a better sense of who Lars was as a person than all the laundered interviews in the world.

So we do video interviews with people a Slashdot editor considers interesting, often after a reader suggests interviewing that person (and includes contact information). Or they're people Timothy meets at conferences and trade shows. Some interviewees are making major contributions in one field or another. Some think they are, but aren't. Some are well-known. Some aren't - - but should be. And some live in obscurity and should stay there.

It's a mixed bag. I say again: if you want to suggest video interview subjects *or* want to be interviewed yourself *or* do an interview, let's go!

- Rob

PS - Slashdot has always done a little original content, and for many years was associated with original content sites NewsForge and Linux.com. If you dip into the pool of internet content every day, shouldn't you be obliged to add to it? :)

'...for now, the only workaround is to simply not be in range of such a malicious network.' Really? How about not owning an iOS device?

Yep. A physicist trying to explain a balanced line to other physicists, without knowing the word for it.

Haldane would be spinning in his grave.

If the end of the coil that is hanging is grounded (earthed), it becomes an autotransformer. As it's shown, it's a variable inductor and the disconnected end is irrelevant and has no meaningful physical effect at the frequency a spark transmitter could have reached.

This comment seems to get closer to what they actually mean in their scientific paper. But the article about it is garble and the paper might suffer from second-language issues, and a lack of familiarity with the terms used in RF engineering.

Sorry, I was being sarcastic. I happen have built more than one counterpoise.

The point they're missing is grounding of the "asymmetric" half of the antenna, and that's to keep a static charge from building in the antenna that'll zap through your electronics (or you) for safety reasons.

Sometimes. But you're missing what a Counterpoise does.