Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Transportation

The Mercedes-Benz 'Cloaking Device' 163

Posted by Soulskill
from the at-least-it-can't-fire-while-cloaked dept.
cold fjord writes "As part of its marketing campaign for the new hydrogen fuel cell powered F-Cell, Mercedes-Benz has equipped one with a cloaking device. They covered one side of an F-Cell with LEDs and used cameras on the other side to capture the view, which is then displayed on the LEDs to effectively remove the vehicle from the line of sight."

Comment: Has no one ever heard of a Faraday cage? (Score 0) 337

by TeTalon (#39229817) Attached to: One In Eight Chance of a Financially Catastrophic Solar Storm By 2020

Has no one ever heard of a Faraday cage?
What is a faraday cage you ask?
Well it is a box made out of conductive metal, or wire that is grounded to earth. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faraday_cage)
Now depending on how strong the EMP is you could just make a big box out of some type of wire fence, or better yet a metal shed, and ground it with a copper earth grounding rod driving in to the earth.
Also your car is a metal box so ground it and it just may not get fried. (50/50)
Unless your vehicle is constructed out of plastic, fiberglass, or some other non-metal composite then your fracked.
What about your solar panels, well wrap the tops in tin foil, and make sure they are grounded.
Building a new house wrap it in a layer of metal and ground it. (Get the idea)
The best Faraday cages are made with multi-layers out of wire mesh with very small holes that I have seen.

Comment: Re:There are ways to shed light on Police behavior (Score 0) 482

by TeTalon (#39218615) Attached to: Photographing Police: Deletion Is Not Forever

1. It is well known that internal affairs departments don't do anything. Complaints are summarily dismissed.
2. My city doesn't have a citizen review board.
3. See 2.
4. The cop who attacked me was a state police officer. And the idea that they would go after another cop is laughable.
5. Are you serious?

Bottom line, there actually isn't any oversight or anyone to complain to. A state trooper attacked me, beat me severely and strangled me in front of a a whole bunch of other state troopers. If another cop hadn't finally pulled him off of me he would have killed me for sure. So I guess at least some of them are human.

What did I do to deserve a damaged windpipe, cracked ribs, damaged legs, and a severe concussion? I swore at the officer in reply to him swearing at me. Needless to say he didn't take kindly to a mere civilian disrespecting him in front of his peers and flew into a violent rage. Unfortunately my state does allow DUI roadblocks. I was just driving down the road minding my own business. I don't drink or do illegal drugs.

They don't need to control themselves because they know they can literally get away with anything. Including murder. Police in the US are a gang of thugs and should be treated accordingly. I wouldn't have disrespected a member of a street gang in LA in a deserted parking lot with no witnesses even if he had disrespected me first. Now I'm facing all kinds of false criminal charges and legal bills adding up to nearly a year of my income. That's what they mean by, "You might beat the rap but you won't beat the ride." As soon as I get the chance I'm going to move to a state where such road blocks are not allowed, but in the long run I'd like to leave this insane country. I've lived in other countries and the cops are not, as a rule, violent thugs like they are here. They are sometimes even real people and not angry, raging animals. As someone else posted, outside of certain urban slum areas, your greatest chance of being a victim of a violent crime is from an encounter with the police. I have always avoided them for this reason, but that night I had no way to avoid them.

Just so you know I am not saying the system even works as intended, because it does not.
It is better than most law enforcement systems out there, but bit still sucks.
But the only way to change it is to take a stand and make some noise.
In your case with state police I would hit up the state legislators, State Attorney General, and the Governor’s Office.
But there is a down side.
You have to have solid evidence because the burden of proof is on you, and even with that you may still get screwed.
Also there may be some blow back either way.
I have ended up on police sh1t lists before and it sucks, but it goes away after a while.
Sometimes taking a stand comes with cost you just have to be willing to pay.
But you do have to pick your fights and be smart about it.

Me I have paid my dues taking a stand and still do.
Because I can’t just stand there and say thank you Sir can I please have another.

Comment: There are ways to shed light on Police behavior (Score 1, Informative) 482

by TeTalon (#39213831) Attached to: Photographing Police: Deletion Is Not Forever

Although many officers seem to get away with some outrages and possibly illegal behavior there are ways to counter this.
At the City level you have the following options:
1. Most large Cities have an internal affairs office which is works as a peer review and is only accountable to a police commissioner or possibly the chief of police.
                              But they are also sill accountable to the Mayor and city council.
2. Some large cities also have a citizen review board that reviews any suspicious behavior conducted by the police.
3. Some large cities have both an internal investigation and citizen review board.
4. Also the state police agencies usually have some kind of mandate to investigate police departments with a history of misbehavior.
5. Small departments are usually monitored by the mayors and city council.

Bottom line you have avenues to lodge a complaint, just make sure you have all your ducks in a row first, and have solid evidence to back it up.

At the State level:
Many State Law enforcement Agencies are accountable to the Governor, the State Attorney General, and State Legislators.
They will also have some kind of internal review process.

At the Federal level:
All Federal Law Enforcement Agencies are accountable to the Office of the President, and Congress.
They will also have some kind of internal review process.

So my story:
I once got harassed and ticketed illegally while my car was parked at a park on the street swapping a flasher solenoid for my blinkers, and I was an Air force Security Police but not in uniform.
After running up the city chain of command I resorted to writing to my congressman Leon Panetta.
The charges were dropped, and the officers involved were suspended without pay. (Circa 1979)
Thank god or I would have had a really awkward meeting with my commander.

Comment: I have to ask (Score -1) 104

by TeTalon (#39179869) Attached to: Ship Anchor Damages African Undersea Cables

Since we have on going operations in the Horn of Africa and have trouble spots like Iran, Pakistan, and Afghanistan are fairly close by.
Could it be my Uncle Sam is using a spy sub to cut the cables and attach a device to bug the cable?
I ask this because it is something I would consider if I was the head of the NSA or CIA.
(Not that it makes it right)

But it would be a way to keep tabs on all the data traffic between Africa and that part of the Middle East.

Comment: Re:Just another Con Man (Score 5, Funny) 498

by TeTalon (#39072471) Attached to: James Randi's Latest Debunking Operation

"the one time he stumbled in to something interesting with the case against Water Memory he created a perfectly blind study without taking in the error factor.
Then did not follow up to find out why the two studies differed and were both repeatable getting the same data along the two different testing technics."

uhm, link? I'm sure that's described in parseable english somewhere. I like to read actually, very much so -- I just don't have much patience for empty words.

Here is a good place to start but it is incomplete:
http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Water_memory

It does not really recount everything or consider all the repeated experiments since then.

In a nutshell.
A paper was published around 1980 in the Journal Nature using the standard chemistry testing protocols still in use today that suggested that water had some form of memory.
The experiments were meant to disprove homeopathy, but suggested that it may in fact be the real deal. (I have no opinions on homeopathy)
The experiment had been recreated around the world resulting in the same data.
The editor in charge of the magazine wanted the experiments rerun with Randi controlling the protocols.
Remember Randi is not a PHD or a chemist.

Randi came up with a new chemistry protocol where no one person knew what they were doing with what samples. Basically it was a completely blind testing protocol, and there have been a few TV shows on this and it was on 60 minutes and NOVA too.
Now they never ran Statistical error analysis on the new protocol so no knew what the error ratereally was.
The experiment came up inconclusive and could not prove that water had memory.

But the cool thing is this that both experiments have been recreated using both protocols several times and came up with the same data results.
Standard protocol’s says water has memory, and Randi’s protocol was inconclusive suggesting that water does not have memory.
Also Randi’s protocol has only been used to recreate this experiment.
So all other chemistry experiments still use the standard protocols today.

So my beef with Randi is that he butted in to a science lab experiment and never followed up with why the data was different and repeatable.
Although these experiments have been repeated a lot since then research in to why was dropped because of the journal bringing in Randi.

My belief is:
The data would suggest that test results are subjective much like the physic experiments done in Princeton Engineering Labs and may give us additional clues towards solving some Quantum Mechanics and M theory unresolved issues.
Then again it could just bring up more interesting questions.

Comment: Re:Just another Con Man (Score -1, Troll) 498

by TeTalon (#39072181) Attached to: James Randi's Latest Debunking Operation

Why yes I do and there are way too many to jot down here.

LOL!!!!! that is the most fucking stupid thing I read in a long time, kudos.

All he does is cause doubt and never follows up to prove his point.

you clearly are projecting, thanks for the laugh :D

otherwise, I'll simply skip your blah-blah for that's what it is; feel free to offer any of the aforementioned evidence once you found even just a single thing, or figured out how to decide WHAT of the mountain of evidence to post. (here's a tip, you don't have to be exhaustive -- just one would suffice to make you seem like less of a liar).

I realize a lot of people don’t like to read.
So I will repost this for you and make it easy for you.

And the one time he stumbled in to something interesting with the case against Water Memory he created a perfectly blind study without taking in the error factor.
Then did not follow up to find out why the two studies differed and were both repeatable getting the same data along the two different testing technics.

Comment: Re:Just another Con Man (Score 0) 498

by TeTalon (#39072149) Attached to: James Randi's Latest Debunking Operation

I bet you're one of those sons of bitches at an engineers meeting that talks the contractor into bringing in a dowser for water, oil, or whatever. I've seen weeks wasted on a contract because of dumb motherfuckers like you running the gamut of dowsers, psychics, and other flim flam just to attempt to make a point. I wish I could say it's a US thing only but having worked now in Asia and the EU, it appears your brand of stupidity is global

People like you should be smacked across the face and put in menial jobs where we can minimize the money you waste on quackery.

Funny I never thought the use of dousing would work with my scripts, or software/hardware issues.
That is being a Computer engineer and all.

Comment: Re:Just another Con Man (Score -1) 498

by TeTalon (#39072083) Attached to: James Randi's Latest Debunking Operation

Have any evidence to backup your defamatory statement?

Why yes I do and there are way too many to jot down here.
Just check everything out he does claiming to be a skeptic.
All he does is recreate an event or phenomena and then make an unsubstantiated claim that it was done that way without actually proving it was done that way. (Sorry I want the smoking gun)
All he does is cause doubt and never follows up to prove his point.

And the one time he stumbled in to something interesting with the case against Water Memory he created a perfectly blind study without taking in the error factor.
Then did not follow up to find out why the two studies differed and were both repeatable getting the same data along the two different testing technics.

So think of him as a guy that creates a device on paper that looks like it would logically work, and then sells it to people without ever knowing if it will really work or not. (A coder that never tests his code)
It might work and then again it might not, but when he is done it is no longer his problem and proclaims himself a genius based on his half completed work.

Then again “skeptics” thought the earth was flat because maps were flat and that is all the proof they needed.
That is why I consider skeptics to be just another type of religious zealot.
Because in science you should have both an open curious mind and a skeptical questioning mind too.

Blackberry

+ - Leaked BlackBerry 10 show New Widgets and Tray Icon | Twitteling->

Submitted by
tculang
tculang writes "RIM has said that BlackBerry 10 new smartphone will be released in late 2012. The waiting time is not a short time and therefore worth asking why BlackBerry fans, will like what 10 BlackBerry handsets in the future? If you are one person waiting, you may be a little glad that the latest leak of BlackBerry 10 smartphones has emerged."
Link to Original Source
Power

+ - Small modular nuclear reactors - the future of energy?->

Submitted by cylonlover
cylonlover (1921924) writes "This year is an historic one for nuclear power, with the first reactors winning U.S. government approval for construction since 1978. Some have seen the green lighting of two Westinghouse AP1000 reactors to be built in Georgia as the start of a revival of nuclear power in the West, but this may be a false dawn because of the problems besetting conventional reactors. It may be that when a new boom in nuclear power comes, it won't be led by giant gigawatt installations, but by batteries of small modular reactors (SMRs) with very different principles from those of previous generations. But though a technology of great diversity and potential, many obstacles stand in its path. Gizmag takes an in-depth look at the many forms of SMRs, their advantages, and the challenges they must overcome."
Link to Original Source
Robotics

+ - Getting closer to the Singularity!->

Submitted by wisebabo
wisebabo (638845) writes "The Singularity I've thought will be achieved when we get two things 1) true atomic level control over matter as demonstrated by human designed robots that can replicate themselves from the lego blocks of nature, atoms, and 2) when we have supra-human intelligence that can take over the difficult process of thinking. (Of course having #2 will make it a lot easier to achieve #1 but that's another topic).

Well it looks like we're getting closer to the first goal. Harvard researchers have built robots made from DNA. While I'm not sure the robots themselves can self-replicate, it seems probable that using PCR it would be easy to make trillions of these things at a time.

I know robots made from DNA may not be as flexible or robust as ones made from a completely "bottom up" approach (by Eric Drexler's assemblers) but it's a (good) start.. By using these self-assembling systems as a base, we can hopefully use them to make more general purpose machines. And as long as they're made from fragile DNA (carbon links) there's less chance of them becoming an unstoppable Grey Goo!

Now if only we could solve that pesky A.I. problem. If Siri and Watson had a baby, would it be HAL?"

Link to Original Source

In any formula, constants (especially those obtained from handbooks) are to be treated as variables.

Working...