Technology StocksThe *NEW* Frank Coluccio Technology Forum

Previous 10 Next 10 
To: Lazarus who wrote (40466)2/6/2012 1:55:03 PM
From: LindyBill
   of 46530
My son-in-law had exactly that BG. Went to work for a major Cell Phone co. They paid his way though Law school and he is now, 20 years later, one of their chief Patient Lawyers. You never know.

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read

To: axial who wrote (40439)2/6/2012 7:02:57 PM
From: axial
3 Recommendations   of 46530
Transplant jaw made by 3D printer claimed as first

' The implant is a complex part - involving articulated joints, cavities to promote muscle attachment and grooves to direct the regrowth of nerves and veins. However, once designed, it only took a few hours to print.

"Once we received the 3D digital design, the part was split up automatically into 2D layers and then we sent those cross sections to the printing machine," Ruben Wauthle, LayerWise's medical applications engineer, told the BBC. "It used a laser beam to melt successive thin layers of titanium powder together to build the part. This was repeated with each cross section melted to the previous layer. It took 33 layers to build 1mm of height, so you can imagine there were many thousand layers necessary to build this jawbone."

Once completed, the part was given a bioceramic coating. The team said the operation to attach it to the woman's face took four hours, a fifth of the time required for traditional reconstructive surgery.

"Shortly after waking up from the anaesthetics the patient spoke a few words, and the day after the patient was able to swallow again," said Dr Jules Poukens from Hasselt University, who led the surgical team. "The new treatment is a world premiere because it concerns the first patient-specific implant in replacement of the entire lower jaw."


Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read

To: ig who wrote (40465)2/6/2012 11:41:15 PM
From: Webster Groves
   of 46530
Seems like the bag really works.

However, as pointed out in a comment on Youtube,
one can hear automated
shutter clicks every second from 0.11 to 0.26
at the peak of the action.
"Ready. camera, action -- it's in the can = staged demo
(don't try this at home. kids).


Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read

From: axial2/7/2012 7:47:39 AM
   of 46530
Why Cognitive Enhancement Is in Your Future (and Your Past)

' It could be that we are on the verge of a great deluge of cognitive enhancement. Or it's possible that new brain-enhancing drugs and technologies will be nothing compared to how we've transformed our minds in the past. If it seems that making ourselves "artificially" smarter is somehow inhuman, it may be that similar activities are actually what made us human.

Let's look at the nature of the new technology. Last week a team of ethicists from Oxford released a paper on the implications of using Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (TDCS) to improve cognition in human beings. Recent years have seen some encouraging, if preliminary, lab results involving TDCS, a deep brain stimulation technique that uses electrodes placed outside the head to direct tiny painless currents across the brain. The currents are thought to increase neuroplasticity, making it easier for neurons to fire and form the connections that enable learning. There are signs that the technology could improve language acumen, math ability, and even memory. The Oxford paper argues that TDCS has now reached a critical stage where its risks must be carefully considered before the research goes further.

Of course, not everyone is convinced that the technology will pan out. Some remain skeptical of TDCS, calling it a fad, the latest in a long series of "neuro-myths" that bubble up when scientists distort or embellish their findings in the name of publicity. But even if brain stimulation fizzles, the questions raised by the Oxford paper are going to be with us for a long time. That's because TDCS is just one of many promising new technologies that neuroscientists hope will enhance cognition, including smart pills, genetic engineering, and brain-to-computer interfacing. As deep brain stimulation has become the flavor du jour in neuroscience, bioethicists have increasingly given it a starring role in the thought experiments they use to tease out the philosophical dilemmas posed by cognitive enhancement. '


Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read

From: Frank A. Coluccio2/7/2012 8:29:06 AM
   of 46530
A phenomenal stat:

During the last five minutes of the Super Bowl game, Twitter was reportedly logging 12,223 tweets per second.


Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (1)

From: pltodms2/7/2012 8:29:50 AM
   of 46530
Nasdaq Data Center Introduces Computing Cabinets with Chimneys

February 7, 2012Tom Steinert-Threlkeld

Nasdaq OMX Group said it will upgrade the amount of power and speed available to customers using its Carteret, N.J., data center for executing trades.

The operator of the Nasdaq Stock Market said it would immediately make available to its customers a chimney system that would increase by 70 percent the amount of computing power that can be installed in a rack of computing appliances.

The exchange operator also said it had filed an application with the Securities and Exchange Commission to increase the capacity of communications within the Carteret data center to 40 gigabits a second on a given channel, from 10 gigabits.

Nasdaq's Super Cabinet. The chimney at left removes heat, allowing the cabinet to contain roughly 70 percent more processing power.

This would cut roundtrip times from a customer’s computing cabinet to the exchange’s order matching engine by “seven mikes,’’ according to Stacie Swanstrom, vice president of transaction services.

That is lingo for seven microseconds, or 7 millionths of a second.

“Seven mikes is still quite a big deal,’’ said Swanstrom.

Nasdaq OMX says it already processes roundtrip messages “door to door” from customers’ computing cabinets to its matching engines inside the Carteret data center and back again in under 100 microseconds.

The company said that number includes the processing of the trade inside its matching engines.

The London Stock Exchange Group in January said it had achieved 30-microsecond round-trip times between a client cabinet and the trading system within the London Stock Exchange’s primary data center.

The exchange, though, said it takes 120 microseconds to process the trade, making for 150 microseconds, all told, in the roundtrip.

The chimneys that Nasdaq will place on customers’ racks of computing power will draw off heat exhaust and as a result allow more computing power be placed in a conventional rack of 44 servers.

The previous standard had been 10 kilowatts of power available to operate and cool trading cabinet in a single given cabinet. Rival exchange operates provide about 8 kilowatts, Nasdaq OMX said.

“This will take it to the next level,’’ said Swanstrom, allowing users to pack, roughly speaking, 70 percent more computing power in a rack of servers, without running out of energy or overheating.

The Super Cab (as in “cabinet”) with its chimney is available immediately.

The 40 gigabit a second connections await review and approval by the Securities and Exchange Commission. Nasdaq OMX projects the connections will be available in April.

The exchange operator is trying to establish the Nasdaq Data Center in Carteret as a hub for world trading.


Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read

To: Frank A. Coluccio who wrote (40471)2/7/2012 10:26:44 AM
From: ftth
   of 46530
Apparently that number was during the 60 second interval at the end of the game when the Giants scored. Wonder how many "unique twits" were living out their sportscaster fantasy, as opposed to the raw number of tweets.

Thankfully it means it was only a miniscule percentage of total worldwide viewers who thought the world needed their commentary via short text message, on what was already being broadcast in high definition video and audio, as well as streamed online in multiple languages, as well as worldwide radio broadcasts.

Good thing the tweets were all under 140 characters long. To paraphrase an old Beatles song: And in the end, the bandwidth you take is equal to the bandwidth you make ;o)

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read

To: Frank A. Coluccio who wrote (40438)2/7/2012 2:32:34 PM
From: Rob S.
1 Recommendation   of 46530
I spent a few hours following this issue because I think it is important for the future of the wireless and broader ICT industry.

The problem stems from allocation of broad bands of spectrum for use by GPS. This was done largely out of necessity because GPS requires the use of satellites to specialized, handheld and embedded device receivers, resulting in very low signal levels. Wide band technology that pushes suppliers and applications to use as wide of spectrum as they think is possible. The conflict arises due both the nature of the wide band technology and the lack of enforcement or commercial motivation to restrict sensitivity outside of the allocated GPS bands.

This can be seen in the initial and subsequent test results after LightSquared modified their network plans. Also, the GPS industry imposed what appears to the non-GPS expert like myself to be a very low threshold for non-interference - when I read the initial report it immediately struck me as exceptional requirements. Several points snap out of these reports including that many devices in use today are not subject to interference because they took precaution in their designs. Relatively simple measures including use of selective antennas and band pass filters have been shown in test results submitted by equipment suppliers, mobile network operators, as well as LightSquared and suppliers aligned with them, to resolve the problems of interference.

The problem remains for equipment that has not followed the GPS, DoD and FCC guidelines for non-interference of GPS equipment. Unfortunately, this includes many critical applications such as flight navigation and precision commercial applications such as agriculture.

On the other hand, I thought that LightSquare's initial proposal was naive at best: They proposed use of some 30,000 high powered base stations while not addressing the interference issues that were due to crop up. Their stance was, rightly or wrongly, that they were entitled to use their spectrum as if GPS were designed within best practices to mitigate interference. Regardless of whether that is technically correct, it was bone headed.

Both sides have wished to steamroll the regulatory review process. That is actually the heart of the matter: in order to make more spectrum available for use by 'smart wireless technology' that is evolving to the commercial forefront today, incumbent uses must come under tighter use of 'best practices' or be reformed to use newer versions or entirely new technologies.

The GPS industry is a pariah of what is wrong with incumbent use at large: GPS takes up large swatches of spectrum using technology that is pegged by slow to change satellite networks. It is, in my opinion, arrogant and prejudiced. Regardless of what I think, it can be proven that the GPS industry has ignored advances aimed at reducing the spectrum footprint even while providing the benefit of better penetration, faster response, and more accurate position measurements. Among the many potentials for advancement of GPS are coordinated use along with terrestrial communications networks, particularly 3G and LTE networks. The way the GPS industry is disposed to operate tends to push against progress needed to advance both their own field and to also free up part of their lock on GPS and encroachment on surrounding bands of spectrum.

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (1)

From: LindyBill2/7/2012 3:05:20 PM
   of 46530
Amazing Fact of the Day: Just Apple's iPhone Alone is Now Bigger Than All of Microsoft
by Mark J. Perry

From Henry Blodget at Business Insider:

"Apple's iPhone business alone is now bigger than Microsoft. Not Windows. Not Office. Microsoft. Think about that. The iPhone did not exist five years ago. And now it's bigger than a company that, 15 years ago, was dragged into court and threatened with forcible break-up because it had amassed an unassailable and unthinkably profitable monopoly.

The iPhone also appears to be considerably more profitable than Microsoft. In the December quarter, Apple's iPhone business generated $24.4 billion of revenue. Microsoft's whole company, meanwhile, from Windows to Office to servers to XBox, generated $20.9 billion (see chart above).

If we assume that Apple generates the same operating profit margin on its iPhone business that it generates on its overall business--38%--the iPhone business generated about $9.3 billion of profit in the December quarter. All of Microsoft, meanwhile, generated only $8.2 billion."

MP: Let's hope that the Apple iPhone's phenomenal success doesn't trigger any government antitrust investigations, Congressional inquiries into "windfall profits," or legislation calling for a "Reasonable Profits Board" to control Apple's profits.

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read

To: Rob S. who wrote (40474)2/8/2012 1:16:32 AM
From: Frank A. Coluccio
1 Recommendation   of 46530
Thanks, Rob S., for a most interesting analysis.


"The way the GPS industry is disposed to operate tends to push against progress needed to advance both their own field and to also free up part of their lock on GPS and encroachment on surrounding bands of spectrum."

I may quote you, or paraphrase this sentence, in a number of other, similar ICT areas where incumbent interests are shooting both themselves and the industry at large in the foot.


Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read
Previous 10 Next 10 

Copyright © 1995-2018 Knight Sac Media. All rights reserved.Stock quotes are delayed at least 15 minutes - See Terms of Use.