There's a Joke Regarding Glow in the Dark Marital Aids Somewhere In There . . .

Great news from University of Missouri (via Gizmodo via Boing Boing)

Batteries can power anything from small sensors to large systems. While scientists are finding ways to make them smaller but even more powerful, problems can arise when these batteries are much larger and heavier than the devices themselves. University of Missouri researchers are developing a nuclear energy source that is smaller, lighter and more efficient.

“To provide enough power, we need certain methods with high energy density,” said Jae Kwon, assistant professor of electrical and computer engineering at MU. “The radioisotope battery can provide power density that is six orders of magnitude higher than chemical batteries.”

Kwon and his research team have been working on building a small nuclear battery, currently the size and thickness of a penny, intended to power various micro/nanoelectromechanical systems (M/NEMS). Although nuclear batteries can pose concerns, Kwon said they are safe.

The only thing that would have made this story more awesome, was if Raekwon the Chef was involved somehow in developing this along with Jae Kwon the Assistant Professor.

That's Not Painting, That's Tracing . . .

Interesting theory on the technology used by Caravaggio in executing his 'chiaroscuro' painting style.

Relatedly, might explain his 'mad as a hatter' mental state.

Probably True, and Both Exciting and Depressing . . .

To stay sane, any consumer needs to think of digital technology as a subscription rather than a product. In the old days, you could buy a typewriter, television or a camera, and it might well last decades. Computers have been different. Once you buy a PC, you are really signing up to upgrade it on a regular basis. Now digital consumer electronics are the same. Your camera, video disc player, and even your television are now likely to become obsolete in just a few years.

Saul Hansell in NYT from this week. Innovation is exciting, constantly having the stuff you buy get passed-up by newer, shinier, faster, and sexier models can get depressing (and really expensive if you want to stay current).

Building in obselence on a very fast timescale is part of the business model now. Durability doesn't pay the bills or increase your stock prices if you are a tech company.

Cellular service providers have gotten consumers used to the idea of "free" handsets that they 'gift' you with after a commitment of another 2 years of service. Will other consumer goods follow that pattern? Will a tech company gobble up a content provider and start offering "free" HDTVs if you promise to stay with 2 years worth of their premium HD package? Will EA offer to give you a "free" PS3 if you agree to buy 25 "Game of the Month" software items at full price (like the old Columbia House semi-rip-off)? These aren't new ideas in retailing, but the number of devices that are basically disposable seems to have increased exponentially.

It's not a good thing, or a bad thing, it's just a thing.

The Golden Age of Emergency Band Scanning?

From the opinion section in today's LA Times:

The looming shift from analog to digital television signals in February 2009 will open a prime set of frequencies to new uses. Nationally, UHF channels 52 to 69 are being cleared for public safety communications and broadband wireless services. Regionally, significant chunks of unused airwaves could open up between channels, depending on how many stations are broadcasting in the area.

First, why looming? This is something to look forward to, 'looming' suggests dread, not hopeful anticipation.

Second, what's it going to mean for everyone to have multiple devices in their home capable of picking up emergency band communications? Police scanners already exist, but it's a specialized market, but when public safety communication will be used on frequencies already tuneable on millions of consumer devices, does this mean that every old TV tuner becomes a police scanner?

The channels between the channels of the current VHF and UHF channels from 2-51 are the ones being fought over. Digital channels require much less bandwidth, and are less prone to interference, so theoretically the spaces between channels in use should be free to be used by other digital devices once terrestrial TV is purely digital. But so far, lab tests have suggested that even with digital transmission and reception, an unacceptable amount of interference is likely to occur. Microsoft had their 'whitespace' devices rejected by the FCC, but they're claiming the test was fixed (too lazy to find the links, but that's my interpretation of the back and forth between M$ and the FCC over the devices that failed certification recently).

I'm a little surprised this LAT editorial is taking the side of greater consumer freedom. They must envision some sort of liberal pirate radio and video services popping up in that bandwidth fighting the brain control rays being put out by 'the man' on the 'official' channels.

Of course, they may make a 180 turn in a few months and decry the increase use of RF signals in our daily life and claim that exposure to RF may be harmful to humans (as a few folks who believe they suffer from 'electrical sensitivity' already claim)