121–130 of 147 posts
Whenever they claim that something will revolutionize everything, it ends up in disappointment. The things that actually do revolutionize everything are usually pooh-poohed at the beginning ("Another search engine?")
Remember when Dean Kamen claimed that the Segway would change the way we built cities? Most hilarious product launch ever.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In my mind, especially because of this: > [Neil McClelland] said soon almost every product you purchase will be coated with liquid glass. Because such things are probably good for you, right?
Silica is one of the most abundant oxides in the earths crust. Our bodies have no problem dealing with it.
If everything is sterile, how will our immune systems get any practice?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Society's track record is pretty good, then. Deaths attributable to asbestos are extremely rare in the scheme of things. Sensational headlines and ambulance chasing lawyers fool our primitive brain's broken probabilistic reasoning circuitry into making bad risk assessments. Given the overwhelming improvement in health and lifespan due to new material development and widespread use, I'd say we've been consistently mak…
Then take PCB's, or mercury and other hvy metal poisoning. Or radium (maybe a different radioactive) they use to paint on clock/watches to make them glow in the dark.
You're thinking of tritium:
The lack of understanding about possible cancerous effects of nano materials worries me, especially with stuff like this and "nanocosmetic" materials. I'd just hate to find out 20 years down the road that all of our miracle materials were slowly killing us.
The lack of understanding about possible cancerous effects of wifi worries me, especially with stuff like this and "cellular" phones. The lack of understanding about possible cancerous effects of CRT screens worries me, especially with stuff like this and "digital" displays. The lack of understanding about possible cancerous effects of GMO food worries me... The lack of understanding about possible cancerous effects…
http://www.bonkersinstitute.org/medshow/bayerheroin1901.html
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There already are portable fuel cells, you still have to get the Hydrogen somewhere. Now if the Orbo worked, that'd be something different. As for a hoverboard - sure it's technically more interesting than a Segway, but would it truly revolutionize anything?
> As for a hoverboard - sure it's technically more interesting > than a Segway, but would it truly revolutionize anything It would for the cast of Back to the Future on Ice. ;-) Seriously though, I think that the technology behind a hoverboard would probably have far more implications than the technology behind the Segway. The product itself might not revolutionize much, but the technology behind it would.
Likely why the revolution has not arrived.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
First off, radio waves have been pervasively bombarding us across a wide spectrum for nearly a century. Radiation and it's effects are well understood and quantified with fields devoted explicitly to the research of it's effects on humans. Animals have been continuously eating food food that's mutated since animals have been mutating. People have not been smearing engineered nanoparticles over their face and putting…
No, humans have been exposed to nanoparticles ever since the invention of fire - combustion of most solid materials generates nanoparticles. Humans have been engineering nanoparticles since the invention of Lustre (a type of pottery). The only novelty with contemporary use of nanoparticles is that we can now create a uniform mix of them - until recently we could only find nanoparticles mixed with larger particles. Yo…