An interesting take on Google vs Apple. I would have loved to hear at least something about Alexa. I’m a hardcore Apple and Amazon user (plenty of Google too). I see myself staying imperfectly hybrid for awhile.
(Edit:) the observation of post-screen being a way to be connected but not distracted was a real revelation. Would love that....
When it comes to Bitcoin, I think of Linux as an analogy. When it first emerged, many people questioned it's basic premise: "why is there a new operating system? Everyone uses Windows, or Mac". People didn't know or understand the idea of open source: "Doesn't that just mean people will find bugs and ways to hack it?" "Without a company behind it, how do I know I can trust it in the long term?"
At first it's usability sucked. It took forever to get it up and running. It was confusing and hard to learn.
It had a small, rabid fan base who kept obsessing about desktop adoption rates and wondering when it would take over.
That is all kind of the same vibe as Bitcoin. But just as Linux showed, you don't need a monolithic, centralized entity to back it, it can start slowly and improve over time.
"linux on the desktop" basically failed (cue all the linux desktop heads on HH....!) but it completely took over the whole back end of the Internet. Every server runs it. And it then morphed and took over almost all mobile/tablet/smartTV/etc/etc devices. I think something similar could easily happen with Bitcoin. It has securely held Billions of USD equivalents in value for years. The software continues to evolve. Its core technology has morphed into many other formats. And like Linux on the Desktop, maybe the early idea of digital cash will change into another idea, like a settlement layer. who knows?
But I remain pretty optimistic about it.
> When it comes to Bitcoin, I think of Linux as an analogy.
I've read Bitcoin is like email, Bitcoin is like TCP/IP, Bitcoin is like the entire Internet. Now I've read Bitcoin is like Linux.
At one time few people had heard of (random thing from thin air) New Kids On The Block.
Some didn't understand the new fangled (boy band) concept, some thought existing bands/music were good enough, some thought they'll take over the world, and some just thought they could get rich off it all before it collapsed.
Bitcoin is something that happened to catch on (entirely, by design, due to profit motive), which is why it's superficially similar to other things that happened to catch on. (Even things that catch on because they're actually useful, and not just a potential route to get rich quick without any effort.)
Once upon a time Denmark, like Bitcoin, didn't exist.
Danes (like Bitcoiners) were a strange bunch, famed and feared for their involvement in crime to make money. Slowly their influence started to spread, however, despite - but in some ways because of - their criminal behaviour.
Many legends were created... Ragnar Lothbrok, Ivar the Boneless, Magical Tux and Free Ross.
Then along came Christianity[1] (Coinbase/Winklevii) which provided more legitimacy with other, less beardy, groups. The true believers didn't like this, of course, but most people recognised the social and economic benefits of selling out everything they were supposedly all about.
The similarities end there, sadly, because today Bitcoin consumes even more power than Denmark. A fact which is completely batshit insane, but since Bitcoin hype and hysteria is even more insane, and increasing with every $1000 price pump, nobody cares.
Serious question (which will go largely unanswered in favour of turning this text white) for people who seriously think Bitcoin ranks in importance/significance with email/Internet/Linux/Denmark:
Now in its tenth year[2], what has Bitcoin actually achieved, other than a sickening energy waste and crazy price fluctuations and speculation?
That's one of the more convincing arguments I've seen.
I still hold though that Bitcoin was an early prototype and its value will sooner or later approach zero.
I do however think that blockchains and cryptocurrencies are a good idea and here to stay.
To build on your example:
Linux is here to stay but a number of the old companies, distros and packages are either gone or on life support and newer companies, distros and packages are making our wishes reality.
I can't help but agree with this. People can only mine so many coins. Users will prefer blockchains which have lower fees and transaction times, so miners will give priority to those coins. At some point the selling point of Bitcoin will become less and less true. I have rewatched several promotional videos for Bitcoin pre-2015, and most of their claims are false as of late 2017.
> When it first emerged, many people questioned it's (sic) basic premise
As they did Charles Ponzi's international reply coupons.
> That is all kind of the same vibe as Bitcoin
You mean the creator(s) who went to great lengths to hide their identities (that's reassuring), or do you mean the various ripoff artists, fraudsters, imprisoned scammers etc.?
> It has securely held Billions of USD equivalents in value for years.
So did tech stocks in 1999...so did subprime mortgages in 2007...
Analogy is good. It does not however tell us that it will be the case, especially if you look at the development community around Bitcoin. While Ethereum, serious innovative stuff is happening but is not being aggresively marketed for good reasons.
Cryptokitties is an important step. It's helping to normalise the discussion around crypto, showcasing a different example of value exchange based on it, and making people comfortable with that style of transaction.
It's like Snapchat's dog-face filter is the normalising step for AR, you need the small, novel things to move the needle.
It is worth noting that not all crops absorb toxic metals in the soil, and some crops/plants sequester certain metals extremely well - (Kale/Thorium, Garlic/Selenium). Possibly we could use certain crops to ameliorate certain metal toxins.
This is such a fascinating (and disturbing) situation. And quite mysterious. High frequency ultrasound is used routinely in medicine and has never been shown to change brain tissue. Infrasound has some effect on tissue but its probably overstated. (the infamous 'brown note' [1]. Other sonic weapons rely on volume/amplitude. None of this seems to be the case here.
Another really interesting point is the description of the hyper localized nature of the sound -- present in one part of the room and not another. Its really hard to localize a sound signal, as anyone who has worked with parabolic speakers can attest. Yes, there can be focal points, but the sound definitely drifts out to the surrounding areas to a significant degree.
One example of hyperlocalized sound perception is Lamont Young's 'Dream House' installation in NYC [2] Although not captured in video documentation, there are distinct and significant microtonal shifts that are easily perceptible as you move through the space caused by standing waves produced through the interaction of the tone generators and the architecture. But this happens within the context of a loud drone that fills the whole room. Not at all what is described by the diplomats and family members.
I hope they can get to the bottom of this and I hope that more information is made public.
If this is true there's a way we can block the effects...
> In 1962, Allan H. Frey discovered that the microwave auditory effect, i.e., the reception of the induced sounds by radio-frequency electromagnetic signals heard as clicks and buzzes, can be blocked by a patch of wire mesh (rather than foil) placed above the temporal lobe.
White matter is the deep part of the brain. Microwaves wouldn't penetrate more than a couple cm.
Personally I think something much more benign is probably the answer. Maybe someone introduced drugs into their food/water? Sometimes a noise is just a noise.
I don't know, if this is some kind of sophisticated multiple-beam system using constructive interference (https://xkcd.com/1922/), it might have more penetrative ability than you'd assume.
Hey rootw0rm, all of your comments are autodead. Not sure what you did to deserve it, but this comment is additive here. Contact the admin to have rights restored.
There is an actual recording of these sounds. Microwaves inducing sounds into a humans perception and at the same time inducing it in recording equipment does not seem plausible.
There is also an easy way to test whether the sound is actual sound conducted in air or the effect of microwave exposure: ear plugs.
If its a high frequency wave, then you would "hear" it with the skin and other tissue on your head rather than your actual ears. Earplugs wouldnt really help.
How it works: you can hear a high frequency wave if its modulated at audible frequency. If it's switched on and off at a relatively low frequency, you can sense the presence and absence of the high-frequency vibrations. Those waves are poorly absorbed from the air, but once they make it into the body they are transmitted much more easily by tissues besides bone. So your ears are not much better than the rest of your skin, which acts like a funnel for sound, diverting it to your cochlea.
There's an actual recording of signals inducted in wires - either from soundwaves moving a magnet in a field (sound picked up by a mic), or inducted by in the wires by electromagnetic radiation, surely?
I agree it might be unlikely that one signal might induce sound in a human that sounds like the sound a recorder might record - but I don't know. I just know that it's trivial for radiation to fool sound equipment (eg: cell phone signal too close to a speaker/mic/amplifier).
However, if this is a sophisticated weapon, there might be two signals: high power that target humans, lower power that target recording equipment?
Exactly what I was thinking of too. The company that created MEDUSA (WaveBand Corp) was awarded a DoD grant in 2005 for a 3m^2 "Millimeter Wave Profiling Deployable Dosimeter".
But generating that much energy requires a huge piece of equipment. For example, the unit used for the ablative technique you linked to is quite large and works only at very short distances.
Ultrasonic waves are attenuated at a rate of 3-180 dB/m[1] (100-1000 kHz waves). So at 10 m a 150 kHz wave will have decreased in amplitude by over 300x. There's no amount of transmitters that can make up for the attenuation at high frequencies. It's not even possible for devices operating above a couple hundred kHz or farther than 10-20 m. A 500 kHz wave will decrease 200 dB over 5 meters, taking it from a shockwave (ie the pressure between pulses is vacuum) to undetectable. You'd need a transmitter strong enough to disintegrate organic material[2] but even the best detectors on earth won't hear it from across a road.
That makes more sense to me, but still, the energy requirements would be huge. Given Cuba's electricity infrastructure (and probably even without that) I think you would be looking at 3 or more big pieces of equipment that require very large, very heavy, batteries. It seems like that would have been very conspicuous.
Also, reminds me of the MacGyver (original) episode "Soft Touch"- where a Columbian drug cartel tortures a federal agent in a garage using high-decibel noise.
Can something activate the perception of the sound in the brain, maybe a high intensity ultrasound or another frequency that with enough intensity would activate the hairs in the inner ear or the nerve signals. For something to cause brain damage through the skin and skull bone it would have to be pretty intense I would imagine...
Yes, microwave energy can do pretty much exactly what you're saying, and perhaps other forms of radiation could directly activate nerves as well. It's also possible that if the brain damage includes auditory processing then it could be phantom sounds. It's too many options, too little evidence, but microwaves seem like a good culprit. It doesn't seem too far-fetched that such a system could induce something like a "recording" as well, or that recording could be coincidental.
If they had devices in the embassy which required maybe intersecting "beams" of microwaves to power up and transmit, and something went wrong...
Back in 2012/2013 there was something called "Mt Gox codes". It was a USD transfer mechanism that was supported by Gox, btc-e, early bitfinex and others.
You could magically and instantly get a USD balance transferred from one exchange to the other. It was pretty crazy to see in operation as funds would instantly flow from Japan to Hong Kong to Russia/Bulgaria/wherever-btcE-was.
It was shut down by US authorities sometime in the Spring of 2013 as I recall. Tether is playing a similar inter-exchange roll today. At least now there is some kind of public ledger, but that may not be saying much.
