Technomorality
March 30, 2004 12:26 PM   Subscribe

Technomorality: Are there more examples of this, or are the Japanese just better than us? As the potential of technology increases, isn't it just possible that the world really could become a better place?
posted by ewkpates (27 comments total)
 
Maybe we'll just use technology to better cover the tracks of our ethical wanderings?

The land mine removal device is pretty cool though.

Technology has already made it lots easier to set traps for and capture pedophiles, I think that's helping to make the world a better place.

And, of course, technology has brought about the porn site and more nakedness is almost never a bad thing.
posted by fenriq at 12:39 PM on March 30, 2004


Yes, the Japanese are better than us. They invented some things! This fan makes the world a better place!
posted by jon_kill at 12:50 PM on March 30, 2004


.....with all the 'lies danger threat terrorist corruption' you read.... this kind of thing is really nice to come across.

This reminds me of an article i read on a frictionless train (which usually uses energy gulping electro magnets) that was based on permanent magnets like these. What ever happened to that? Last i heard, they had a functioning prototype.
posted by Tryptophan-5ht at 12:53 PM on March 30, 2004


AYB came from Japan, joy_kill, isn't that enough for you?

Today a fan, tomorrow, a HUGE FAN THAT ALLOWS US TO POPULATE MARS!
posted by ewkpates at 1:13 PM on March 30, 2004


You must be talking about Inductrack: I haven't heard much about it lately, either. Most recent update I could find is from November of last year: they're building bigger prototypes. From the looks of it, though, nobody's going to be GIVING this technology away for the benefit of humanity.
posted by coelecanth at 1:20 PM on March 30, 2004


As the potential for technology increases, the world becomes a potentially more dangerous place.
posted by stbalbach at 2:07 PM on March 30, 2004


Technology is bad.
We should all go back to bringing in the harvest with oxcarts and dying from common cold and superstition at 35.
posted by spazzm at 3:05 PM on March 30, 2004


Oh wait - oxcarts are also a form of technology.
We should all go back to living from berries and digging for roots with our bare hands. And dying from malnutrition and superstition at 25.
posted by spazzm at 3:10 PM on March 30, 2004


As the potential for technology increases, the world becomes a potentially more dangerous place.

Seems that the world has always been a dangerous place, technology or not. Perhaps we should phrase that as "As the potential for technology increases, the world becomes potentially more threatened by human beings."

Yet, technology isn't really the problem, it's the people who develop and implement technology. I know it's that old "guns don't kill people....." adage, but I think it's relevant.

*goes out rooting for roots and berries*
posted by elwoodwiles at 3:37 PM on March 30, 2004


This guy's motor sounds a lot like a perpetual motion machine to my gut, but if it turns out not to be a hoax, it'll be a boon for electric vehicles. Everybody's been working on increasing the capacity of batteries, but few have made fundamental strides in the efficiency of motors.
posted by kindall at 3:49 PM on March 30, 2004


"Yet, technology isn't really the problem, it's the people who develop and implement technology."

The problem isn't inventors and developers - the problem is people who choose to use technology to further their agendas on the behalf of others.

Those people are rarely inventors themselves, our culture's "mad scientist" stereotype notwithstanding.
posted by spazzm at 3:52 PM on March 30, 2004


kindall:
I agree - this seems like an 'energy for free' type of thing.
No matter how one arranges the magnets, there's no way to get an engine to output more energy than it consumes.

But the mine clearing thing still seems cool.
posted by spazzm at 3:56 PM on March 30, 2004


err... make that "at the expense of others." Sorry, people.
posted by spazzm at 3:57 PM on March 30, 2004


The landmine removing excavator isn't unique, though the addition of a magnet is a little more unusual. A flail is a pretty common big device for demining, but they are expensive. They have a similar spinning device, an axle with about foot to two foot long chains which spin into the ground and burst anything in front of them.

Anybody interested in this should definitely check out the Mine action information center and the Journal of Mine Action, which focus on humanitarian demining.

If it's something you're really interested in, people willing to (sensibly) design and test tools are important and needed. Future tool improvements are necessary to make detection and removal faster, safer, and more effective.

Did you know that it takes a team (between 10 and 30 people or so) a year to demine 11 km of road [ref]? Remember, a road is only 1 or 2 cars wide!

So the most common, most effective, and cheapest way to find land mines is still to send people out into the field, in well-marked lanes, and have them use a metal detector. Every beep has to be investigated. So the number of times you dig out a penny or a piece of barbed wire or screw is somewhere around 10 to 1000 times greater than the number of times you actually find a mine (depending on how developed the country is, whether it's urban or rural, etc.). Many more modern mines (including american made ones) are known as "minimum metal mines," and have only a small, sometimes easily missed or even removed, piece of metal.

Once you find something, you have to get down on the ground and poke and dig carefully from behind the location of the signal to find whatever it was. This is very difficult, especially in hard-baked ground (Middle East) and muddy, rainy places (S.E. Asia). Many of the people doing this are paid only $1 a day. Sometimes they are issued visors or other protective equipment, but it's heavy, hot, and often uncomfortable.

Sure, there's a lot of technology out there (water cress, tempest, etc), but the time, money, and materials available in the areas that need this work done most limit their application in the real world.

(Yes, I am designing equipment for humanitarian demining in hard ground)
posted by whatzit at 4:02 PM on March 30, 2004


Ok, I'm not a physicist or anything, but this machine must clearly be a perpetual motion machine by definition. If it puts out more energy than it takes in, then it can use its own output to power itself (or another identical machine) to produce even more power.

For example, the machine in the story had an input of 540mW and an output of 1.75W. So, one motor could produce enough electricity to power 3 more and those 3 could then produce enough power for 9 more motors, which could power 27 more, which could.... well, you get the picture. An initial input of 540mW could produce an infinite amount of energy if enough of these were stringed together.

Please, someone prove me wrong.
posted by PigAlien at 4:40 PM on March 30, 2004


It doesn't claim to put out more energy than it takes in, just that it's a lot more efficient than existing motors.
posted by kindall at 4:52 PM on March 30, 2004


Well, kindall, no motor can put out more energy than it takes in. This motor might be more efficient if it were converting 75% of it's fuel into energy, as opposed to, say, 50%.

However, this article is claiming that 540mW are going in and 1.75W coming out. That is not an improvement in efficiency, that is actually putting out more energy than is put in.
posted by PigAlien at 5:25 PM on March 30, 2004


Oh yeah. I missed that paragraph where they hooked it up to a generator! That's rather credulous reporting.
posted by kindall at 5:32 PM on March 30, 2004


Yeah, isn't it? LOL Well, what's even funnier is how the reporter even mentions his doubts, but then just rolls with what the inventor tells him about being more efficient and 'harnessing the 4 fundamental forces.'!
posted by PigAlien at 5:36 PM on March 30, 2004


The problem isn't inventors and developers - the problem is people who choose to use technology to further their agendas on the behalf of others.

Fair enough.
posted by elwoodwiles at 6:23 PM on March 30, 2004


I love how the article mentions that the Japanese patent office was "forced to recant" their denial of a patent - on the basis that the invention could not possibly work as described - because the U.S. patent office sought fit to go ahead and grant patent protection.

Sigh. If I had a nickel for each and every hokum free energy machine, magnetic medical device, crystal gizmo, etc. that the U.S. patent office has rubber stamped without the slightest concern for whether the invention in question works (or is even theoretically possible) then I would have one honking big jar of nickels.

The patent office notes, correctly, that it is not their mandate to test the inventions filed with them.... but seeing as how many people out there seem to feel that having had your daffy duck device granted a patent is proof that it can really do what you claim, I sure would like to see some sort of requirement of feasibility (or even just possibility!) added to the requirements of a patent.
posted by John Smallberries at 6:48 PM on March 30, 2004


IANAP, but I could believe that the energy coming out of the generator = the energy going in + energy stored in the permanent magnets, which would have to become demagnetized as a result. But I'm not necessarily convinced.
posted by Eamon at 9:46 PM on March 30, 2004


are the Japanese just better than us?

Well, it must be said that the Japanese are much better at rape and dismemberment porn than anyone else.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 12:30 AM on March 31, 2004


Well, stavros, maybe you wouldn't be as snarky and jealous if you invented a perpetual motion machine. Envy much?
posted by ewkpates at 5:56 AM on March 31, 2004


Please come into my study. I have many things to show you which may pique your interest, friend.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 5:58 AM on March 31, 2004


Uhh, it isn't like lithographs or prints or something, is it?
posted by ewkpates at 6:37 AM on March 31, 2004


*chuckles evilly*
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 7:08 AM on March 31, 2004


« Older somebody had to post it!   |   Incredible, unstoppable titan of terror! Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments