How Small Can It Get?

Quote "But there is indeed more. The nanotube can also function as a transmitter. Theoretically, thousands of nanoradios distributed through the air or in the bloodstream could send back signals about air quality or the state of a patient's cells, Zettl said."

I wonder whether the HMO will be willing to pay for the stroke caused when one of their batteries clogs an artery somewhere ;-)

Yet another absurd nanotube "breakthrough." There have been thousands of them so far, with 0.0% becoming useful.

The original SF Chronicle print article, in the Business section, was hilarious. There were three pictures: a tiny "picture" of a nanotube (a little hairlike line), a big artsyfartsy collage featuring a 1950's tube radio, and an even bigger picture of Eric Clapton's wedding. I am not joking. It's no wonder that newspaper circulation keeps falling, and that the Chron recently had a big layoff.

Grrrrr.

John

Prosper Magazine in Sacramento is closing its doors in December. IIRC all 18 employees will have to look for new jobs.

in other words, how to control millions of people by spiking their beverage with the nano-receivers

and then drowning them with cult specific information.....

oooops, they already doing that with pres bush's crafted press releases ;-))

Why can't these people understand that their customer base is people who *read*, and insulting their intelligence is the best way to drive them off?

Oh, wait, I know why: it's because they're stupid.

John

Other than our daily paper, a weekly German one to keep up that language, an aircraft magazine and some IEEE journals we have no subscriptions anymore. There is just too much fluff out there.

But I think what's really killing them is the Internet. And if the TV stations don't watch it there may be some pink slips needed if places like YouTube siphon off their viewership. IMHO they've got until early

"Nano" and "President Bush" all in the same sentence. You don't exactly need a press release to connect those two...

-mpm

I agree. Mass Media tends to gravitate to the sixth-grade level. Cable & Satellite are killing them. Over the air TV is expensive, and actual viewership via direct broadcast generally hovers about 15%. Satellite, and to a lesser extent cable - especially systems that insert their own advertising during staion breaks - dilute revenues and localism. Newspapers are not much better.

-mpm

Well, the Dictatorship will kill TV as we know it anyway...

Hey, I'd vote for that. TV couldn't be much worse.

John

Innumeracy--they've confused 'least common denominator' with 'greatest profit multiplier.'

Cheers, James Arthur

Kind of ironic, given that "least common denominator" is itself a confusion of "least common multiple" with "greatest common denominator".

Yes, the substitution's a fallacy on three levels: literally, figuratively, and mathematically.

(Sorry if you didn't find it punny.)

James Arthur (ducking for cover...)