Jump to content

Technology Will Save The World


Parsad

Recommended Posts

A mouthwash that selectively kills only the cavity-causing bacteria -- leaves the other bacteria alone:

 

http://www.dentistry.ucla.edu/news/new-mouthwash-targeting-harmful-bacteria-may-render-tooth-decay-a-thing-of-the-past

 

 

Dental caries, commonly known as tooth decay or cavities, is one of the most common and costly infectious diseases in the United States, affecting more than 50 percent of children and the vast majority of adults aged 18 and older. Americans spend more than $70 billion each year on dental services, with the majority of that amount going toward the treatment of dental caries.

 

Hopefully P&G will not buy the patents...

 

BeerBaron

 

 

I don't get it?  Why would it be bad if P&G bought the patents?  They certainly have the production, distribution and marketing capacity to profitably deliver such a product to consumers....

 

Well, it does threaten the cavity-fighting toothpaste market.

 

And a mouthwash that is effective for 4 days after a single rinse might threaten the twice-a-day rinse market.

 

People buy fancy toothbrushes that vibrate or have special "reach" capability.

 

They could be tempted to just buy the patent and never roll out a product.

 

I'm not sure that people would stop using Crest or Scope just because this product kills the worst bacteria.  There's nothing quite as nice as brushing your teeth in the morning.

 

More likely that they'd roll out the product and price it at a point where they'd earn equivalent or higher profits from each user (hey, I'd consider paying $100/year to beat the tooth decay problem).  My suspicion is that insurance policies would probably provide coverage for the initial years, as it would be a no-brainer to reduce their costs.

 

After the patent expires (and there would probably be less than 15 years to exploit it), then every Tom, Dick and Harry could probably produce the stuff at a price competitive with current mouthwashes.  Eventually P&G would have to drop their prices in preparation for patent expiration, but it could be a great run for the first 10 years.

There's nothing quite as nice as brushing your teeth in the morning.  Stubble Jumper you may want to rethink  -retract the previous statement.  LOL

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 63
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Not really related to mouthwash, but these things will change billions of lives:

 

 

http://www.steripen.com/

 

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LifeStraw

 

especially the life straw.  No power required.

 

And composting toilets while were at it. 

 

 

 

And the humble solar panel.  I recently met a Navajo fellow who has lived off the grid his entire life.  The Nation bought them some solar panels a few years ago and they now have electicity. 

 

Add a solar panel with rechargeable batteries and you can now use UV to treat your water.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Recently, I was invited to sit in on Tim McElvaine's investor day in Vancouver. Tim briefily discussed the technology of 3D-Printing and the implications that could have to manufacturers. China, really seems under invested in technology because labour has always been so cheap.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3D_printing

 

http://blip.tv/makerbot/the-colbert-report-featuring-bre-pettis-ceo-of-makerbot-june-8-2011-5262194.

 

This is amazing.

KFRCanuk, thanks for posting the link.

 

You might like this one from TED.com:

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Recently, I was invited to sit in on Tim McElvaine's investor day in Vancouver. Tim briefily discussed the technology of 3D-Printing and the implications that could have to manufacturers. China, really seems under invested in technology because labour has always been so cheap.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3D_printing

 

http://blip.tv/makerbot/the-colbert-report-featuring-bre-pettis-ceo-of-makerbot-june-8-2011-5262194.

 

This is amazing.

KFRCanuk, thanks for posting the link.

 

You might like this one from TED.com:

 

 

3D Printing raw consumables needs to come down big time. My guess is that they'll try doing the old give the printer, sell the cartridges techniques. The problem is that, while 2D printing is somewhat expensive, it's still a ridiculously small amount of my budget so I don't restrain from using my 2D printer. On the other hand printing a 3D part is quite expensive and people might not want to spend 30$ of consumables to print shoes that are lower quality then retail.

 

BeerBaron

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I've been keeping an eye on 3D printing as well, the stuff that has been coming out this past year is truly impressive.

 

 

Oh, and this is how Technology Will Save the World:

 

1. Advance in technology exponentially increases efficiency.

2. Everyone becomes unemployed, no one is required to work.

3. People are so bored from reality shows they throw themselves into the oceans.

4. No more civilization. "The World" is saved.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Criminals are finding them useful:

 

http://www.pcworld.com/article/241605/criminals_find_new_uses_for_3d_printing.html

 

In response, another Thingiverse user posted a model for printing a part called the lower receiver for the AR-15.

 

If, like me, you're not very knowledgeable about guns, that may not sound like much; but from a legal perspective, the lower receiver is actually a pretty interesting gun part. If you wanted to buy the parts for an AR-15, you could purchase at gun shows or from mail-order catalogs--without any sort of record--every part of the rifle except the lower receiver. By printing out the lower receiver of an AR-15 on a 3D printer, it's possible to complete construction a fully functional, unregistered AR-15.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Criminals are finding them useful:

http://www.pcworld.com/article/241605/criminals_find_new_uses_for_3d_printing.html

In response, another Thingiverse user posted a model for printing a part called the lower receiver for the AR-15.

If, like me, you're not very knowledgeable about guns, that may not sound like much; but from a legal perspective, the lower receiver is actually a pretty interesting gun part. If you wanted to buy the parts for an AR-15, you could purchase at gun shows or from mail-order catalogs--without any sort of record--every part of the rifle except the lower receiver. By printing out the lower receiver of an AR-15 on a 3D printer, it's possible to complete construction a fully functional, unregistered AR-15.

 

Criminals find baseball bats and tire-irons useful too.

 

OMG a gun could exist without being registered in a government database!  Oh the humanity! Someone need to do something!  Where is the government to save us!

 

But don't worry by the time the scare stories start hitting the press like this it is a sure bet that Chuck Schumer is already hard at work preparing legislation to squash the revolution in home/local/custom manufacturing before it even gets off the ground.  The first scary thing that happens with something containing a custom made printed part, the legislation will be ready and introduced.

 

But remember: When 3D Printers are outlawed only outlaws will have 3D Printers.

 

The sad part though is that they will not outlaw them, just regulate the usefulness and utility out of them, or just make them so expensive to buy and/or use that they remain a curiosity used only by hobbyists. And it will all be sold to the public as "common sense regulations and protections".

 

--Eric

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Yes amazing technology in the hands of governments is a scary thing. 

What also scares me a little is the coming of artificial life forms.  I'm not saying it should be regulated in any way (what the government does with tech like this intentionally is far more scary than what Venter might do unintentionally), but you can just see something like this having unintended consequences even with the best of intentions.

 

Craig Venter’s Bugs Might Save the World

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Just read this article today in Wired:

 

How U.S. will track Afghanistan long after they've left

http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2012/05/spy-rock/

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

NASA retirees save the world:

 

"However, the cost of the Tri-Polar Lead Cobalt Battery II is $75 per kilowatt-hour (kWh) vs. $360-$450/kWh for a Lithium-Ion Battery. A Lithium-Ion Battery weighing 450-pounds might cost $25,000, while a Tri-Polar Lead Cobalt Battery II of the same weight would cost $5,200 and take an electric car the same number of miles on a charge."

 

If the cycle length is 1500x ie 600,000 miles for a car as suggestted this is revolutionary.

 

http://www.batterypoweronline.com/images/PDFs_articles_whitepaper_appros/Appllo.pdf

 

http://www.apolloenergysystems.com/

 

The factory is supposedly being built in Boise Idaho. Any locals who can provide updates would be greatly appreciated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...