Light Point Holograms – MY FREAKIN IDEA!

Many Bothans Died to Bring You This Working 3D Hologram.


I cannot believe it. I just can’t believe it. And it annoys the heck out of me because there’s nothing I can do to stop it.

Here’s my bitch – once again someone else has brought one of my ideas to life. I am always coming up with ideas and other people are always bringing them to life.

I’m not naive. As a matter of fact, I get mad when Apple sues some third-world company for coming up with technology Apple has only recently released. Apple tends to think that they are the only ones who can come up new, innovative technology. When someone else is found to be working on technology Apple is working on, Apple tells them to stop working on that technology or face the consequences…

So I know that if I have an idea there’s a good chance someone else in the world has had that same idea. It’s possible they could have thought of it before I did, or after I did. It’s also possible they could have actually brought the idea to life already, are working on it now, or will be working on it in the future (so I can bitch about it then). So, I am fully aware that this can happen. It just makes me upset when it does.

Years ago, I thought of a way to make holograms a reality. My idea was to use the air itself as the medium. You would then use some sort of magnetic field or laser system to excite the air or create light particles in the air.

If you follow the link above you will find an article about a hologram system which uses lasers to create plasma out of oxygen or nitrogen molecules in the air or water. It essentially creates points of light in the air. Multiple points let you make shapes. A combination of green, red, and blue lasers allows you to create any colors.

BTW – I know this all sounds stupid. But if I put my ideas out on the Internet, people would steal them. So, I have to wait until someone comes up with one of my ideas to call them out on it.

5 Companies – One Product?

I was reading this article just minutes ago. Actually, I was scrolling down the page looking at the titles throughout the article. (It was a really long and rather old article, btw.) Then, I got to my favorite part: the comments. I find the comments to be more informational than most articles I read. I also find them to be simultaneously frustrating and hilarious. First you get the “professional’s” point of view, and then you get view points from people who actually know what they are talking about (for the most part). These are people who have been using the products for years. They have been in the fox hole. They have taken hits and won battles. The war is far from over, and the fun continues through web-news article comments.

Now, every so often I read a comment I do not like. Why? You would probably guess that I am a conservative know-it-all who thinks I know more than you because I went to Harvard, have two Ph. D’s , and have studied civics for the last 25 years. Well, 25 years ago I was 3. So, no, I have not been studying civics since I was 3 years old. And if you know me you know I did not go to Harvard. (Who would want to anyway?) To top it off, I don’t even know what civics is. Here is the comment, for reference:

“And yet another OS that has mimicked webOS “cards”. How could palm and hp drop the ball so bad.”
J McDouche

The reason I did not like his comment is the fact that pattents and copyrights have all but staggered the development of some pretty cool technology over the last few years. Don’t believe me? I don’t care. And I’m not gonna waste my time explaining it because it’s just too difficult for the average person to understand.

So here’s the lowdown: Apple makes something. Tech ‘r Us makes something that is similar to Apple’s. Apple sues Tech ‘r Us for stealing their intelectual information (because heaven forbid someone else use icons to signify applications). Apple usually wins because they are paying off the courts they have more money than the little companies they pick on. So, this technology which usually isn’t being used in any sort of phenominal way, just sits on Apple’s devices with no further development. This technology does not enjoy the fruits of innovation. Sure, maybe Apple ripped everything off of Palm is the first to put this all together, and we count that as innovation, but let’s be honest: Apple, and companies like them, stiffel innovation by taking “intellectual property” too seriously.

For example: Apple sues HTC, Samsung, and a few other smartphone companies for, among other reasons, arranging icons in columns and rows… W…T…F…?!? Are you kidding me? Now, watching things like this happen how can anyone say Apple is legally and logically protecting property? I saw a cell phone company arrange their icons differently. Besides being confusing, it was utterly disgusting to look at. And I’m not even going to mention how Apple is a big, giant chicken; sueing the cell phone hardware manufacturers who just so happen to be running the Android OS, instead of sueing the developers of the Android OS which supposedly infringes on their intellectual property. (oops, did I mention that?) Why would they do such a thing? Oh ya, because Google is the developer of Android and sueing them could be bad for business, cost a lot of money, and it’s not really certain just how things will turn out. At least Apple is pretty sure they can beat a smaller company like HTC into submission (although, they only won a handfull of the suits they brought towards HTC, Samsung, etc.).

I was thinking about this “intellectual property” nonsense and began to develope my own plan for fixing the world of patents, copyright, and intangible property. I began thinking about my computer class.

Let’s say a teacher from another school visits my computer class. She’s heard good things about my computer lab, the curriculum, my games, the technology I use, and the innovating way I use technology. There’s obviously someone talking me up out there, ’cause I don’t do anything terribly interesting. Even still, this teacher wants to see what’s up. Her school could use some new ideas. So she visits my classroom and sees some contingencies she likes, some projects she thinks her kids would enjoy, and some technology (she actually has) being used in new ways. After she has watched my classes all day, taken her notes, and liked what she saw, she asks if she can borrow some of my ideas…

If, at this point in time, I tell her “no way” unless she wants to pay me for them, her computer classes will continue to be bland, uninteresting, uninformative, and not the least bit educational. Her students will become bored, and tire her into letting them play games on the Internet, when they should be learning about Internet safety instead.

However, if I let her use some of my ideas, it’s possible her class will be come more educational, informative, and fun for her students. They will learn more about technology, be more excited about technology and using it properly. The students may even want to learn more, and play games less. All I would ask for is credit for my ideas and credit for showing her other readily available lessons.

But this would never work with patents and copyright. This would require companies like Apple to allow others to use their techniques and simply give them credit (not payment). You would put certain limitations on this:

  1. Point one: certain items would be considered common sense (such as the representation of apps with icons, and the sorting of apps and files in lists, and columns and rows). Companies would just have to get over it. Once something has permeated the landscape as much as pinch-to-zoom it’s just too common place for a company to assume control of it’s placement in devices. Everything does pinch-to-zoom and similar gestures and if you can figure out how to do it on your device, then go ahead, you don’t owe anyone anything.
  2. This takes us to the second part: The true innovators get the credit for developing the technology or software. Everyone else gets to copy them if they can figure it out for themselves. You can’t tell me Apple and Microsoft have teams which would never come to the same conclusions or create the same technology without ever knowing what the other company is doing. That’s just stupid. Now tell me that HTC, Samsung, Apple, Google, Microsoft, RIM, Nokia, and Palm/HP (who all have separate developer teams) would never end up with similar technologies as each other and that’s just insane. It may be a form of copying, but if I develop a program, and someone else develops a similar program all on their own, who am I to say their hard work should be for nothing. And if this new guy creates a better program than me? That pushes me to innovate. Sueing him because I’m jealous causes his better tech to suffer and fall wayside.
  3. The third point: the true innovators are writers of sci-fi. Apple didn’t develop the iPad, Star Trek developed the iPad. Apple didn’t make a lot of the product you buy. They made a lot of the products you buy shinier. And somehow that means they are innovators in the mobile space? I don’t think so. Just about every technology we have and wish to have in the future is already a real item in sci-fi somewhere. The bad dude from the original Tron movie had screens and a keyboard in his desk. Years later, Microsoft builds the Surface. Microsoft cannot be credited with the concept, but they can be credited with the device they produced, and the software which makes it work.
  4. Last Point: Give credit where credit is due. Even though a company might not be the one to come up with the technology, if they are the first to make it real, then they get credit for doing so. No stealing. If two companies are working on the same tech and one comes out with it first, they get credit. However, if one company shows off their tech in a ridiculous, unfinished form, and another company then releases a finished product, this second company would obviously get the credit for having a useable product first.

Now, I know some people are thinking, “the only way to know who had it first is to show it to someone and have them record the date and time and we already have something like that it’s called the patent office.”

My response: STFU, fool! Patents for physical devices or parts thereof are fine as long as something is to be done about it. Then, if I spend my own time and money making something from scratch that you just so happen to have patented recently, I should be able to go on with my device. Why? I’m not copying you. I did my own research. I did my own work. You’re not telling people what you’re doing so how am I supposed to know? Why should I suffer because you got their first? Everyone knows you got to it first, so why can’t I have a go at it now? You think because you built it and patented it you own the idea forever? Like no one else on the planet could have thought about what you did? You’re the only original thinker on the planet?


If people worked together more, we’d probably have flying cars by now. Or at least cars which run above 50mpg… oh wait, we had those once. I wonder what happened to those?

Honestly, What else can the iPhone possibly do?

I hate Apple. I hate Steve Jobs. I hate the iPhone. Now, that said, I would take an iPhone if someone gave it to me. I already have an Android device (which I also hate to a certain extent) and therefore have a data plan. So, to switch to the iPhone wouldn’t be that big of a deal. And since we’re being honest, I really want a Windows Phone 7 device. It looks so awesome. There’s just one problem…

One problem which I will turn into many problems. This one, solitary problem which I will subdivide is very simple: investment. I have invested time and money into my Android device. I have done my research to find the apps which will work for me. I have tested many, many apps which I thought would work for me (but didn’t). If I moved to a Windows Phone 7 device like I want to, I will lose much of the information I have collected with the Android apps on my current phone. Sure, there are similar apps for WP7, but not the same exact app which I already paid for. So there’s one issue with moving to WP7. A rather big one, but fairly simple to overcome (once I deal with the fact that I have to find and learn how to use a new app… yet again).

The same type of thing happens if you try to move to an iPhone. I had an iPod Touch for a limited time. Honestly, I just wanted to play with it. I am attracted to shiny technology (keep that in mind, ladies). I loaded it with apps: games, productivity, informational, and so on. The one (and possibly only) thing I liked about the platform was that this device in my hand was the only one. Not the only one in the world, but the only set of specifications for developers. Technically, you have the iPhone, iPhone 3G, iPhone 3GS, iPod Touch G1, iPod Touch G2, and currently the iPhone 4 (I’m not counting the iPad because there are specific apps which only run on the iPad, even though they usually have iPhone/Touch equivalents). But even with these different devices, they’re not really different. The OS is simply upgrades of the previous OS. The hardware is pretty much just upgrades of the previous hardware with some hardware additions. If my friend and I both have an iPhone (or Touch of some kind) he can show me a cool app, and I know a.) I can find the same app by the same developer, and b.) I know the app will run on my device with no problems.

Now, if I wanted to go from my Android device to an Apple device it would be similar to the move from Android to WP7 with one exception: as of late, I have found it is possible to find the same Android app on the Apple App Store (and vice versa). That’s very difficult to do with WP7, not counting official commercial apps and apps for companies such as, or So, if I got an iPhone 4 (or maybe the upcoming iPhone “5”) it would probably be easier to move. Not to mention that even if I can’t find the exact same app, there’s a good possibility (with, like, a ga-gillion apps) that I can find something I am very happy with.

Honestly, though, why would I trade the freedom I have with my Android for the finesse of an iPhone? There are many tweaks and changes I can make to my Android phone which Apple just doesn’t allow on their precious iPhone. Any Android phone, these days, has the same specs, apps, and uses as any iPhone. Whether it’s GPS, WiFi, Bluetooth, accelerometers, cameras, RFID, voice recognition, high definition screens, high fidelity audio, 3G/4G/whatever G networks… every phone manufacturer has these same specifications on one of their devices. Is there something missing?

Honestly, I need to get the point of this post: what else can the iPhone possibly do? The answer to that question is “everything and nothing.” The iPhone could do a lot of other things.

  • They could go the route of Motorola and make the iPhone a real desktop replacement. Set the phone in a dock which only props it up at a 10 degree angle. The phone would work as a sort of touch screen and track mouse. Attach a keyboard via Bluetooth. Attached to a monitor and you’d get more data on the screen and could watch movies and tv shows on a nice, bigger screen or home entertainment system.
  • The iPhone could be your one and only credit card (yes, they are working on this). Just swipe your phone and be on your way.
  • The iPhone could employ 3D technologies. If setup properly, you could use the phone not only to take 3D pictures and videos, but also take 3D scans of objects and output those scans to 3D printers or software. You could also share 3D pictures right on the phone with a 3D screen. (some Android phones already do some of this. And there is an app for the current iPhone 4 which will allow you to take a 3D picture that can be manipulated)
  • The iPhone could be setup with microphones to allow a soldier to place the phone in the center of a room; the iPhone would send and collect subsonic audio to map out the structure of the room or building; using GPS to show locations and stitch different rooms or iPhones data together… but I guess this would only be used for the military.
  • That Motorola phone has a fingerprint reader on it… c’mon Apple. You have my iFingerprint. Don’t you want my real fingerprint?

But besides this stuff, most of which is being worked on or is already being done, what else can the iPhone possibly do? Upgrade the cameras? Upgrade the screen? Upgrade the speakers and microphones? Upgrade, upgrade, upgrade…? Really, all there is left to do for phones is upgrade the current technology. Until someone comes up with hologram technology which is cool and useful and can fit into a phone, there’s not much else to do. Maybe you could somehow fit a Kinect into a phone?

So, the next iPhone will probably be a hit success. Yet, with no real differences between the iPhone and other phones (whether it’s Android, HP WebOS, WP7, or Blackberry) how long will Apple be able to attract people with their “innovations?” Steve Jobs touts the iPhone as a user-friendly device, so intuitive that even kindergarteners instantly understand how to use it. That’s not gonna change; and I argue that goes for other touch phones as well, these days. So what is going to change? You think these are being talked about at Cupertino?:

  • iTazer (the new phone for women everywhere)
  • iCredit (a credit card with Apple… might as well give them my soul, then)
  • i3D (I think Apple invented 3D…)
  • iHologram (they’d have to pay royalties to George Lucas)
  • iSonar (I was gonna say iDolphin, but I don’t think people would get it)
  • iBreath-alyzer (you’d find this on every teen’s Christmas list)
  • iDesktopReplacement (doesn’t Apple make desktops…?)
  • iDroid (like a snarky PDA. But, again, they’d have to pay Lucas some big bucks)
  • iPrint (like a Polaroid. What? You don’t know what a Poloroid is?)
  • iMorhper (“there’s no time to call the police! Periodontalasoarus! *SP-DOUCHE WHA WHA WHA!*
  • iDrive (you already race on your phone. Why not just drive your actual car with your phone. Or your plane. Or your tank. Or your Millenium Falcon… oh, ya… Lucas royalties)
  • iMemory (just hold the phone to your brain, copy your current state of mind. Should something depressing happen simply restore your mind from your phone…. “What happened to Uncle Chuck!?! RESTORE!”)

As ingenious as these ideas are, I don’t think Apple will got for any of them. Which begs the question, “what else could the iPhone possibly do?” And that question begs the question, “if the iPhone is only going to upgrade the camera with every new model, why would I buy one?” I guess only iTime will tell.

This post was written after reading this article on eweek:

How are “memories” stored in the brain?

I am watching Through the Wormhole with Morgan Freeman. It’s an interesting show. One of the things scientists are wondering in this episode is how the brain is built, how it stores information, and how we remember the things we see, taste, hear, smell, and feel. Well, I hate to act like a know it all, but… well…

It’s seems very simple to me. We all remember certain events very vividly. Why? Because that event meant something to us. Let’s say a person you love surprises you with cookies after school. You might remember their face at that point in time, the smell of the cookies, the facts like the weather, the season, the month, maybe even the day or hour. You remember the feeling, the sights, the smells, the sound of this special person’s voice. It is a very vivid memory because it meant something to you. It was very personal. It stirred up personal feelings towards someone. So, you remember this event very well.

What about the other day when you walked down the hallway and picked up your shoe… Then walked back to your bedroom, grabbed the other shoe, and put them on… Then had a bowl of cereal before getting into the car and making that 1 hour drive to work… again…? Do you remember everything in a morning like that? I think you think you do, but I don’t think you really do.

How does your brain store information? The same way still frames are stored in an MPEG video file. The information in the frames which stands out is stored as special information. Everything else, such as a blue sky in a 5 minute scene, is stored as the same information and simply used over and over again in each frame of the video. Only the areas of the video which change are stored as separate, special information.

I think this is how the brain stores information. The structure of my house is stored in my brain. It never changes. Many things in my house don’t move. Other things in my house move around, and still others are shuffled about from here to there. The things like my walls are stored in my memory almost permanently. They don’t change, so my brain doesn’t bother “remembering” their position for every point in my day compared to what it was I was doing. My brain has simply memorized where my walls are, and this data is compared to what I may have been doing in a virtual reality sort-of-way.

This is why people who move repeatedly make turns towards their old house. They’re brain has not re-written the information for their house. The location of the old house is almost hard-wired into the brain. This is also how you manage to drive home late at night only to realize you don’t remember driving the whole way…

Anyway, the special things that happen in your life are the things which are stored in memory separately. The normal, everyday things are not really stored in each and every memory, but rather stored away to be pulled out when the brain marks an event as happening in a stored location. And those everyday, un-memorable occurances? YouTube.

Sorry, technically, YouTube videos, which are converted into Flash Video formats, follow the same rules as MPEG videos. The stuff that changes is stored as significant and the stuff that doesn’t change from frame to frame is only stored once. However, the YouTube site, or rather visiting the YouTube site, is similar to short term memory. You watch a YouTube video, it makes you laugh, you might pass it on or show it to other people, but then it fades into oblivion. Same thing with your brain. We have what is called short-term memory and long-term memory. Those short-term memories stick around in your brain like every other memory – until your brain decides it’s not important and breaks it up into little pieces. These pieces are compared to other information already stored in the brain and the pieces which match well enough are considered the same, and thus only stored once.

This compression is combined with a huge database that keeps track of the comression process. For instance, your brain might remember bits and pieces from your 10th birthday. It would correlate these bits and pieces, through the database, with the spacial memory of your house. The brain would do all of this for the sights you see, the smells you smell, the sounds you hear, the surfaces, temperatures, pains, and pleasures you feel, and the foods and drinks you taste.

And its not continuous memories. It’s all stored with compression.

“So does this mean our brain can’t hold as much as we thought it could?”

How should I know. I’m not a scientist.

>Helper Helpington

>i don’t think there is any problem with wanting to help people. It’s good to want to put other people’s needs first. You just have to remember that if you are so worried about others that you are run ragged, what help will you be if you come upon someone who really needs help?