IMO controls are genuinely hard in AVE/VR studies. There isn't an obvious "inert" placebo, no light/sound removes immersion, random flashes or audio still affect arousal, and even "wrong" frequencies can entrain.
VR-only controls help, but don't isolate sensory stimulation. That's why many early AVE studies use pre/post designs and treat results as exploratory rather than definitive.
As for binaural beats and isochronic tones, it's all about using the right frequencies, how you transition between them, how you combine tones or beats with other music or sounds, the carrier frequency, how you synchronize lights with the tones or beats, and so on.
Lithium-sulfur batteries look like the most possible candidate as the next incremental evolution of the lithium ion batteries.
Lithium metal... not so much.
But I really hope for revolution in this space, rather than incremental changes. This will boost and give wings to so many other inventions.
Lithium-sulfur only works hot. It may be a great option for huge batteries connected to the power grid, but plugging a 200°C inflammable battery to your laptop might not increase its safety.
You must be talking about the flow version of lithium-sulfur. The ones with (presumably) graphite and cobalt oxide electrodes are going into e-scooters in China now [0]. However, they are yet far from the theoretical 2x in volumetric density of lithium-ion.
For a very good survey on the state of the art in lithium-sulfur look up this recent study [1].
> If you have a lot of relations in your data don't use mongo, it's just hype. You will end up with collections without relations and then do joins in your code instead of having db do it for you.
So... you are not against MongoDB but against NoSQL in general? I've used MongoDB and I've never ended up with lots of joins in my code. But I guess it all depends on the use case and how you've structured your data.
Document databases are not a silver bullet.
What's interesting about Xamarin is that they are very local about OSS (Miguel) but what they did was not very "open sourcey" - obtaining a perpetual license for Mono and this way making sure that no one else can put Mono on Android / iOS. Ever.
And then charging 1000$ annually per developer, per platform.
On the other hand they've made something that developers love (from what I've heard, I've never used Xamarin's stuff personally) so they deserve the credits.
Someone should make a browser that blocks "Everybody can earn xxx$+ daily... You can earn from ..." spam comments. I think I've seen those mostly through the FB comments plugin.
Obviously FB can't / doesn't want to fix that.
Even with the blood sample "shortcoming", it will be huge if it keeps to its promise.
But I learned not to get excited by new medical inventions before a few years pass, before it's FDA approved, before there are enough studies that prove it really does what it says it does, etc.
Cool video. A woman writing some formulas, nano technology, DNA sequences, etc. All cool stuff.
> They're real, like, but not really real, you know what I mean.
You mean.. the real reality?
The reality that can't be easily explained through observation and empirical evidence? The reality that can't be perceived through our basic physical senses? The reality where causation and correlation don't mean a thing?
If you mean that reality... there's no such thing, and even if there is, there's no point in talking about it, it's way beyond our reach.
If you mean the reality in which we've done most of the division and classification work very poorly due to lack of data... I know what you mean.
> there's no point in talking about it, it's way beyond our reach
All of humanity's scientific progress has been a step-by-step widening of the circle of our knowledge into that vast universe of the unknown. There is certainly a point in acknowledging it, acknowledging its vastness in comparison to what we actually know, and looking for the next tiny pebble we can chip out of that wall of ignorance.
All of humanity's scientific progress has been built gradually upon principles, that have been the same for ages. Start experimenting with the fundamentals and you start wandering in a sea of abstractness - holographic universe, multiverse, one-electron universe... you name it. Theories that you can either prove or disprove and theories that bring no progress.
> Theories that you can either prove or disprove and theories that bring no progress.
Of course you can "prove"/"disprove" them, otherwise they wouldn't be discussed by scientists but by philosophers or theologians. For theories to be different, there must be an experiment that in principle could be done, for which each of them predicts different result. If we get around doing that expriment, we'll learn which theory is the right model.
This is an universal principle of science and applies at every level - both fundamentals and macro/practical.
VR-only controls help, but don't isolate sensory stimulation. That's why many early AVE studies use pre/post designs and treat results as exploratory rather than definitive.