Recag/C4_4 · Datasets at Hugging Face

text stringlengths 12 27.8k
I'm playing around with a mixing hotend. Uses cyan, magenta, and yellow filaments to make process color plastic. After I finish my experimentation (Bwahahahah!), I may try turning a four color mix head from brass, since black rarely looks good from CMY.
Take that new remake of the airship.
Now add drones to drop and deliver.
I forget when there was an invention to allow bi-planes take off from airships, or if they could also be retrieved... so that's not new.
This shouldn't get a patent because its so simple.
In terms of implementation... never will happen.
FAA will not allow airships to fly low enough or drones high enough to meet.
Yup - the US had a couple of aircraft launching/retrieving airships at least (Macon?) I think the requirement for a laundry might have been a weight problem.
It shouldn't get a patent because it is obvious this is an idea and not a physical object.
It should have been rejected immediately as it so obviously breaks the laws of physics.
"they can navigate horizontally toward a user specified delivery location using little to no power, other than to stabilize the UAV and/or guide the direction of descent," said the patent."
Really? It can fly horizontally using NO power? What if it's windy? What if air itself has the property of not being frictionless (like it does). OK so they used the word "navigate" rather than "fly" so it's ambiguous (which should also be an instant rejection) but even taking account of the exceptions described it would still require power for other things.
Personhally I think this was filed just to generate some news stories and get some very cheap publicity in the media (and that has obviously worked then....). The idea is obviously stupid for lots of reasons. But am I too late to file a patent for gaining free publicity by filing a ridiculous patent that may sound vaguely plausible to some of the more technically and scientifically challenged people out there?
"Really? It can fly horizontally using NO power?"
They said using "little to no power", not "No power". That is entirely feasible given the height the drone would be descending, they are clearly stating that the horizontal component of the journey would not significantly contribute to the power consumption, all the energy from that would be contributed by the very thing you were suggesting they'd forgotten, the air resistance generated by the descent (i.e. they'd effectively glide horizontally).
Unfortunately you focused on one of the things that is pretty solid and achievable. What I find more curious is how, once the drone has descended 45K feet and delievered its package, does it get back up there? A quick google suggests that the most people have managed to fly a drone to is about 11K feet, and it then needs some way of docking. Alternatively they might be intending to then fly the drones off to some collection point to then be re-installed when the plane lands, but at that point you have to wonder if that's a cost effective solution.
You're overlooking the obvious flaw: the descent would need to be controlled and hence would require power - given we are talking about controlling the descent of several kilo's the power needs are potentially significant. But then I suggest, designing and building a 'drone' that is capable of carrying a payload of a couple of kilo's and a controlled descent from 45,000ft will in itself involve independently several patentable inventions - just as the helicopter, sewing machine and mobile phones aren't the results of a single patentable invention.
'method' doesn't have to have any basis in reality.
Err - you know that gliders are unpowered, right?
Err ... no they are not. A glider (aka sailplane) has a human being controlling the systems. Human beings like any other control system require energy to function.
Gliders are not completely un-powered. They have human powered control surface actuators. Take the human out of them and you need some sort of powered actuators to do the function.
The power needs would indeed be significant for calculations, but my point (and I think theirs) was that the horizontal component of the travel would not add to these costs. If you're calculating a way down, you're making these decisions. Whether that's a direct drop, or a "glide" is irrelevant to the calculation costs. The glide itself is unpowered.
At 45000 feet this object will contain a lot of potential energy and very little kinetic energy. As it drops, most of that potential energy gets converted into kinetic. Even commercial jets use a ram air turbine for emergency instrumentation power in the event of fuel exhaustion or other engine failures. Flight calculations are relatively modest unless you start trying to get into weather modeling or something. We are talking iPhone battery levels of power.
Actually, come to think of it, maybe if they use a note 7 battery, they weeks then have a good rocket to launch the drone back to the mothership.
Happens all the time during parasailing.... Totally unpowered flight. Also happens during skydiving.
"FAA will not allow airships to fly low enough or drones high enough to meet."
Congestion will also be a problem around airports. A stray drone that malfunctions and flies into the path of an airliner that is landing or taking off could have some, shall we say, interesting results.
A stray drone that malfunctions and flies into the path of an airliner that is landing or taking off could have some, shall we say, interesting results.
It doesn't even need to do that. A stray drone that appears to be heading towards controlled airspace without clearance is enough to trigger the re-routing of many aircraft - with each diversion tending to cause additional diversions in order to maintain separation. It's a mess.
Can't find it on the web at the mo - I'll post a link if/when I do.
"This is basically getting first-strike capability, isn't it?"
Will it deliver electric sheep and mood organs to the urban conapts?
"A new life awaits you in the off-world colonies! ... A chance to begin again in a golden land of opportunity and adventure℠!! Buy a one-way ticket on an Amazon Blue Origin® Mayflower™ vessel today!"
Re: Will it deliver electric sheep and mood organs to the urban conapts?
"Buy a one-way ticket on an Amazon Blue Origin® Mayflower™ vessel today!"
...and buy NOW! The price will increase in line with the nearness of the expected date of the arrival of the planet eating STAAAAAR GOAAAAAAAAT!!!!
So, how do the drones get back to the mothership? They're not likely to be able to do a 45k vertical assent. Does the mothership have to land to get another droneload or do they stuff all the used drones into a big bucket and send it up under a balloon?
Two swallows will carry them back in pairs with string held under the dorsal guiding feathers!
African or European? Or does it depend on the weight of your order?
Hmm, just wondering about the mass of the drone with payload, and its mass after making its delivery. Its range will be greater after the delivery, but by how much I haven't the foggiest. It might be that for some items - an SD card, for example - the weight difference will be negligible.
Are you suggesting that they're planning to deliver migratory coconuts?
I suspect that that are planning to use paper airplanes, perhaps with "smart ink" for guidance?
Just very, very, very long ones!
I did wonder about that. If the drones can only be used once due to inability to reach 45000 ft, where do they land? Do they park a container nearby for them to home in on,before sending the full container aloft to the mother ship?
And what about weight? Presumably drones won't be used to deliver a new 55" TV to a fan at a football match, so presumably it'll be fairly small items. In which case the majority of the payload of the mothership at take-off will be one-shot drones.
And how is this a better way to get T-shirts to football fans than having a stand outside the ground?
Or are they assuming a very, very high attrition rate for the drones from local shotgun owners?
Whatever, it's really an expensive solution in search of a non-existent problem. I reckon Amazon are just winding people up.
Not all solutions are fixing problems. Sometimes it's just marginal (or larger) improvements on the way things are done. Did you read that part about getting things within minutes of ordering them? Hmmm, let's say I'm a wedding photographer and my camera just died... tap tap tap... new one ordered.... be here in 4 minutes. I like the sound of that.
"Hmmm, let's say I'm a wedding photographer and my camera just died... tap tap tap... new one ordered.... be here in 4 minutes"
If you're any type of professional, you don't go out on a job without backup for any mission critical equipment.
Wait for it to return to the ground.
The BBC has a picture from the patent application with their version of this story. This shows that after the drone makes its delivery, it flies off to a ground location. From there a smaller airship takes it back to the mothership, along with fresh stock.
it flies off to a ground location. From there a smaller airship takes it back to the mothership, along with fresh stock."
I'm still trying to get my head around exactly what it is Amazon want to patent. There's nothing in the diagram that is patentable or isn't already subject to patents. Apart from anything else, cost issues aside, it's blindingly obvious even to me as a possibility, never mind "an expert in the field"
If these "Death Stars" are coming to pollute our skies, it's time to prepare the X-wing fighters and practice using the Force.
Mine's the one with the light sabre in the pocket.
how much could this flying warehouse hope to hold?
how long would it stay in the air?
e.g. the article mentions people ordering things at a sporting event, would the UAV somehow locate the person in the stadium and drop the item directly to the person, would hundreds of drones descending to drop off snacks or souvenirs not be considered a problem by the other spectators?
how is such a pie in the sky concept patentable? There lots of examples of similar ideas in books, comics, tv shows and movies. How long before some tries to patent the terminator?
But how many had the capabilities to brainwash by "advertising for the temporal event"?
Remember when they wanted to project advertisements on the moon? Mankind doesn't deserve to have a future.
@James51 that's the best reason - pie delivery drones!
Think of all the places where this could go wrong - "Dear Amazon, I'm here at the presidential inauguration, please ship two dozen Rebellious Ryan 9 Inch Dildos With Suction Cup and 20 bags of Hoffman Dehydrated Super Manure to the podium."
Or was, at least, the patent filed at 1 April 2014?
bastards got in my way at the rugby while delivering to some lazy wanker or sliced someones head off in front of me I would be slightly miffed and demand a full ticket refund.
WTF is happening to the people on this planet, have we suddenly all become stupid overnight?
"have we suddenly all become stupid overnight?"
No, it's just that you've suddenly noticed it.
Well, the internet is the open version of the closed ward.
On a related topic: if we are typical for a technical civilisation, the Fermi paradox isn't one.
riding our over-weight useless bodies around in an anti-gravity lounge chair, sipping on Brawndo while talking to a non-existant personal assistant.
Yes, plus there's greed and those cheerful, colorfully dressed marketing types who are like used car salesman but without the class.
Most aircraft are explicitly prohibited from such events - UK Air Law requires at least 1000ft distance to large groups of people, and the US seems to have the same rule (as you'd expect - aviation is well-standardised). So delivering to the rugby would require either specific permission for each flight (which will take months, not minutes), or a change in Aviation Law in every country in which they want to operate.
This just isn't going to happen.
How can this be patented?
I'm going to patent my idea of trucks filled with items that can travel across designated paths (I'll call them 'roads'), each one of them carrying a 'human' witch will, upon arriving at the delivery address, hop out and deliver the ordered item.
Re: How can this be patented?
Yes, now "[long-established X] but with drones" is patentable just like ""[long-established X] but on a computer" or ""[long-established X] but on the Internet" is.
Re: MiguelC Re: How can this be patented?
Ha! That's nothing, I just submitted a patent application for Efficient Oxygen Inhalation Through an Autonomic Rhythmic Contractions of the Ribcage's Intercostal Muscles and Diagphram. Those fools at Amazon can literally cough up now or quit breathing! On second thoughts, a licensing clause to exclude patent lawyers would be a great benefit to humanity.
That's the MiguelC Difference! Witches delivering the goods! Why not just cut out the truck and have them fly them in on their brooms? Single wand-wave ordering, Muggle prices, magical delivery. I'm in for Witches Prime.
Kiki approves of this idea.
If they look like Hermione Granger, I'm all for it.
I bet the CAA have never had such a good laugh. IT will make their New Year.
This is a non flyer if I ever saw one.
It's flying too high to be a warehouse.
The possibility of an accident doesn't bear thinking about. Whole urban areas covered in tat.
"Based upon your recent delivery history, we thought you would like...."
To be honest, I hope this gets shot down before it ever takes off.
We don't need any more Amazon, as the banners at Kew Gardens Station say.
"To be honest, I hope this gets shot down before it ever takes off."
Bernard Woolley would like a word with you.
Might be time to see if eBay's got an old AKAK gun for sale... Bring it down over the north east coast of the UK. We've got a history for that sort of thing.
"Whole urban areas covered in tat."
We already have those, they're called "January Sales"?
It will probably require more than one airship so that restocking can occur by descending/ascending an airship and may be a lot more energy/time expensive than land storage/transport, especially given it would require a warehouse with an airship landing/hanger area near it.
I am still dubious about drone use for deliveries because I don't see the short flight time of purely battery powered drone as practical; they'd need a longer lasting, energy dense, power source like Petrol, possibly for hybrid electrically powered propellers.
It maybe more sensible to move a land vehicle, say a van or a lorry, nearer to a cluster of delivery locations, then launch several drones from the top surface with homing back to the possibly moving vehicle, given that could save a lot of flight energy and still save significant time.

I'm playing around with a mixing hotend. Uses cyan, magenta, and yellow filaments to make process color plastic. After I finish my experimentation (Bwahahahah!), I may try turning a four color mix head from brass, since black rarely looks good from CMY.

Take that new remake of the airship.

Now add drones to drop and deliver.

I forget when there was an invention to allow bi-planes take off from airships, or if they could also be retrieved... so that's not new.

This shouldn't get a patent because its so simple.

In terms of implementation... never will happen.

FAA will not allow airships to fly low enough or drones high enough to meet.

Yup - the US had a couple of aircraft launching/retrieving airships at least (Macon?) I think the requirement for a laundry might have been a weight problem.

It shouldn't get a patent because it is obvious this is an idea and not a physical object.

It should have been rejected immediately as it so obviously breaks the laws of physics.

"they can navigate horizontally toward a user specified delivery location using little to no power, other than to stabilize the UAV and/or guide the direction of descent," said the patent."

Really? It can fly horizontally using NO power? What if it's windy? What if air itself has the property of not being frictionless (like it does). OK so they used the word "navigate" rather than "fly" so it's ambiguous (which should also be an instant rejection) but even taking account of the exceptions described it would still require power for other things.

Personhally I think this was filed just to generate some news stories and get some very cheap publicity in the media (and that has obviously worked then....). The idea is obviously stupid for lots of reasons. But am I too late to file a patent for gaining free publicity by filing a ridiculous patent that may sound vaguely plausible to some of the more technically and scientifically challenged people out there?

"Really? It can fly horizontally using NO power?"

They said using "little to no power", not "No power". That is entirely feasible given the height the drone would be descending, they are clearly stating that the horizontal component of the journey would not significantly contribute to the power consumption, all the energy from that would be contributed by the very thing you were suggesting they'd forgotten, the air resistance generated by the descent (i.e. they'd effectively glide horizontally).

Unfortunately you focused on one of the things that is pretty solid and achievable. What I find more curious is how, once the drone has descended 45K feet and delievered its package, does it get back up there? A quick google suggests that the most people have managed to fly a drone to is about 11K feet, and it then needs some way of docking. Alternatively they might be intending to then fly the drones off to some collection point to then be re-installed when the plane lands, but at that point you have to wonder if that's a cost effective solution.

You're overlooking the obvious flaw: the descent would need to be controlled and hence would require power - given we are talking about controlling the descent of several kilo's the power needs are potentially significant. But then I suggest, designing and building a 'drone' that is capable of carrying a payload of a couple of kilo's and a controlled descent from 45,000ft will in itself involve independently several patentable inventions - just as the helicopter, sewing machine and mobile phones aren't the results of a single patentable invention.

'method' doesn't have to have any basis in reality.

Err - you know that gliders are unpowered, right?

Err ... no they are not. A glider (aka sailplane) has a human being controlling the systems. Human beings like any other control system require energy to function.

Gliders are not completely un-powered. They have human powered control surface actuators. Take the human out of them and you need some sort of powered actuators to do the function.

The power needs would indeed be significant for calculations, but my point (and I think theirs) was that the horizontal component of the travel would not add to these costs. If you're calculating a way down, you're making these decisions. Whether that's a direct drop, or a "glide" is irrelevant to the calculation costs. The glide itself is unpowered.

At 45000 feet this object will contain a lot of potential energy and very little kinetic energy. As it drops, most of that potential energy gets converted into kinetic. Even commercial jets use a ram air turbine for emergency instrumentation power in the event of fuel exhaustion or other engine failures. Flight calculations are relatively modest unless you start trying to get into weather modeling or something. We are talking iPhone battery levels of power.

Actually, come to think of it, maybe if they use a note 7 battery, they weeks then have a good rocket to launch the drone back to the mothership.

Happens all the time during parasailing.... Totally unpowered flight. Also happens during skydiving.

"FAA will not allow airships to fly low enough or drones high enough to meet."

Congestion will also be a problem around airports. A stray drone that malfunctions and flies into the path of an airliner that is landing or taking off could have some, shall we say, interesting results.

A stray drone that malfunctions and flies into the path of an airliner that is landing or taking off could have some, shall we say, interesting results.

It doesn't even need to do that. A stray drone that appears to be heading towards controlled airspace without clearance is enough to trigger the re-routing of many aircraft - with each diversion tending to cause additional diversions in order to maintain separation. It's a mess.

Can't find it on the web at the mo - I'll post a link if/when I do.

"This is basically getting first-strike capability, isn't it?"

Will it deliver electric sheep and mood organs to the urban conapts?

"A new life awaits you in the off-world colonies! ... A chance to begin again in a golden land of opportunity and adventure℠!! Buy a one-way ticket on an Amazon Blue Origin® Mayflower™ vessel today!"

Re: Will it deliver electric sheep and mood organs to the urban conapts?

"Buy a one-way ticket on an Amazon Blue Origin® Mayflower™ vessel today!"

...and buy NOW! The price will increase in line with the nearness of the expected date of the arrival of the planet eating STAAAAAR GOAAAAAAAAT!!!!

So, how do the drones get back to the mothership? They're not likely to be able to do a 45k vertical assent. Does the mothership have to land to get another droneload or do they stuff all the used drones into a big bucket and send it up under a balloon?

Two swallows will carry them back in pairs with string held under the dorsal guiding feathers!

African or European? Or does it depend on the weight of your order?

Hmm, just wondering about the mass of the drone with payload, and its mass after making its delivery. Its range will be greater after the delivery, but by how much I haven't the foggiest. It might be that for some items - an SD card, for example - the weight difference will be negligible.

Are you suggesting that they're planning to deliver migratory coconuts?

I suspect that that are planning to use paper airplanes, perhaps with "smart ink" for guidance?

Just very, very, *very* long ones!

I did wonder about that. If the drones can only be used once due to inability to reach 45000 ft, where do they land? Do they park a container nearby for them to home in on,before sending the full container aloft to the mother ship?

And what about weight? Presumably drones won't be used to deliver a new 55" TV to a fan at a football match, so presumably it'll be fairly small items. In which case the majority of the payload of the mothership at take-off will be one-shot drones.

And how is this a better way to get T-shirts to football fans than having a stand outside the ground?

Or are they assuming a very, very high attrition rate for the drones from local shotgun owners?

Whatever, it's really an expensive solution in search of a non-existent problem. I reckon Amazon are just winding people up.

Not all solutions are fixing problems. Sometimes it's just marginal (or larger) improvements on the way things are done. Did you read that part about getting things within minutes of ordering them? Hmmm, let's say I'm a wedding photographer and my camera just died... tap tap tap... new one ordered.... be here in 4 minutes. I like the sound of that.

"Hmmm, let's say I'm a wedding photographer and my camera just died... tap tap tap... new one ordered.... be here in 4 minutes"

If you're any type of professional, you don't go out on a job without backup for any mission critical equipment.

Wait for it to return to the ground.

The BBC has a picture from the patent application with their version of this story. This shows that after the drone makes its delivery, it flies off to a ground location. From there a smaller airship takes it back to the mothership, along with fresh stock.

it flies off to a ground location. From there a smaller airship takes it back to the mothership, along with fresh stock."

I'm still trying to get my head around exactly what it is Amazon want to patent. There's nothing in the diagram that is patentable or isn't already subject to patents. Apart from anything else, cost issues aside, it's blindingly obvious even to me as a possibility, never mind "an expert in the field"

If these "Death Stars" are coming to pollute our skies, it's time to prepare the X-wing fighters and practice using the Force.

Mine's the one with the light sabre in the pocket.

how much could this flying warehouse hope to hold?

how long would it stay in the air?

e.g. the article mentions people ordering things at a sporting event, would the UAV somehow locate the person in the stadium and drop the item directly to the person, would hundreds of drones descending to drop off snacks or souvenirs not be considered a problem by the other spectators?

how is such a pie in the sky concept patentable? There lots of examples of similar ideas in books, comics, tv shows and movies. How long before some tries to patent the terminator?

But how many had the capabilities to brainwash by "advertising for the temporal event"?

Remember when they wanted to project advertisements on the moon? Mankind doesn't deserve to have a future.

@James51 that's the best reason - pie delivery drones!

Think of all the places where this could go wrong - "Dear Amazon, I'm here at the presidential inauguration, please ship two dozen Rebellious Ryan 9 Inch Dildos With Suction Cup and 20 bags of Hoffman Dehydrated Super Manure to the podium."

Or was, at least, the patent filed at 1 April 2014?

bastards got in my way at the rugby while delivering to some lazy wanker or sliced someones head off in front of me I would be slightly miffed and demand a full ticket refund.

WTF is happening to the people on this planet, have we suddenly all become stupid overnight?

"have we suddenly all become stupid overnight?"

No, it's just that you've suddenly noticed it.

Well, the internet is the open version of the closed ward.

On a related topic: if we are typical for a technical civilisation, the Fermi paradox isn't one.

riding our over-weight useless bodies around in an anti-gravity lounge chair, sipping on Brawndo while talking to a non-existant personal assistant.

Yes, plus there's greed and those cheerful, colorfully dressed marketing types who are like used car salesman but without the class.

Most aircraft are explicitly prohibited from such events - UK Air Law requires at least 1000ft distance to large groups of people, and the US seems to have the same rule (as you'd expect - aviation is well-standardised). So delivering to the rugby would require either specific permission for each flight (which will take months, not minutes), or a change in Aviation Law in every country in which they want to operate.

This just isn't going to happen.

How can this be patented?

I'm going to patent my idea of trucks filled with items that can travel across designated paths (I'll call them 'roads'), each one of them carrying a 'human' witch will, upon arriving at the delivery address, hop out and deliver the ordered item.

Re: How can this be patented?

Yes, now "[long-established X] but with drones" is patentable just like ""[long-established X] but on a computer" or ""[long-established X] but on the Internet" is.

Re: MiguelC Re: How can this be patented?

Ha! That's nothing, I just submitted a patent application for Efficient Oxygen Inhalation Through an Autonomic Rhythmic Contractions of the Ribcage's Intercostal Muscles and Diagphram. Those fools at Amazon can literally cough up now or quit breathing! On second thoughts, a licensing clause to exclude patent lawyers would be a great benefit to humanity.

That's the MiguelC Difference! Witches delivering the goods! Why not just cut out the truck and have them fly them in on their brooms? Single wand-wave ordering, Muggle prices, magical delivery. I'm in for Witches Prime.

Kiki approves of this idea.

If they look like Hermione Granger, I'm all for it.

I bet the CAA have never had such a good laugh. IT will make their New Year.

This is a non flyer if I ever saw one.

It's flying too high to be a warehouse.

The possibility of an accident doesn't bear thinking about. Whole urban areas covered in tat.

"Based upon your recent delivery history, we thought you would like...."

To be honest, I hope this gets shot down before it ever takes off.

We don't need any more Amazon, as the banners at Kew Gardens Station say.

"To be honest, I hope this gets shot down before it ever takes off."

Bernard Woolley would like a word with you.

Might be time to see if eBay's got an old AKAK gun for sale... Bring it down over the north east coast of the UK. We've got a history for that sort of thing.

"Whole urban areas covered in tat."

We already have those, they're called "January Sales"?

It will probably require more than one airship so that restocking can occur by descending/ascending an airship and may be a lot more energy/time expensive than land storage/transport, especially given it would require a warehouse with an airship landing/hanger area near it.

I am still dubious about drone use for deliveries because I don't see the short flight time of purely battery powered drone as practical; they'd need a longer lasting, energy dense, power source like Petrol, possibly for hybrid electrically powered propellers.

It maybe more sensible to move a land vehicle, say a van or a lorry, nearer to a cluster of delivery locations, then launch several drones from the top surface with homing back to the possibly moving vehicle, given that could save a lot of flight energy and still save significant time.