| Msg. 187131 of 187136 Jump to msg. # |
http://ragingbull.quote.com/mboard/boards.cgi?board=VCSY&read=187131
I think the question being a
sked amongst some people is this:
How much has VCSY been damaged by being forced to work unknown all these seven years? How many of the big software houses would find our technology valuable? How many of the automation companies would find our hardware technology valuable? How much of the computer hardware market would likely have already been creating the products we're see now back then and flourishing all this time had VCSY been allowed to work without fear of being taken out?
I think that's the question that's really on everybody's mind and for some it will be a bittersweet reminder that people who want something badly enough to try to take it will squirm to the end of any opportunity if it buys them one more day of “grace” instead of truth. How much money have we shareholders in VCSY been forced to do without based on a pressure against the company that demanded they do their marketing and business in secret?
How many shareholders were convinced to sell VCSY shares because they were told VCSY was a scam and told in very convincing ways? How many here know that now? How many who are not yet here will know that? What will their course of action be as I believe their experience will be simply bitter, having been told to bail out and listening to those voices instead of those who dug into information to demonstrate there was much more value to VCSY than was being portrayed.
And who is responsible for driving the audience for VCSY capabilities into the dirt? The shareprice? Or the posters on message boards who charged VCSY was a scam? Both I say. And we should all look in to why the shareprice has been held so low and by whom.
My interest (call it a hobby of mind to ferret out this kinds of people and stretching their hides out across the barn door to dry in the Sun, so to speak) is an entertainment and a hobby. One that consumes a lot of interest but I haven't been able to locate a reliable supply of hobby model paints so I am stymied in the construction of my plastic replica of the German Komet. Acht der flamenshtikken est fribenflotzam. So I have time on my hands often to peruse and meditate. I have read a number of very skillful posters who stayed on message day after day week after week month after month year after year since 2000-2001... for what purpose? but to alert everyone VCSY was a scam.
Only one problem, the patents alone say this is no scam. And now we wait for DC-Steve to locate an expert in any of the areas (pick one and just prove that is a bust) covered by the patents or even the pending patent which is a language builder to enable building semantic web-languages like mister Tim more than one last name said could be done. Just like DARPA requires but must have enabled. I'm darn glad all these people have finally gotten down to being able to do the enabling. Now we can get down to business. How much is the projected business income for the next generation of software businesses and services? We want a fair portion of that. Now, we're not getting greedy.
If Microsoft can pay 7 billion for a second banana, what would they need to pay to cover a banana split? Let's see. A billion shares divided by 10 billion? Or is it the other way around? Any MBAs around here to hep us out? I don't know a whole lot about money. I just know about technology and people's habits. Oh!Oh! The chief 'intelligentsia' of the software world have not spoken so these are all bosh and boobles! I forget about that. They are all so wise. Ohhhh so wise. And they can't figure a way out of the trap. They're trapped DC. That's why you don't hear anyone saying anything. They need to keep their mouths shut and their noses clean and say “yes-sir” when asked do you want to stay in business. Sounds crazy?
We have a number of days ahead to dig for clues. There seems to be another every day and things continue to be clear. And the funny part is, the first good PR from VCSY will be “Microsoft settles with VCSY” OR “Microsoft tells VCSY to take a hike”. Either way, the REST of the audience that were convinced by many here VCSY would fade into oblivion will get to watch right here on this board and on the news boards as VCSY turns to the rest of the software houses and say “Microsoft is feeling frisky.” OR “Microsoft feels lucky.” Either way, I don't think EVERY CEO out there is stupid. Just a handful of bad apples and cracked nuts. I got a jolt tonight when I finally “saw” how the fiber optic patent can work beyond conjugate waveform synthesis (which I believe could be used to “see” three d with only one fiber given the nature of the method I believe is being used – THIS is an exponential expansion of the fundamental “see the image through a single fiber' concept and is not at all difficult to breadboard once you understand what's being attempted. Why struggle? Buy a license and hook up you're “image sensing” applications and you can drop all the imaging chips and image processing electronics. Boom. Another slam on the chip making industry. Also another incredible opportunity for synergy and idea creation. Surface could do tactile imaging unimagined right now.).
The fiber optic patent is so incredibly easy to decipher now I am hesitant to tell what I think as it makes it possible for teenage kids familiar with laser techniques to cobble together ideas on their own. But, isn't that what innovation is? And innovation may be destructive or regenerative. So let the kids play as ideas will make the cruz fiber an incredibly useful invention I would compare to the transistor or the laser in potential impact. At the same time, there are a set of hurdles and knowledges the average teen would have to acquire and THAT is what is precious and what separates the men from the noodles. Those hurdles certainly do not face the fiber and microscopic imaging field as the techniques indicated in my scenario of the Cruz patent theory are extremely simple to implement in today's component technology. Now I understand why it doesn't use electrical power. It only needs sources of light to illuminate the object being looked at (if it's microscopic, you can shine a light on if from the fiber optic hair illuminated at the “viewing” end. If it's big as a house or a spaceship, you need more light, but you can still see it easily enough. Today there are telescopes that shine a reference layer into the atmosphere to build a “star” image in the sky. Looking at that star image and adjusting the shape of the collecting mirror at the astronomer's end per every variation of the reference star projected on (through actually) the atmosphere above the astronomer's head, allows the lighted image from the other end of the atmosphere (before the light from the reference laser reaches into vacuum) to be seen clearly.
Mister Cruz has likely conquered the aberrated medium of glass fiber in essentially a manner akin to the way astronomers have de-burred the aberrations of the atmosphere. Now, that may not be the way it's actually done, but, because we have a thought model to pick over and debate in technological terms, the FO patent is a reality whether folks choose to believe it or not.
And if it is a reality, it also means it doesn't need the kind of sensor-end complexity first imagined when thinking through a workable solution based on no information. If my scenario is correct, we should see the ability to find sensors comprising a single fiber to a spot to be monitored or analyzed or measured and see the ability to convey complex information from the sensor to the monitoring equipment. We start seeing just such items when we look at a few of the hits on google Cruz+fiber+optic. Light the image at the other end with lasers from the observing end with a reference laser to measure the aggregated distortion, subtract that information from the received waveform and presto bingoo you have yourself a reflective image transported through an aberrated media. Throw in conjugate waveform generation (you only need four lasers for any of this stuff – 1 reference, 3 variable 'color') Now, at the 'looking end' of the fiber, put a piece of polarized plastic. Glue a couple points on the plastic to the machine and you now have a spot-on stress analysis sensor. The stress could be heat induced mechanical motion. The heat could be induced by power loss in a circuit, do a bit of fourier analysis on the data the image of the strain gauge represents and you can measure for voltage and current (power) on anything from transformers to chip substrates.
I'm waiting for only one individual to provide a convincing view that the fiber optic patent is a hoax. If you're waiting on tepe to supply references and referential information, hold your breath... and try not to laugh.
sked amongst some people is this:How much has VCSY been damaged by being forced to work unknown all these seven years? How many of the big software houses would find our technology valuable? How many of the automation companies would find our hardware technology valuable? How much of the computer hardware market would likely have already been creating the products we're see now back then and flourishing all this time had VCSY been allowed to work without fear of being taken out?
I think that's the question that's really on everybody's mind and for some it will be a bittersweet reminder that people who want something badly enough to try to take it will squirm to the end of any opportunity if it buys them one more day of “grace” instead of truth. How much money have we shareholders in VCSY been forced to do without based on a pressure against the company that demanded they do their marketing and business in secret?
How many shareholders were convinced to sell VCSY shares because they were told VCSY was a scam and told in very convincing ways? How many here know that now? How many who are not yet here will know that? What will their course of action be as I believe their experience will be simply bitter, having been told to bail out and listening to those voices instead of those who dug into information to demonstrate there was much more value to VCSY than was being portrayed.
And who is responsible for driving the audience for VCSY capabilities into the dirt? The shareprice? Or the posters on message boards who charged VCSY was a scam? Both I say. And we should all look in to why the shareprice has been held so low and by whom.
My interest (call it a hobby of mind to ferret out this kinds of people and stretching their hides out across the barn door to dry in the Sun, so to speak) is an entertainment and a hobby. One that consumes a lot of interest but I haven't been able to locate a reliable supply of hobby model paints so I am stymied in the construction of my plastic replica of the German Komet. Acht der flamenshtikken est fribenflotzam. So I have time on my hands often to peruse and meditate. I have read a number of very skillful posters who stayed on message day after day week after week month after month year after year since 2000-2001... for what purpose? but to alert everyone VCSY was a scam.
Only one problem, the patents alone say this is no scam. And now we wait for DC-Steve to locate an expert in any of the areas (pick one and just prove that is a bust) covered by the patents or even the pending patent which is a language builder to enable building semantic web-languages like mister Tim more than one last name said could be done. Just like DARPA requires but must have enabled. I'm darn glad all these people have finally gotten down to being able to do the enabling. Now we can get down to business. How much is the projected business income for the next generation of software businesses and services? We want a fair portion of that. Now, we're not getting greedy.
If Microsoft can pay 7 billion for a second banana, what would they need to pay to cover a banana split? Let's see. A billion shares divided by 10 billion? Or is it the other way around? Any MBAs around here to hep us out? I don't know a whole lot about money. I just know about technology and people's habits. Oh!Oh! The chief 'intelligentsia' of the software world have not spoken so these are all bosh and boobles! I forget about that. They are all so wise. Ohhhh so wise. And they can't figure a way out of the trap. They're trapped DC. That's why you don't hear anyone saying anything. They need to keep their mouths shut and their noses clean and say “yes-sir” when asked do you want to stay in business. Sounds crazy?
We have a number of days ahead to dig for clues. There seems to be another every day and things continue to be clear. And the funny part is, the first good PR from VCSY will be “Microsoft settles with VCSY” OR “Microsoft tells VCSY to take a hike”. Either way, the REST of the audience that were convinced by many here VCSY would fade into oblivion will get to watch right here on this board and on the news boards as VCSY turns to the rest of the software houses and say “Microsoft is feeling frisky.” OR “Microsoft feels lucky.” Either way, I don't think EVERY CEO out there is stupid. Just a handful of bad apples and cracked nuts. I got a jolt tonight when I finally “saw” how the fiber optic patent can work beyond conjugate waveform synthesis (which I believe could be used to “see” three d with only one fiber given the nature of the method I believe is being used – THIS is an exponential expansion of the fundamental “see the image through a single fiber' concept and is not at all difficult to breadboard once you understand what's being attempted. Why struggle? Buy a license and hook up you're “image sensing” applications and you can drop all the imaging chips and image processing electronics. Boom. Another slam on the chip making industry. Also another incredible opportunity for synergy and idea creation. Surface could do tactile imaging unimagined right now.).
The fiber optic patent is so incredibly easy to decipher now I am hesitant to tell what I think as it makes it possible for teenage kids familiar with laser techniques to cobble together ideas on their own. But, isn't that what innovation is? And innovation may be destructive or regenerative. So let the kids play as ideas will make the cruz fiber an incredibly useful invention I would compare to the transistor or the laser in potential impact. At the same time, there are a set of hurdles and knowledges the average teen would have to acquire and THAT is what is precious and what separates the men from the noodles. Those hurdles certainly do not face the fiber and microscopic imaging field as the techniques indicated in my scenario of the Cruz patent theory are extremely simple to implement in today's component technology. Now I understand why it doesn't use electrical power. It only needs sources of light to illuminate the object being looked at (if it's microscopic, you can shine a light on if from the fiber optic hair illuminated at the “viewing” end. If it's big as a house or a spaceship, you need more light, but you can still see it easily enough. Today there are telescopes that shine a reference layer into the atmosphere to build a “star” image in the sky. Looking at that star image and adjusting the shape of the collecting mirror at the astronomer's end per every variation of the reference star projected on (through actually) the atmosphere above the astronomer's head, allows the lighted image from the other end of the atmosphere (before the light from the reference laser reaches into vacuum) to be seen clearly.
Mister Cruz has likely conquered the aberrated medium of glass fiber in essentially a manner akin to the way astronomers have de-burred the aberrations of the atmosphere. Now, that may not be the way it's actually done, but, because we have a thought model to pick over and debate in technological terms, the FO patent is a reality whether folks choose to believe it or not.
And if it is a reality, it also means it doesn't need the kind of sensor-end complexity first imagined when thinking through a workable solution based on no information. If my scenario is correct, we should see the ability to find sensors comprising a single fiber to a spot to be monitored or analyzed or measured and see the ability to convey complex information from the sensor to the monitoring equipment. We start seeing just such items when we look at a few of the hits on google Cruz+fiber+optic. Light the image at the other end with lasers from the observing end with a reference laser to measure the aggregated distortion, subtract that information from the received waveform and presto bingoo you have yourself a reflective image transported through an aberrated media. Throw in conjugate waveform generation (you only need four lasers for any of this stuff – 1 reference, 3 variable 'color') Now, at the 'looking end' of the fiber, put a piece of polarized plastic. Glue a couple points on the plastic to the machine and you now have a spot-on stress analysis sensor. The stress could be heat induced mechanical motion. The heat could be induced by power loss in a circuit, do a bit of fourier analysis on the data the image of the strain gauge represents and you can measure for voltage and current (power) on anything from transformers to chip substrates.
I'm waiting for only one individual to provide a convincing view that the fiber optic patent is a hoax. If you're waiting on tepe to supply references and referential information, hold your breath... and try not to laugh.
No comments:
Post a Comment