Reader Comments (rss)

(Flattened / Threaded)

1.  

   Nanotechnology?

   

   Jo Mamma, Sep 26th, 2006 @ 5:29pm

   
   

   Can the advertisers please stop using terms such as "nanotechnology" in such obviously phony ways? I mean, really, are people THIS stupid?!
   
   I really hope not. My pencil probably has as much nanotechnology as this thing does.

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

2.  

   Re: Nanotechnology?

   

   zeroJJ, Sep 26th, 2006 @ 5:35pm

   
   

   Unfortunately, no. It won't stop anytime soon.
   
   Oh yeah, and basically everything in our physical world has "nanotechnology"

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

3.  

   Will it Sell?

   

   Chris, Sep 26th, 2006 @ 6:11pm

   
   

   Well, I know that when the flu is going around in my neighborhood, I do what I can to prevent it's spread if I am infected, or preven myself from getting it if I am not. To do this I wipe down and mouse and keyboard (with one of those clorax wipes or something similar) before and after I use them and I sanatize my hands before I eat. Why wouldn't other people

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

4.  

   umm...

   

   PhysicsGuy, Sep 26th, 2006 @ 6:14pm

   
   

   and why should the use of nanotechnology raise red flags? don't tell you guys here at techdirt have nanophobia...
   
   and to the two guys above... chances are it doesn't have nanotechnology ... you pencil certainly doesn't

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

5.  

   Re: umm...

   

   PhysicsGuy, Sep 26th, 2006 @ 6:15pm

   
   

   sorry for the typos, just had a 5 hour physics class...

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

6.  

   Re: Re: umm...

   

   Materials Science guy, Sep 26th, 2006 @ 6:43pm

   
   

   yeah, they probably used copper in someform or another. They're also starting to change hospital door handles to the special copper doped door handles. For some reasons that i'm not completely sure of, copper has anti-bacterial properties. Theres a lot of research going into the biomaterials field about it.... it's some pretty interesting stuff... but then again, a lot of marketing is just a load of BS so i could be wrong.

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

7.  

   nasty

   

   Tim, Sep 26th, 2006 @ 6:44pm

   
   

   how many people don't wash their hands before using a public mouse? almost everyone!

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

8.  

   sterile wipes

   

   Charlie Potatoes, Sep 26th, 2006 @ 6:44pm

   
   

   i don't know and i don't care what nanotechnology is or is not... except that one time i saw a really nice Star Trek TNG episode about it...
   but i do have a question for you hyper-geeks...if the clorox (or clorax) wipe kills 99% of all the germs on the mouse...what happens to the 1% which survive?
   wait...don't tell me...i'm not sure i want to know...

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

9.  

   3 Dirtiest Items in your house

   

   dorpus, Sep 26th, 2006 @ 6:48pm

   
   

   1. Computer Keyboard
   2. Kitchen Sponge
   3. Shower Curtains

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

10.  

    

    charlie potatoes, Sep 26th, 2006 @ 7:23pm

    
    

    maybe in your house, Dorpus, not mine..
    .um..what do with that keyboard of yours? no...wait..i'm pretty sure i don't want to know this.

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

11.  

    Re:

    

    dorpus, Sep 26th, 2006 @ 7:34pm

    
    

    I suggest you take a course in microbiology.

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

12.  

    to #3

    

    *sigh*, Sep 26th, 2006 @ 7:44pm

    
    

    You do know that by "Preventing the spread" of the flu is actually going to make you get sicker the next time you get it right? Honestly. Our bodies build up a natural immunity to diseases over time. In my opinion, (and from what I remember of biology) The sicker you are at a younger age the less chance you have of getting sick when older.
    
    Influenza for Everyone!!!!

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

13.  

    Re: Re: Re: umm...

    

    Anonymous Coward, Sep 26th, 2006 @ 7:49pm

    
    

    i think thats silver not copper

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

14.  

    

    Guy who reads before commenting, Sep 26th, 2006 @ 8:00pm

    
    

    If any of you would acually take the time to read it instead of spewing jargon out of your a$$, then you can form a coherent, and valid argument.
    
    The mouse has a titanium oxide coating which the article details its workings. The titanium oxide basically makes an unlivable surface for bacteria.
    
    Secondly, nanotechnology is simply working with matter on a n ultra-small scale. Nanotechnology is not always little robots in your blood stream. While its very misleading to the general public who views star trek and the likes as what nano tech is, the mouse does destroy bacteria on an ultra small scale.

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

15.  

    Re: sterile wipes

    

    PhysicsGuy, Sep 26th, 2006 @ 8:02pm

    
    

    that 1% will eventually breed a type of super-bacteria? i'm not sure about this, as i find most biology boring, but i'm pretty sure they say it kills 99.99% of germs just to cover their asses... i don't think there is a .01%... at least not a known .01%.

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

16.  

    Re:

    

    Jo Mamma, Sep 26th, 2006 @ 8:20pm

    
    

    Well, Guy who reads before commenting your reading the article is admirable, and you're completely right to admonish us for not reading the article. But I generally just give these tech dirt articles a quick read at work and ignore facts, so admittedly I probably should be put in some 'lazy ass' category. But, for the record, after reading your explanation I still think it's BS.
    
    And of course everything in this physical universe uses 'nanotechnology' in some way... that's why I made reference to my pencil using nanotechnology. It just depends on how broadly you define 'nanotechnology'.
    
    I would still say that nanotechnology, for better or worse, does conjure up images of "little robots in your bloodstream". Those that market these products know that and are intentionally misstating the sophisticaion of their product.
    
    THAT was my point, but I just condensed it into the pencil comment.

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

17.  

    Grammar

    

    Narcuru, Sep 26th, 2006 @ 8:36pm

    
    

    hey joe i think you forgot a word "they can buy a self-sterilizing mouse and use that win customers." I'm guessing that its supposed to be "to win customers." Either way good article like normal

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

18.  

    Re: Re:

    

    PhysicsGuy, Sep 26th, 2006 @ 8:46pm

    
    

    Jo Mamma, i usually try not to be mean, but you're a moron. You need to look up the definition of technology. A short one that's good is as follows: the application of scientific advances to benefit humanity. so tell me, since making a pencil doesn't require any manipulation on the molecular level, as in manipulating individual molecules seperatly, how does your pencil use nanotechnology? how does a rock use nanotechnology? how does anything aside from that which is manipulated on the molecular level constitute nanotechnology?
    
    there is no "broad" defintion of nanotechnology... hell, since you seem too inept to use even google to look up a word, here: A precise molecule by molecule control of products and byproducts in the development of functional structures. i'll even put it in bold for you so that maybe it will sink in. that's as broad as the definition goes... you could be more precise and say the manipulation of atoms or molecules 1-100 nanometers wide... you CANNOT however say the manipulation of molecules 1 centimeter or 1 millimeter or even 1 micrometer wide.... maybe you're just another dumbass who never learned the metric system but nano has specific implications to it...

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

19.  

    reading the article

    

    charlie potatoes, Sep 26th, 2006 @ 9:10pm

    
    

    i seldom bother. i come here to read the comments. they range from the sublime to the ridiculous. all of us just like to see our names on the board. and we keep coming back to see if anyone after us has talked about us. then some of us keep commenting so we can keep stirring it.. and some of us just randomly sceam out, 'fuck you, towel head' to see what the others will say. oh well.... one day i intend to get a life..really i do.

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

20.  

    germs

    

    Vinnie, Sep 26th, 2006 @ 9:19pm

    
    

    back to microbiology...a typical mouse surface may harbour tens of millions of bacteria. this 0.01% is still a large portion of livable bacteria which can migrate to your hand and populate. this effectively lengthens the interval of time before your hands would culture the same quantity of bacteria than with, lets say, a regular mouse. additionally: how thick is this coating? does it not wear off after prolonged usage? it is true that we become much more resilient to infection upon exposure to various micro organisms. this is why peoples of various global origins tend to get sick more often when travelling overseas or abroad. bacteria constitute a constant presence in human, in varying degrees and it is generally an antibiotic relationship.

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

21.  

    

    Anonymous Coward, Sep 26th, 2006 @ 9:29pm

    
    

    Some would argue that you should be exposed to germs to make your immune system stronger. This idea is not entirely false, but its best to be exposed to bruised and battered bugs. Influenza is not something that I would want to contract from someone else unless it comes in the form of a shot. CDC's website states "The single best way to prevent the flu is to get a flu vaccination each fall."

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

22.  

    

    MY GOD!, Sep 26th, 2006 @ 10:03pm

    
    

    Buncha trolls!
    
    TO: PhysicsGuy
    
    Arent you just a stuffed full of knowlege... Perhaps you should chronicle your findings and sell a famous book about nanotechnology and how it doesnt apply to a pencil! I'd buy it! (just to burn it)
    
    TO: Jo Mamma
    
    Who's to say you dont have some NASA enhanced perfect tip nanotechnology pencil. Because it IS possible that makes mr. smarty pants physics dude completely irrelavent. ANYTHING is possible with nanotechnology.
    
    TO: ALL
    
    CHILL... ITS A NEWS POST.... FROM TECHDIRT... NOOOO BIGGIE!

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

23.  

    

    Anonymous Cowardess, Sep 26th, 2006 @ 10:08pm

    
    

    charlie potatoes, that's the truest thing I've seen all day

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

24.  

    

    charlie potatoes, Sep 26th, 2006 @ 10:11pm

    
    

    gee thanks, dad..you always cut right to the chase. *smirk

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

25.  

    Re: Re: Re: umm...

    

    Germiphobic reader, Sep 26th, 2006 @ 11:07pm

    
    

    They are probably made with the new AgION silver ion compounds. This uses nano sized ceramic particles that have been bound with silver to coat items. if you would like to know more: http://www.agion-tech.com/consumer3.html

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

26.  

    Re:

    

    Jo Mamma, Sep 27th, 2006 @ 12:01am

    
    

    Look Physics guy, I've read your posts and they all seem to make pretty good sense to me and you seem to be a pretty intelligent dude, so please try to understand that I am pointing out the interpretation of this stuff by "marketing"... not "scientists".
    
    Judging by your semi-flame posting, I'm thinking you're on the younger side of life which probably means you don't have a ton of hands on working experience. I'll sum up one of the conclusions I've reached... marketing is full of shit.
    
    They'll call anything anything if it makes money... and if it takes broadening your "broad", purely scientific definition they'll do it. Physics isn't the only place where things are relative IMO... all of life is relative... relatively full of shit. Life doesn't revolve around what scientists think.
    
    And yes, my pencil was made by NASA, the NSA, KGB, and LMNOP. If someone gets way out of line, it's got a mini nanite at the tip that I can shove straight up ... [end flame]
    
    I actually enjoy reading your posts, just give me a bit of respect dude :-)

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

27.  

    

    flamebait, Sep 27th, 2006 @ 12:38am

    
    

    Actually yes you can define a pencil as nanotech and specifically a pencil for what it is. Cause a pencil is made of some special arrangement of carbon atoms which otherwise would not be helpful in writing. If you get stuck on the word "technology" tough ok, diamonds are the "nanotech" version. and btw; titanium is already sort of hygenic, that's why they use it for surgical implants isn't it?

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

28.  

    Re:

    

    skibumski, Sep 27th, 2006 @ 10:52am

    
    

    Because it is considered to be physiologically inert, the metal is used in joint replacement implants such as hip ball and sockets and to make medical equipment and in pipe/tank lining in food processing. Since titanium is non-ferromagnetic, patients with titanium implants can be safely examined with magnetic resonance imaging (convenient for long-term implants).
    
    Thank you Wiki.

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

29.  

    

    Former Pencil User, Sep 27th, 2006 @ 11:57am

    
    

    I'm so disappointed! My mechanical pencil package had a big starburst on the front that said "Made with nanotechnology." I thought it was true. It had a picture of a little robot and everything!

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

30.  

    Re: Re:

    

    PhysicsGuy, Sep 27th, 2006 @ 1:42pm

    
    

    don't get me wrong, i completely agree that nanotechnology marketing borders on absurd. it's a new byword for most people and the people who market new products will surley abuse it. i'm just a stickler for precision in wording when it comes to certain things. i got into an argument with my calc teacher today because she was using the word velocity when she should have been using the word speed. i was somewhat insulting to her as well and she's my professor, so don't take offense to anything i say.
    
    and i shouldn't respond to a person with the name flamebait, but we don't arrange the molecules in the graphite of our pencils molecule by molecule, therefore it's not nanotechnology.

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

31.  

    

    darrell, Dec 29th, 2006 @ 3:51pm

    
    

    IT SUKS

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

Add Your Comment