[Vo]:Radiola III and 15

[Frank Znidarsic]

I had a RCA Radiola 15 for a number of years.  I restored it and it plays.  Its 
a tuned radio frequency device.  It was one of the very first AC plug in 
radios.  Two stages of RF amplification are within the radio.  The RF signal is 
then high enough to get through the detector.  It requires a long antenna.  I 
likes to pick up WJM knoxville at night.  Receivers today are all 
superhetrodyne.  A short internal antenna will do with these.


I was at a yard sell last week and came across a Radiola III.  They thought it 
was a metal detector.  It is in good condition and I grabbed it. Its about 90 
years old, cera1923.   I plan to restore this one too.  It ran on batteries.  I 
will have to build a battery replacement pack.  I not sure where to get the 
tubes.  I may put FETs in the device and use a more modern tubes simply for 
aesthetics.  The RCA radiola III is a super-regenative receiver.  It has a gain 
knob that can be turned up until it oscillates.  The original headphones were 
with the device.  This one will be fun to play with.


Its fun to work both with old (radios) and new (apps) technologies.









http://www.angelfire.com/scifi2/zpt/images/radiola3and15.jpg





Frank Znidarsic

Re: [Vo]:More on automation and Martin Ford

[Jed Rothwell]

Brian Ahern  wrote:

> This is neo-communism.
>
Yes, it is. Except that instead of exploiting other people's labor, it
would exploit robots. Robots don't care. They will not be upset.

All of us helped develop robots and computers with our tax money, so we
should all get the benefits from them.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:More on automation and Martin Ford

[Lennart Thornros]

No Brian,
This is the opposite to communism.
This takes care of the problem with unemployment. It gives an elite an
opportunity to more. It is human.
It  has nothing to do with "workers in all nations join together". It is
national and it can be adjusted to fit local needs.
It should be part of the GOP program. I think they just do not see the
issues. Neither do you I guess.

Best Regards ,
Lennart Thornros


lenn...@thornros.com
+1 916 436 1899

Whatever you vividly imagine, ardently desire, sincerely believe and
enthusiastically act upon, must inevitably come to pass. (PJM)


On Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 3:41 PM, Brian Ahern  wrote:

> This is neo-communism.
>
>
> --
> *From:* a.ashfield 
> *Sent:* Wednesday, November 23, 2016 10:36 AM
> *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com
> *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:More on automation and Martin Ford
>
> I'm very glad to see Ontario is thinking about giving UBI a trial.  Not
> only is a trial needed to see what the snags are, but the concept is so
> alien to the GOP that right now they would never consider it.  There has to
> be some way of taking care of those made unemployed by AI and robotics.  I
> don't know of a better way of doing that.
>
> On 11/22/2016 8:20 PM, H LV wrote:
>
> From The Belleville Intelligencer
>
> 'Ontario is on the precipice of a three-year pilot to test out the concept
> of a guaranteed basic income and residents have been invited to share their
> views on the proposal online, as well as during several public
> consultations ...
>
> 'It’s a consultation Ruth Ingersoll, executive director for Community
> Development Council of Quinte, certainly plans to get in on.
> '
> “I like the model and the idea of a basic income,” said Ingersoll, adding
> it would relieve many of the barriers surrounding the complex Ontario
> Disability Support Program (ODSP) and social assistance programs. “I think
> basic income is a more dignified and respectful way to give people money
> and it would give everybody an income floor.”
>
> 'Ingersoll also said she believes it would eliminate chronic cycles of
> poverty exacerbated by the systems currently in place — having to liquidate
> assets and prove they’re poor in order to receive assistance.
>
> '... A basic income would also open up more opportunities to those living
> below the poverty line, like getting a post-secondary education or to
> supplement part-time “precarious” work.
> '... It goes beyond just money in the bank for Ingersoll, it also removes
> a lot of anxiety and stress in people’s lives.
>
> '“Our poverty isn’t just with people on social assistance and ODSP, our
> poverty is with the working poor as well. People are only able to find
> part-time minimum wage jobs.
>
> '“We have people coming in our doors working two to three jobs just to
> make ends meet.”
>
> 'A common argument against basic income is the worry it will incentivize
> people to stay unemployed and live off the government.
>
> 'It’s a worry Ingersoll doesn’t share, saying she feels the opposite is
> more likely.
> 'Part-time work, added to a basic income, would allow people currently on
> social assistance to live above the poverty line.'
>
> Read more ...
>
> http://www.intelligencer.ca/2016/11/18/can-guaranteed-basic-income-work?
> 
> Can guaranteed basic income work?
> 
> www.intelligencer.ca
> What would you do if your income was taken care of?
>
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Nov 22, 2016 at 5:39 PM, Jed Rothwell 
> wrote:
>
>> Quoting the article:
>>
>> "Yet figuring out how such a system [Universal Basic Income] could be
>> afforded -- and not turn a country into a nation of slackers -- is unclear."
>>
>>
>> As usual the author misses the point. If robots do all the work why
>> should anyone care whether people turn into slackers?
>>
>> This sort of thinking has always been common. When writing was invented
>> the ancient Greeks supposedly complained that young people no longer
>> memorized The Odyssey. Now that we have computers, people complain that
>> grade school students no longer learn how to write in script. I suppose
>> that when automobiles became common, elderly people fretted that young
>> people no longer knew how to ride horses.
>>
>> You cannot expect people to know how to use obsolete technology they do
>> not use. Someday that will include all technology. People will hardly know
>> how to tie their own shoes, never mind cooking or building a house. That
>> will be a problem for our grandchildren.
>>
>> See Arthur C. Clarke's masterpiece "Profiles of the Future," chapters 12
>> and 13. Here is the end of chapter 13, describing a world in which all
>> material goods are available in unlimited quantities for free:
>>
>> It is certainly fortunate that the replicator, if it can ever be built at
>> all, lies far 

Re: [Vo]:More on automation and Martin Ford

[H LV]

Elon Musk says there's a 'pretty good chance' universal basic income will
become reality

http://www.businessinsider.com/elon-musk-universal-basic-income-2016-11

​Harry​


On Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 2:41 PM, Brian Ahern  wrote:

> This is neo-communism.
>
>
> --
> *From:* a.ashfield 
> *Sent:* Wednesday, November 23, 2016 10:36 AM
> *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com
> *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:More on automation and Martin Ford
>
> I'm very glad to see Ontario is thinking about giving UBI a trial.  Not
> only is a trial needed to see what the snags are, but the concept is so
> alien to the GOP that right now they would never consider it.  There has to
> be some way of taking care of those made unemployed by AI and robotics.  I
> don't know of a better way of doing that.
>
> On 11/22/2016 8:20 PM, H LV wrote:
>
> From The Belleville Intelligencer
>
> 'Ontario is on the precipice of a three-year pilot to test out the concept
> of a guaranteed basic income and residents have been invited to share their
> views on the proposal online, as well as during several public
> consultations ...
>
> 'It’s a consultation Ruth Ingersoll, executive director for Community
> Development Council of Quinte, certainly plans to get in on.
> '
> “I like the model and the idea of a basic income,” said Ingersoll, adding
> it would relieve many of the barriers surrounding the complex Ontario
> Disability Support Program (ODSP) and social assistance programs. “I think
> basic income is a more dignified and respectful way to give people money
> and it would give everybody an income floor.”
>
> 'Ingersoll also said she believes it would eliminate chronic cycles of
> poverty exacerbated by the systems currently in place — having to liquidate
> assets and prove they’re poor in order to receive assistance.
>
> '... A basic income would also open up more opportunities to those living
> below the poverty line, like getting a post-secondary education or to
> supplement part-time “precarious” work.
> '... It goes beyond just money in the bank for Ingersoll, it also removes
> a lot of anxiety and stress in people’s lives.
>
> '“Our poverty isn’t just with people on social assistance and ODSP, our
> poverty is with the working poor as well. People are only able to find
> part-time minimum wage jobs.
>
> '“We have people coming in our doors working two to three jobs just to
> make ends meet.”
>
> 'A common argument against basic income is the worry it will incentivize
> people to stay unemployed and live off the government.
>
> 'It’s a worry Ingersoll doesn’t share, saying she feels the opposite is
> more likely.
> 'Part-time work, added to a basic income, would allow people currently on
> social assistance to live above the poverty line.'
>
> Read more ...
>
> http://www.intelligencer.ca/2016/11/18/can-guaranteed-basic-income-work?
> 
> Can guaranteed basic income work?
> 
> www.intelligencer.ca
> What would you do if your income was taken care of?
>
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Nov 22, 2016 at 5:39 PM, Jed Rothwell 
> wrote:
>
>> Quoting the article:
>>
>> "Yet figuring out how such a system [Universal Basic Income] could be
>> afforded -- and not turn a country into a nation of slackers -- is unclear."
>>
>>
>> As usual the author misses the point. If robots do all the work why
>> should anyone care whether people turn into slackers?
>>
>> This sort of thinking has always been common. When writing was invented
>> the ancient Greeks supposedly complained that young people no longer
>> memorized The Odyssey. Now that we have computers, people complain that
>> grade school students no longer learn how to write in script. I suppose
>> that when automobiles became common, elderly people fretted that young
>> people no longer knew how to ride horses.
>>
>> You cannot expect people to know how to use obsolete technology they do
>> not use. Someday that will include all technology. People will hardly know
>> how to tie their own shoes, never mind cooking or building a house. That
>> will be a problem for our grandchildren.
>>
>> See Arthur C. Clarke's masterpiece "Profiles of the Future," chapters 12
>> and 13. Here is the end of chapter 13, describing a world in which all
>> material goods are available in unlimited quantities for free:
>>
>> It is certainly fortunate that the replicator, if it can ever be built at
>> all, lies far in the future, at the end of many social revolutions.
>> Confronted by it, our own culture would collapse speedily into sybaritic
>> hedonism, fol­lowed immediately by the boredom of absolute satiety. Some
>> cynics may doubt if any society of human beings could adjust itself to
>> unlimited abundance and the lifting of the curse of Adam—a curse which may
>> be a blessing in disguise.
>>
>> Yet in every age, 

[Vo]:LENR as a source of frustration

[Peter Gluck]

http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2016/11/nov-23-2016-lenr-as-source-of.html

but not only that...\

peter
-- 
Dr. Peter Gluck
Cluj, Romania
http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com

Re: [Vo]:More on automation and Martin Ford

[Brian Ahern]

This is neo-communism.



From: a.ashfield 
Sent: Wednesday, November 23, 2016 10:36 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:More on automation and Martin Ford

I'm very glad to see Ontario is thinking about giving UBI a trial.  Not only is 
a trial needed to see what the snags are, but the concept is so alien to the 
GOP that right now they would never consider it.  There has to be some way of 
taking care of those made unemployed by AI and robotics.  I don't know of a 
better way of doing that.

On 11/22/2016 8:20 PM, H LV wrote:
>From The Belleville Intelligencer

'Ontario is on the precipice of a three-year pilot to test out the concept of a 
guaranteed basic income and residents have been invited to share their views on 
the proposal online, as well as during several public consultations ...

'It’s a consultation Ruth Ingersoll, executive director for Community 
Development Council of Quinte, certainly plans to get in on.
'
“I like the model and the idea of a basic income,” said Ingersoll, adding it 
would relieve many of the barriers surrounding the complex Ontario Disability 
Support Program (ODSP) and social assistance programs. “I think basic income is 
a more dignified and respectful way to give people money and it would give 
everybody an income floor.”

'Ingersoll also said she believes it would eliminate chronic cycles of poverty 
exacerbated by the systems currently in place — having to liquidate assets and 
prove they’re poor in order to receive assistance.

'... A basic income would also open up more opportunities to those living below 
the poverty line, like getting a post-secondary education or to supplement 
part-time “precarious” work.
'... It goes beyond just money in the bank for Ingersoll, it also removes a lot 
of anxiety and stress in people’s lives.

'“Our poverty isn’t just with people on social assistance and ODSP, our poverty 
is with the working poor as well. People are only able to find part-time 
minimum wage jobs.

'“We have people coming in our doors working two to three jobs just to make 
ends meet.”

'A common argument against basic income is the worry it will incentivize people 
to stay unemployed and live off the government.

'It’s a worry Ingersoll doesn’t share, saying she feels the opposite is more 
likely.
'Part-time work, added to a basic income, would allow people currently on 
social assistance to live above the poverty line.'

Read more ...

http://www.intelligencer.ca/2016/11/18/can-guaranteed-basic-income-work?
[http://storage.intelligencer.ca/v1/dynamic_resize/sws_path/suns-prod-images/1297816148947_ORIGINAL.jpg?quality=80=320x=1458332004373]

Can guaranteed basic income 
work?
www.intelligencer.ca
What would you do if your income was taken care of?






On Tue, Nov 22, 2016 at 5:39 PM, Jed Rothwell 
> wrote:
Quoting the article:

"Yet figuring out how such a system [Universal Basic Income] could be afforded 
-- and not turn a country into a nation of slackers -- is unclear."

As usual the author misses the point. If robots do all the work why should 
anyone care whether people turn into slackers?

This sort of thinking has always been common. When writing was invented the 
ancient Greeks supposedly complained that young people no longer memorized The 
Odyssey. Now that we have computers, people complain that grade school students 
no longer learn how to write in script. I suppose that when automobiles became 
common, elderly people fretted that young people no longer knew how to ride 
horses.

You cannot expect people to know how to use obsolete technology they do not 
use. Someday that will include all technology. People will hardly know how to 
tie their own shoes, never mind cooking or building a house. That will be a 
problem for our grandchildren.

See Arthur C. Clarke's masterpiece "Profiles of the Future," chapters 12 and 
13. Here is the end of chapter 13, describing a world in which all material 
goods are available in unlimited quantities for free:

It is certainly fortunate that the replicator, if it can ever be built at all, 
lies far in the future, at the end of many social revolutions. Confronted by 
it, our own culture would collapse speedily into sybaritic hedonism, fol­lowed 
immediately by the boredom of absolute satiety. Some cynics may doubt if any 
society of human beings could adjust itself to unlimited abundance and the 
lifting of the curse of Adam—a curse which may be a blessing in disguise.

Yet in every age, a few men have known such freedom, and not all of them have 
been corrupted by it. Indeed, I would define a civilized man as one who can be 
happily occupied for a lifetime even if he has no need to work for a living. 
This means that the greatest problem of the future 

[Vo]:My latest product

[Frank Znidarsic]

It's in testing now.  It should be released at Google and Amazon by years end.
 How do you like it?


http://www.angelfire.com/scifi2/zpt/movies/Dreams4MB.mp4




My cold fusion books are selling slowly now.


Frank Znidarsic

[Vo]:Sherritt Gordon process for nickel

[Jones Beene]

There is a specialty nickel powder which is a bit more costly, since it is is 
made by hydrogen reduction. Essentially this means that the nickel is refined 
in a process which itself could be gainful in energy, since hydrogen under heat 
and pressure are employed to refine it. The Sherritt Gordon company in Canada 
no longer makes this product, but it is still available.

Hunter Chemical LLC sells this Sherritt Gordon type, but almost everyone in 
LENR seems to be using Hunters other nickel process - the "AH" series which is 
a carbonyl process (reduction primarily by carbon instead of hydrogen). 

Notably - the AH nickel has a spikey surface which was formerly thought to be 
important - but the bottom line is that no one in LENR can make the spikey 
nickel work for excess heat, despite having "a nano-structured surface which 
looks like it ought to work" - at least no one has made Hunter-AH nickel work 
in a robust and repeatable way.

So why would anyone suspect that the Sherritt Gordon processed nickel, would 
work? It looks very different under magnification and does not have the 
nano-structured spikes of the carbon-based product. Not sexy. So much for 
appearances. 

Could it be the case that hydrogen processing of nickel during manufacture in a 
key to success? Well, that is going too far, but as it turns out, Sherritt 
Gordon was the type of nickel used in the Thermacore "runaway" reaction. There 
was so little attention given to that incident by most in LENR, that the type 
of nickel involved was almost forgotten. 

If anyone out there has actually used the Sherritt Gordon nickel - please 
comment here. 

Extra‐High‐Purity Nickel Powder from Nickel Sulfate Solution by Hydrogen 
Reduction

  
|  
|   |  
Extra‐High‐Purity Nickel Powder from Nickel Sulfate Solution by Hydrogen 
Reduction
   |  |

  |

 

Re: [Vo]:More on automation and Martin Ford

[a.ashfield]

I'm very glad to see Ontario is thinking about giving UBI a trial. Not 
only is a trial needed to see what the snags are, but the concept is so 
alien to the GOP that right now they would never consider it.  There has 
to be some way of taking care of those made unemployed by AI and 
robotics.  I don't know of a better way of doing that.


On 11/22/2016 8:20 PM, H LV wrote:

From The Belleville Intelligencer

'Ontario is on the precipice of a three-year pilot to test out the 
concept of a guaranteed basic income and residents have been invited 
to share their views on the proposal online, as well as during several 
public consultations ...


'It’s a consultation Ruth Ingersoll, executive director for Community 
Development Council of Quinte, certainly plans to get in on.

'
“I like the model and the idea of a basic income,” said Ingersoll, 
adding it would relieve many of the barriers surrounding the complex 
Ontario Disability Support Program (ODSP) and social assistance 
programs. “I think basic income is a more dignified and respectful way 
to give people money and it would give everybody an income floor.”


'Ingersoll also said she believes it would eliminate chronic cycles of 
poverty exacerbated by the systems currently in place — having to 
liquidate assets and prove they’re poor in order to receive assistance.


'... A basic income would also open up more opportunities to those 
living below the poverty line, like getting a post-secondary education 
or to supplement part-time “precarious” work.
'... It goes beyond just money in the bank for Ingersoll, it also 
removes a lot of anxiety and stress in people’s lives.


'“Our poverty isn’t just with people on social assistance and ODSP, 
our poverty is with the working poor as well. People are only able to 
find part-time minimum wage jobs.


'“We have people coming in our doors working two to three jobs just to 
make ends meet.”


'A common argument against basic income is the worry it will 
incentivize people to stay unemployed and live off the government.


'It’s a worry Ingersoll doesn’t share, saying she feels the opposite 
is more likely.
'Part-time work, added to a basic income, would allow people currently 
on social assistance to live above the poverty line.'


Read more ...

http://www.intelligencer.ca/2016/11/18/can-guaranteed-basic-income-work?



On Tue, Nov 22, 2016 at 5:39 PM, Jed Rothwell > wrote:


Quoting the article:

"Yet figuring out how such a system [Universal Basic Income]
could be afforded -- and not turn a country into a nation of
slackers -- is unclear."


As usual the author misses the point. If robots do all the work
why should anyone care whether people turn into slackers?

This sort of thinking has always been common. When writing was
invented the ancient Greeks supposedly complained that young
people no longer memorized The Odyssey. Now that we have
computers, people complain that grade school students no longer
learn how to write in script. I suppose that when automobiles
became common, elderly people fretted that young people no longer
knew how to ride horses.

You cannot expect people to know how to use obsolete technology
they do not use. Someday that will include all technology. People
will hardly know how to tie their own shoes, never mind cooking or
building a house. That will be a problem for our grandchildren.

See Arthur C. Clarke's masterpiece "Profiles of the Future,"
chapters 12 and 13. Here is the end of chapter 13, describing a
world in which all material goods are available in unlimited
quantities for free:

It is certainly fortunate that the replicator, if it can ever
be built at all, lies far in the future, at the end of many
social revolutions. Confronted by it, our own culture would
collapse speedily into sybaritic hedonism, fol­lowed
immediately by the boredom of absolute satiety. Some cynics
may doubt if any society of human beings could adjust itself
to unlimited abundance and the lifting of the curse of Adam—a
curse which may be a blessing in disguise.

Yet in every age, a few men have known such freedom, and not
all of them have been corrupted by it. Indeed, I would define
a civilized man as one who can be happily occupied for a
lifetime even if he has no need to work for a living. This
means that the greatest problem of the future is civilizing
the human race; but we know that already.

So we may hope, therefore, that one day our age of roaring
factories and bulging warehouses will pass away, as the
spinning wheel and the home loom and the butter churn passed
before them. And then our descendants, no longer cluttered up
with possessions, will remember what many of us have
forgotten—that the