Fast Track Financial Independence (5 steps) | Millennial Money

Posted on by

05 Jul Fast Track Financial Independence (5 steps)Grant SabatierFounder of Millennial Money and Author of Financial Freedom. Dubbed "The Millennial Millionaire" by CNBC, Grant went from $2.26 to over $1 million in 5 years, reaching financial independence at age 30. He's passionate about helping others build wealth and is addicted to Personal Capital.Latest posts by Grant Sabatier (see all)

One of the most common questions I get is How can I reach financial independence or retire early? While its never been easier to get rich slowly (save 10-20% and invest in index funds), its actually a lot harder to fast track your financial independence (when work is optional).

And when I say fast track financial independence, I am talking about retiring in 10 years or less from today, even if you are starting with very little. You need to make a lot of money, cut back on your three biggest expenses, invest as much as you can, and keep track of your net-worth using a free tracker like Personal Capital.

Honestly, trying to make as much money as you can and reach early retirement can be pretty stressful. There were weeks where I hardly slept and I definitely wasnt chilling as hard as I hustled. Im not going to sugar coat it for youit was the hardest and most intense thing Ive ever done in my life. While I always say that saving is an opportunity, not a sacrifice, trying to essentially go from broke to financial independence in 6 years requires a pretty big sacrifice.

But would I do it again? Absolutely. While tired, I was pretty happy most of the time. I enjoyed the challenge, the discipline, the mistakes, and simply doing something different than 99% of people out there. I like being different and a little weird; its just more fun. Chasing early retirement is definitely not the status quo.

Most people just didnt get it. They thought I was crazy. You save 80% of your income? You have a six figure income so shouldnt you have a nice car? Im sorry, Grant, but why do you live in such a crappy apartment when you make so much money? None of it phased me. I had a goal. Its what I thought about when I woke up and what I thought about when I went to sleep. How was I going to escape the rat race? How was I going to make more money?

Whether you are just starting your financial independence journey or you are deep in it,heres how I was able to fast track and go from broke to financial independence in 6 years. This is what I did and what I wished I did (like sleeping more and learning when to treat myself sometimes).

In 2010 when I started my financial independence journey, I didnt set a goal for how long it would take. All I knew was that when I did the math I was never going to be able to retire if I was only able to save 5-10% of a $40,000 $50,000 income.

The math I did was pretty simple. If I was able to save $5,000 per year maximum, even with an expected compounding rate of 6%, I would have about $433,000 in 30 years. While that might seem like a lot of money today,its not going to be that much in 30 years, because of two expected variablestaxes and inflation. You will need to pay tax on that money when you take it out, assuming a 30% tax rate that cuts the after-tax value to $308,000, which when adjusted for 2% annual conservative inflation amount (it could be higher than this even!), then the future value of that money after taxes and inflation is approximately $170,000.

While $170,000 is still a lot of money, its not going to be in 30 years. It definitely wont be enough to live on for 20+ years.

Typical wisdom is that you need 25x your annual expenses to retire early. When I did this calculation, I anticipated my annual expenses would be at least $50,000 in the future (who knows if I will actually be able to live off $50,000 in the futureI sure hope so!). But it was the best starting point I had, so by simply multiplying 25x by $50,000, I determined that I would need to save $1,250,000. Thats a big number, but it was my target.

You can sit down with a piece of paper and see how much money you need to retire early by checking this calculator I built.

Keeping a budget is really hard and its what stops most people from really fast tracking their financial independence. Of course, its important to keep track of your money, but if you really want to save, then you need to look first optimize your three biggest expenseshousing, transportation, and food.

The average American spends 70% of their money on housing, transportation, and food, so if you can spend less on them (say 25% or so, then you can bank the difference). If you move to a smaller apartment, walk to work, and cook at home, you could realistically increase your savings rate to 25%+ or even higher.

By reducing what I spent on my housing, transportation, and food costs, I increased my savings rate to 40% and sometimes as high as 80% while I was fast tracking my financial independence. The only way I was able to fast track was by cutting way back on my living expenses and investing the difference. If you want to save money on housing (typically your biggest expense), check out how to live rent free and the fundamentals of house hacking.

At the end of the day it comes down to a personal choice, but I was happy moving to a smaller apartment, moving closer to my office, and eating out less, to bank the difference. And I definitely was able to bank the differencesaving at least an additional $13,000 per year by cutting back. While I dont have the exact figures, I estimate that cutting back for 2 years, before buying my first home, I was able to save about $25,000 that I invested in 2011 and 2012, and that cutting back is now worth more than $100,000 in my investment accounts. Im going to continue to let it grow and hopefully making that decision 2 years ago will compound in 20 years into a lot more money. It was totally worth cutting back on my three biggest expenses. Try it out.

After doing the simple math that making $50,000 was definitely not going to be enough to fast track my financial independence, I knew I had to make a lot more money to invest. I startedside hustlingintensely in 2010, back when it was just called freelancing or gigging. Ive probably had over 25 different side hustles over the past 7 years, but the smartest thing I did was invest as much money of my side hustle money as possible.

One day in 2011, I sold a $50,000 website project, then that same day, someone who lives in my building posted on the community message board looking for someone to watch his cat for the next few days for $60. I was around for the weekend, so I jumped on it. Two days later, I sold one of my mopeds for a $300 profit. The next week, I resold 4 tickets to a Kanye West show for $550 profit.

A few weeks later, I took the $60 + $300 + $550 = $910 and the $50,000 x .70 = $35,000 after estimated taxes, and put the $35,910 directly into my Vanguard Total Stock Market Index fund from my phone. This was all side income, which I was investing 100% of at the time to fast track my financial independence.

Today, as Im writing this in 2017 that $35,910 is now worth about $108,000. The $910 alone that I made on the side increased in value to over $2,700. Not bad for building a website, watching a cat, selling a few tickets, and flipping a model.

At the height of my side hustling, I had seven pretty consistent income streams and was only living off one of them. The rest went right into investments. Every day I look for money making opportunities like this and then I do the most important step of allinvest it, so it can grow.

First, its essential to switch from a saving to an investing mindset. Its not possible to fast track financial independence by keeping your money in a savings accountinvesting is an essential ingredient. I have made more money through investing than anything else and most of it in my sleep! Just recently, I was looking at my investing returns over a 90 day period and realized that I had made over $15,000 in gains from one of my investments, which is more money than I made in 6 months working at my first job after college. If you really want to make money, then you need to be investing as much money as you can.

As Ive written about before, if you increase your savings/investing rate 1% every year, you can retire up to 2 years earlier, or if you save just 5% more then you could retire 10-15 years earlier. The math is pretty simple and the higher your % saving/investing rate, the faster you will able to reach financial independence. During my most intense months, I was saving 60%+ of my income and 100% of my side hustle income. Earlier this year, I tested myself and was able tosave 82% of my total income. While that might be a little extreme, it makes a massive difference for your future net-worth.

Remember what I said about living differently? A 50% saving/investing rate is more common than you would think amongst the FIRE (financial independence early retirement) crowd. I know a lot of people that save this much each month because they get it. Saving 50%+ of your income is definitely going against the status quo, but thats how you fast track wealth. If you want to go deeper, here are two posts onhow much money you should be savingandmy investing strategy.

At 24 years old, with no money, I had no idea how I was going to save my target $1,250,000.Its been shown in a bunch of research studies that our brains cant actually comprehendthat much moneythe numbers are too large and abstract to most people. It was daunting, to say the least.How was I going to make all that money?

This is why a lot of retirement calculators just arent that effective. They tell you that youll need $2,000,000 saved in 30 years, but dont break down the steps to get you there.

Recent psychology research also highlights that our brains work best when we break down large goals into daily goals. I figured out that to reach $1,250,000 in 30 years (expecting a return of 6-7% per year) using my investing strategy, I would need to save $50 per day to retire in 30 years. Every dollar I could save after $50, I would be fast-tracking my financial independence. Its also worth noting that I didnt start at $50 per day, I scaled up to it starting at $5 per day and then pushing it a few dollars more when I could.

Research also highlights that we should accomplish these daily goals through better habits. The key to building wealth is really in our daily habits. The better our money habits, the more money we will make, save invest, and grow. To go deeper, here are mybest money habits.

The five steps I used to fast track financial independence are simple in theory but can be difficult in practice. Like many things in life, its all about the effort and execution. You need to be consistent. Consistency is more important than anything elseyou cant just follow these steps for a few months. If you want it, youll prioritize it. You can also start as slowly or quickly as you want.

In 2010 when I made the decision to chase financial independence, I jumped in 100%, but thats just what I needed to do to get going.The key to building any sustainable results is to start at your own pace, start making more money where you can, and really push your investing percentage higher 1% at a time. It really adds up and every $1 you are investing today will compound as long as you keep it invested. As Ive mentioned before every $1 I invested in 2010 is worth almost $4 today.

It took almost all of my energy for six straight years to go from broke to financially independent. I also got lucky the stock market has grown so much over the past 7 years, but I was ready. Building wealth is about controlling as many of the variables as you can and then letting it grow.

+ GET CHAPTER 1 of my Bestselling Book FINANCIAL FREEDOM!

Success! Now check your email to confirm. FIGHTING THE SPAMBOTS!

Read more:

Fast Track Financial Independence (5 steps) | Millennial Money

Cyberpunk 2020 – Wikipedia

Posted on by

The basic rules system of Cyberpunk 2020 (called the Interlock System) is skill-based rather than level-based, with players being awarded points to be spent on their skill sets. New skills outside of their expertise can be learned, but in-game time needs to be spent on this. A large part of this system is the player characters' ability to augment themselves with cyber-technology and their ensuing loss of humanity as they become more machine than human.

Cyberpunk 2020 claims to lend itself to play in the street level, dark film noir genre, but certain aspects of the basic system can influence game sessions toward a high body-count, 1980s action movie style.

Although each player must choose a character class or "role" from those given in the basic rules, there is enough variation in the skill system so that no two members of the same class are alike. Because Cyberpunk 2020 is skill-based, the choice of skills around the class-specific special ability allows a wide range of character development choices including non-combatants.

The combat system, called "Friday Night Firefight", emphasizes lethality. Several pages in the rules are devoted to discussing real combat vs. the illusions often seen on TV. Attempts are made to keep the combat as realistic as possible in a game setting. No matter who the character is, a single bullet can result in a lethal wound. This encourages a more tactically oriented and thought-out game play, which is in accordance to the rough-and-gritty ethos of the Cyberpunk genre. Also, the amount of damage a character can sustain does not increase as the character develops. The only way a character can become more damage-resistant is to either become better at not being hit, physically augment their body with muscle (trained or implanted) or cybernetics, or wear armor.

Firestorm was supposed to be the bridge between Cyberpunk 2020 (the 2nd edition rules and milieu) and Cyberpunk V.3 (the 3rd Edition rules and milieu). Its purpose was to shake up everything and get players prepared for the new background they were cooking up.

Set in 2023, the backstory has two deep-ocean-based megacorporations dueling for control over a third one (the period known as the "Ocean War"). When it escalates into open warfare, they each hire mercenaries. One hires the Japanese diversified technology and security services firm Arasaka and the other hires the American military technology and mercenary services firm Militech.

During the conflict, the long-standing bitter rivalry between Arasaka and Militech causes them to forget about their customers and go for each other. In the beginning they feud quietly (the phase called the "Shadow War"). But the covert war between the two heats up, becoming the Fourth Corporate War.

In the course of the adventure setting, the characters are hired to hunt down a pesky netrunner who is making their anonymous employer unhappy. Little do they realize that the hacker is the infamous (and already "dead") Rache Bartmoss. Regardless of what they do, their employer pinpoints the apartment with an orbital mass-driver and vaporizes it.

Set in 2024, the second part of the Firestorm series sees Arasaka mobilize the Japanese Defense Force to take on Militech and the American military in a series of "proxy conflicts" (the phase dubbed the "Hot War").

Waves of cyberviruses corrupt databases worldwide, leaving the isolated Arasaka Towers arcology in Night City the last viable data storage mainframe in the world.

Militech gathers together the surviving meta-characters and a Special Forces team played by the player characters into a "super team". Their job: to take out Arasaka's Night City arcology with a tactical nuke to deny its assets to Arasaka.

Then they find out that Alt Cunningham, who was captured by Arasaka earlier, is trapped inside the mainframe. Of course, Johnny won't let Alt die a second time, so the team tries to break her out.

The end result is that the meta-characters go out in a blaze of glory. Johnny Silverhand dies at the hands of Arasaka's cyborg assassin Adam Smasher in order to buy Spider Murphy enough time to break Alt into a series of datapackets and downloads her into the Net. Morgan Blackhand then takes on Adam Smasher atop Arasaka Towers while the rest of the team gets extracted out. The outcome of the duel is greatly disputed because the low-yield tactical nuke the team deployed sets off the 2-kiloton "self destruct" bomb Arasaka had placed in its data core. This destroyed much of downtown Night City and contaminated the ruins and anything downwind of it with lethal fallout.

The long-awaited third volume, Aftershock promised to tie all the loose ends together and herald the end of the old Cyberpunk 2020 (or "Cyberpunk V.2") game world and usher in the beginning of the new Cyberpunk 2030 (or "Cyberpunk V.3") game world. It was later cancelled and its material was folded into the Cyberpunk 203X rules book.

Cybergeneration takes place in an alternate future of the core Cyberpunk 2020 timeline, where a nanotech virus epidemic has resulted in a subgroup of teenagers with unusual, superhuman skills. It began as a supplement that still required the Cyberpunk 2020 rulebook, but the second edition became a standalone game.

Ever since the 1998 release of the Cyberpunk 2020 sourcebook Firestorm: Shockwave, fans of the game had been waiting for a third edition of the Cyberpunk game, known as Cyberpunk 203X. Over the years, the entire project had at times been discounted as vaporware, its delays due to other projects and Pondsmith's involvement in the development of The Matrix Online.[citation needed]

The game was released first in PDF form on December 17, 2005 and as a conventional book on January 15, 2006.

The setting has been heavily updated from its last event book series, Firestorm, which covered the opening of the Fourth Corporate War. The aftermath of the Fourth Corporate War has resulted in widespread corruption of the Net and major losses of hard-copied data, to the point that all data is intangible and recent recorded history is in doubt. An example that pops up in Pondsmith's demos at conventions, releases on the Internet, and in the finished game is that history has become so corrupted that many people in the world now believe Richard Nixon, instead of resigning over Watergate, committed suicide on camera and that memes such as the moon landing being hoaxed become prevalent.

The war has also led to the collapse of nations, the world economy, and many of the staple megacorporations. This civil upheaval leads to the rise of the "altcults", alternative cultures similar in vein to the "phyles" from Neal Stephenson's The Diamond Age. In fact, Cyberpunk V.3 has more to do with the new postcyberpunk literary movement and transhumanism than with the Gibson-Sterling mirrorshades movement.

In addition to rules changes to the Fuzion system and background, Cyberpunk V3.0 also uses concepts taken from Pondsmith's experience at Microsoft with computer and video games as well as corporate culture, such as a simpler character generation system using templates, web-based active content URL links for updates, and making groups, organizations, and corporations their own "characters".

In addition, there is also the Fallen Angels, space-bound scavengers, the Ghosts, people who have uploaded their minds, and the Neo-Corps, the surviving corporations of the Cyberpunk 2020 world that now exist in the form of organized crime syndicates. However, the six listed above are the only ones that have been mentioned in any deep detail. Only the Edgerunners Altcult had a published sourcebook released.

On January 25, 2018, R. Talsorian Games announced an updated edition for Cyberpunk 2020 called Cyberpunk Red, which is currently in active development.[2]

More here:

Cyberpunk 2020 - Wikipedia

Urban Dictionary: cyberpunk

Posted on by

A subgenre of science fiction that nerds can never agree on the exact meaning of. A good guide line though is the two words in that portmanteau: "cyber" and "punk." Does the movie/book/show/comic/whatever in question have a heavy emphasis on technology? (As opposed to aliens, space exploration, time travel, etc.) Then it's got the "cyber." Does it have a punk-like feel to it? (Dark, neon-filled setting, black leather and sunglasses, techno-punk soundtrack, devil-may-care attitudes, etc.) Then it's got the "punk."

Depending on which nerd you ask, examples of cyberpunk include: "The Matrix," "Blade Runner," "The Terminator," "Total Recall," "Snow Crash," "Neuromancer," "Burning Chrome," "Hammerjack," "Altered Carbon," "Shadowrun," "Repo: The Genetic Opera," "Inception," "Ultraviolet," "Aeon Flux," "Tron," and probably tons of other classic examples this writer is forgetting.

Cliches to look for, that may indicate a cyberpunk story:

- Hackers- Virtual reality- A dark (in any sense of the word) future- Sunglasses- Leather- Pimpin' suits- Razor Girls- Techno music- Neon- Urban settings- Evil corporate dudes- Anything related to Japan- Spunky teenage couriers on wheels (skateboards, bikes, roller blades, etc.)- A wise and mysterious black dude- Sarcasm- Robots- Gratuitous action/violence/boobies- Hearing yourself say "Damn this is so cheesy, but I love it so much!"- Giant, futuristic blimps

"It was made in 1999. True cyberpunk must be from the '80s, like 'Blade Runner' and 'Neuromancer.'"

"Dude, that's like saying 'Harry Potter' can't be fantasy, because it wasn't written in the same decade as 'Lord of the Rings.'"

"...it's *post*-cyberpunk, is what it is."

"Dude....waaat?"

Excerpt from:

Urban Dictionary: cyberpunk

Gene therapy might be a cure for "bubble boy disease …

Posted on by

They were born without a working germ-fighting system, every infection a threat to their lives. Now eight babies with "bubble boy disease" have had it fixed by a gene therapy made from one of the immune system's worst enemies HIV, the virus that causes AIDS.

Astudyout Wednesday details how scientists turned this enemy virus into a savior, altering it so it couldn't cause disease and then using it to deliver a gene the boys lacked.

"This therapy has cured the patients," although it will take more time to see if it's a permanent fix, said Dr. Ewelina Mamcarz, one of the study leaders at St. Jude Children's Research Hospital in Memphis.

Omarion Jordan, who turns 1 later this month, had the therapy in December to treat severe combined immunodeficiency syndrome, or SCID.

"For a long time we didn't know what was wrong with him. He just kept getting these infections," said his mother, Kristin Simpson. Learning that he had SCID "was just heartbreaking ... I didn't know what was going to happen to him."

Omarion now has a normal immune system. "He's like a normal, healthy baby," Simpson said. "I think it's amazing."

Study results were published by the New England Journal of Medicine. The treatment was pioneered by a St. Jude doctor who recently died, Brian Sorrentino.

SCID is caused by a genetic flaw that keeps the bone marrow from making effective versions of blood cells that comprise the immune system. It affects 1 in 200,000 newborns, almost exclusively males. Without treatment, it often kills in the first year or two of life.

"A simple infection like the common cold could be fatal," Mamcarz said.

The nickname "bubble boy disease" comes from a famous case in the 1970s a Texas boy who lived for 12 years in a protective plastic bubble to isolate him from germs. A bone marrow transplant from a genetically matched sibling can cure SCID, but most people lack a suitable donor. Transplants also are medically risky the Texas boy died after one.

Doctors think gene therapy could be a solution. It involves removing some of a patient's blood cells, using the modified HIV to insert the missing gene, and returning the cells through an IV. Before getting their cells back, patients are given a drug to destroy some of their marrow so the modified cells have more room to grow.

When doctors first tried it 20 years ago, the treatment had unintended effects on other genes, and some patients later developed leukemia. The new therapy has safeguards to lower that risk.

A small study of older children suggested it was safe. The new study tried it in infants, and doctors are reporting on the first eight who were treated at St. Jude and at UCSF Benioff Children's Hospital San Francisco.

Within a few months, normal levels of healthy immune system cells developed in seven boys. The eighth needed a second dose of gene therapy but now is well, too. Six to 24 months after treatment, all eight are making all the cell types needed to fight infections, and some have successfully received vaccines to further boost their immunity to disease.

No serious or lasting side effects occurred.

Omarion is the 10th boy treated in the study, which is ongoing. It's sponsored by the American Lebanese Syrian Associated Charities, the California Institute of Regenerative Medicine, the Assisi Foundation of Memphis and the federal government.

"So far it really looks good," but patients will have to be studied to see if the results last, said Dr. Anthony Fauci, head of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, which helped develop the treatment. "To me, this looks promising."

Rights to it have been licensed by St. Jude to Mustang Bio. Doctors say they have no estimate on what it might cost if it does become an approved treatment.

A similar technique harnessing a modified version of HIV is also being studied as a possible cure for sickle cell anemia, CBS News chief medical correspondent Dr. Jon LaPook reports. In a clinical trial at the National Institutes of Health, nine adults with sickle cell anemia have undergone the gene therapy. So far, all are responding well.

Link:

Gene therapy might be a cure for "bubble boy disease ...

Gene therapy restores immunity in infants with rare …

Posted on by

News Release

Wednesday, April 17, 2019

NIH scientists and funding contributed to development of experimental treatment

A small clinical trial has shown that gene therapy can safely correct the immune systems of infants newly diagnosed with a rare, life-threatening inherited disorder in which infection-fighting immune cells do not develop or function normally. Eight infants with the disorder, called X-linked severe combined immunodeficiency (X-SCID), received an experimental gene therapy co-developed by National Institutes of Health scientists. They experienced substantial improvements in immune system function and were growing normally up to two years after treatment. The new approach appears safer and more effective than previously tested gene-therapy strategies for X-SCID.

These interim results from the clinical trial, supported in part by NIH, were published today in The New England Journal of Medicine.

Infants with X-SCID, caused by mutations in the IL2RG gene, are highly susceptible to severe infections. If untreated, the disease is fatal, usually within the first year or two of life. Infants with X-SCID typically are treated with transplants of blood-forming stem cells, ideally from a genetically matched sibling. However, less than 20% of infants with the disease have such a donor. Those without a matched sibling typically receive transplants from a parent or other donor, which are lifesaving, but often only partially restore immunity. These patients require lifelong treatment and may continue to experience complex medical problems, including chronic infections.

"A diagnosis of X-linked severe combined immunodeficiency can be traumatic for families," said Anthony S. Fauci, M.D., director of NIHs National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID). These exciting new results suggest that gene therapy may be an effective treatment option for infants with this extremely serious condition, particularly those who lack an optimal donor for stem cell transplant. This advance offers them the hope of developing a wholly functional immune system and the chance to live a full, healthy life.

To restore immune function to those with X-SCID, scientists at NIAID and St. Jude Childrens Research Hospital in Memphis, Tennessee, developed an experimental gene therapy that involves inserting a normal copy of the IL2RG gene into the patients own blood-forming stem cells. The Phase 1/2 trial reported today enrolled eight infants aged 2 to 14 months who were newly diagnosed with X-SCID and lacked a genetically matched sibling donor. The study was conducted at St. Jude and the Benioff Childrens Hospital of the University of California, San Francisco. Encouraging early results from a separate NIAID-led study at the NIH Clinical Center informed the design of the study in infants. The NIH study is evaluating the gene therapy in older children and young adults with X-SCID who previously had received stem cell transplants.

The gene therapy approach involves first obtaining blood-forming stem cells from a patients bone marrow. Then, an engineered lentivirus that cannot cause illness is used as a carrier, or vector, to deliver the normal IL2RGgene to the cells. Finally, the stem cells are infused back into the patient, who has received a low dose of the chemotherapy medication busulfan to help the genetically corrected stem cells establish themselves in the bone marrow and begin producing new blood cells.

Normal numbers of multiple types of immune cells, including T cells, B cells and natural killer (NK) cells, developed within three to four months after gene therapy in seven of the eight infants. While the eighth participant initially had low numbers of T cells, the numbers greatly increased following a second infusion of the genetically modified stem cells. Viral and bacterial infections that participants had prior to treatment resolved afterwards. The experimental gene therapy was safe overall, according to the researchers, although some participants experienced expected side effects such as a low platelet count following chemotherapy.

"The broad scope of immune function that our gene therapy approach has restored to infants with X-SCID as well as to older children and young adults in our study at NIH is unprecedented," said Harry Malech, M.D., chief of the Genetic Immunotherapy Section in NIAIDs Laboratory of Clinical Immunology and Microbiology. Dr. Malech co-led the development of the lentiviral gene therapy approach with St. Judes Brian Sorrentino, M.D., who died in late 2018. These encouraging results would not have been possible without the efforts of my good friend and collaborator, the late Brian Sorrentino, who was instrumental in developing this treatment and bringing it into clinical trials, said Dr. Malech.

Compared with previously tested gene-therapy strategies for X-SCID, which used other vectors and chemotherapy regimens, the current approach appears safer and more effective. In these earlier studies, gene therapy restored T cell function but did not fully restore the function of other key immune cells, including B cells and NK cells. In the current study, not only did participants develop NK cells and B cells, but four infants were able to discontinue treatment with intravenous immunoglobulins infusions of antibodies to boost immunity. Three of the four developed antibody responses to childhood vaccinations an indication of robust B-cell function.

Moreover, some participants in certain early gene therapy studies later developed leukemia, which scientists suspect was because the vector activated genes that control cell growth. The lentiviral vector used in the study reported today is designed to avoid this outcome.

Researchers are continuing to monitor the infants who received the lentiviral gene therapy to evaluate the durability of immune reconstitution and assess potential long-term side effects of the treatment. They also are enrolling additional infants into the trial. The companion NIH trial evaluating the gene therapy in older children and young adults also is continuing to enroll participants.

The gene therapy trial in infants is funded by the American Lebanese Syrian Associated Charities (ALSAC), and by grants from the California Institute of Regenerative Medicine and the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, part of NIH, under award number HL053749. The work also is supported by NIAID under award numbers AI00988 and AI082973, and by the Assisi Foundation of Memphis. More information about the trial in infants is available on ClinicalTrials.gov using identifier NCT01512888. More information about the companion trial evaluating the treatment in older children and young adults is available using ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT01306019.

NIAID conducts and supports research at NIH, throughout the United States, and worldwide to study the causes of infectious and immune-mediated diseases, and to develop better means of preventing, diagnosing and treating these illnesses. News releases, fact sheets and other NIAID-related materials are available on the NIAID website.

About the National Institutes of Health (NIH):NIH, the nation's medical research agency, includes 27 Institutes and Centers and is a component of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. NIH is the primary federal agency conducting and supporting basic, clinical, and translational medical research, and is investigating the causes, treatments, and cures for both common and rare diseases. For more information about NIH and its programs, visit http://www.nih.gov.

NIHTurning Discovery Into Health

E Mamcarz et al. Lentiviral gene therapy with low dose busulfan for infants with X-SCID. The New England Journal of Medicine DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa1815408 (2019).

###

Link:

Gene therapy restores immunity in infants with rare ...

Libertarianism | Cato Institute

Posted on by

Libertarianism is the belief that each person has the right tolive his life as he chooses so long as he respects the equal rightsof others. Libertarians defend each persons right to life,liberty, and property. In the libertarian view, voluntary agreementis the gold standard of human relationships. If there is no goodreason to forbid something (a good reason being that it violatesthe rights of others), it should be allowed. Force should bereserved for prohibiting or punishing those who themselves useforce, such as murderers, robbers, rapists, kidnappers, anddefrauders (who practice a kind of theft). Most people live theirown lives by that code of ethics. Libertarians believe that thatcode should be applied consistently, even to the actions ofgovernments, which should be restricted to protecting people fromviolations of their rights. Governments should not use their powersto censor speech, conscript the young, prohibit voluntaryexchanges, steal or redistribute property, or interfere in thelives of individuals who are otherwise minding their ownbusiness.

Libertarianism.orgA project of the Cato Institute, Libertarianism.org providesinstant access to writings, multimedia programs, and research fromthe best contemporary and historical minds on individual liberty,limited government, economics, free markets, history, law,philosophy, political science, and more. The site includes onlineaccess to the Encyclopedia ofLibertarianism, as well as free print and audio editions ofLibertarianism.orgs library of books.

Read the original here:

Libertarianism | Cato Institute

Libertarianism – RationalWiki

Posted on by

One of the more pretentious political self-descriptions is Libertarian. People think it puts them above the fray. It sounds fashionable, and to the uninitiated, faintly dangerous. Actually, its just one more bullshit political philosophy. George Carlin[1]

Libertarianism is, at its simplest, the antonym of authoritarianism.[2] The term has been around since the beginning of the 19th century, first appearing in Joseph Dejacque's letter to Proudhon titled "On the Human Being, Male and Female"[3] and was primarily used for self-identification with anarcho-communism and labor movements. Albert Jay Nock and H. L. Mencken were some of the first prominent figures in the United States that used the term libertarianism[4]. However Murray Rothbard was the person most responsible for popularizing libertarianism as term to describe a political and social philosophy that advocates laissez-faire capitalism as a panacea for virtually everything[5]. Non-libertarians view this as synonymous with oligarchic plutocracy after the fashion of the American Gilded Age, while the reality-based community tends to realize that one cannot just yank economic theories out of the air and magically expect them to work.

This anti-government phenomenon is found primarily throughout most Western countries, particularly in the United States, Canada, and Western Europe. In reference to the latter, the term "liberal" is generally used to define the American and Canadian meaning of neoclassical libertarianism, while the word "libertarian" itself generally refers to the general support of individual freedoms, regardless of economic policy. Historically, the term has been associated with libertarian socialism and even sometimes anarchism in its more extreme case, but this article mainly covers the libertarianism in the United States, or what's also called "right-libertarianism" (as in "right-wing", not being right).

The US political party most aligned with libertarianism is the Libertarian Party, "America's Third Largest Party,"[6] whose candidate obtained 4.5 million, or 3.27 percent, of the vote in the 2016 presidential election.[7] This total was greater than their 1 million vote (0.99%) of the popular vote in the 2012 presidential election.[8] and 0.32% of the popular vote[9] in the 2004 presidential election (though, if any amount of fairness is to be given to them, first-past-the-post election methods are mathematically predetermined to trend towards a two-party system).[10]

There is also an "Objectivist Party," formed as a spin-off from the Libertarian Party by those who thought that the party's 2008 presidential candidate, Bob Barr, was too left-wing,[11] and a Boston Tea Party (no connection other than ideological to that other tea party) formed as a spin-off by those who thought the Libertarian Party had become too right-wing on foreign policy and civil liberties after the LP deleted much of its platform in 2006. Even so, that, again, due to the arbitrary definition of the word itself, makes little sense, as the general notion of libertarianism specifically emphasized on social liberties, with economics having little to do with the definition itself. The term "liberal", however, has come to primarily be associated with the left, due to the moderate left's support of social liberties, which played into the term "libertarian" becoming popularized in the United States in order to differentiate between the two. Even so, it is to be said that the definitions of "left" and "right" are incredibly arbitrary, seeing as, fundamentally, capitalism, despite its many flaws, is, both historically and definitively, more compatible with social progressivism than modern iterations of socialist thought, referring specifically to command-style economics.

Basically everyone agrees with libertarians on something, but they tend to get freaked out just as quickly by the ideologys other stances.

The dominant form of libertarianism (as found in the US) is an ideology based largely on Austrian School economics and Chicago School, or neoclassical, economics. The Austrian School relies on normative axioms, rather than hard empirical analysis, primarily concerned with what is ideal as opposed to "what is". That said, the branch of libertarianism that has had the most success in influencing public policy is primarily informed by the Chicago School.

Proponents of modern libertarianism frequently cite the "Non-Aggression Principle" (NAP) as the moral basis of their ideology. The NAP states that everyone is free to do whatever they want with their lives and property, so long as it does not directly interfere with the freedom of others to do the same. Under this rule, you may only use "force" in response to prior inappropriate force against the life and/or property of yourself or others. Compare and contrast with John Stuart Mill's "The Harm Principle." The critical difference between the two is that libertarians completely oppose the preemptive use of force. By contrast, Mill and other classical liberals believe that the preemptive use of force to prevent likely future harm can be justified, so long as it is for the greater good. Despite this, Mill believed that it should be seen as a last resort. Morally, modern libertarianism, specifically "classical liberals" of the Chicago School, have primarily been influenced by the concept of Utilitarianism on an ethical level, which combines both individualist and some aspects of collectivist thought.

Under any logical scrutiny it becomes evident that the precise definition of aggression is highly subjective and supposes a strict libertarian definition of property.[15] The NAP can therefore be used in almost any way its user intends, by changing the definition of aggression to suit their particular opinion/agenda. For example, throwing someone in prison for massive tax evasion is seen as an act of aggression by the state, whereas selling someone cigarettes knowing they will kill that person is not seen as aggression.

Libertarians secretly worry that ultimately someone will figure out that the whole of their political philosophy boils down to "get off my property". News flash: This is not really a big secret to the rest of us.

Many libertarians, who do not identify as either classically liberal or more left-wing branches, believe that government is the largest threat to the freedom of an individual. For this reason, they are closely associated with opposition to gun control, government surveillance, entitlements, and prohibitory drug policy.

The primary functions of government that most (emphasis: most) libertarians believe should be permissible elements of the state are:

This brand of the ideology, often referred to as "minarchism", is as close to pure anarchy one could get while still getting away with calling themselves "libertarian". This governmental structure is often referred to as a "Night-Watchman State". However, instead of dedicating their lives to defending the lands of Westeros from the Wildlings, these folk focus on dedicating their lives to defending the lands of Western Civilization from anyone whom they deem a "statist", whatever that means.

But it doesn't end there. If one moves down the spectrum towards the extremes, more and more things normally handled by the police and criminal courts are instead handled by civil courts, and eventually even the civil courts are privatized.[17] This is a very ironic philosophy, and, in a sense, makes so-called "libertarians" who believe in this ideology look extremely incoherent for various reasons, other than the fact that "anarchism" is literally the root word of anarcho-capitalism, there are some differences between the latter model and mainstream libertarianism, including minarchism, which is commonly seen as being a halfway point of sorts.

Libertarianism and anarcho-capitalism are often erroneously associated with one-another due to a vast misunderstanding of both philosophies. First of all, it is important to understand the difference between both economic structures. To start, "libertarian" is more of a political label than a specific ideology. In fact, libertarianism is a term that encompasses a very wide range of political ideologies that advocate limited government, on a variety of scales and across the political spectrum. Anarcho-capitalists, which is a specific thought school encompassed within the "anarchist" belief system. By definition, anarcho-capitalism is "right wing" anarchism, although this really only exists on paper. If one takes a closer look at anarcho-capitalism, they will realize that it is basically a sham. Anarcho-capitalists will virulently argue against their corporatist agenda, but if one takes a closer look at the system they will realize that it is nothing more than crony capitalism, if it can even be considered capitalism at all. Over time, trusts and monopolies would continue to merge, with a single major corporate powerhouse running the economy, making the laws, enforcing the laws, and levying taxes to help support its upkeep. There is really nothing libertarian about this, as libertarianism opposes big government and a regulated economy. Anarcho-capitalism is basically just a gateway to a political brand of corporatism where worldwide business conglomerates become a stand-in for the state. Anarcho-capitalism is a clever way to label an ideology catered to line the pockets of robber barons, industrialists, and business executives in order to abolish total protectionism as a means to instill their own personal interests upon those of lower economic status. The whole idea and result of the concept is that, by abolishing the state, that enables the opportunity to establish a new state disguised as a private corporation. Libertarians, on the other hand, are generally for the free market, speaking of those on the more moderate to right wings. Competition and consumer choice are key elements of the free market, as well as an emphasis on small business and firms owned on a more local level.

Most libertarians, even those on the hard left, oppose most forms of taxation (as taxes are "theft of property by force"), and any function of government outside of a general wish list, although, hereby proving that it is not a singularly consistent ideology relating pure policy, there are often-times layers of hypocrisy, as they have a number of things they like over others. Additionally, they are against the use of taxes to deal with externalities, commons, or free rider problems. Their most common remedy for these problems involve the use of civil suits to deal with (negative) externalities, and, in the case of minarchists, the privatization of commons, which allows for civil suits to handle harms to this private property. Of course, these answers are, many times, woefully inadequate in practice.[18]

Libertarians advocate extensive individual rights - an ideological stance that has always been consistent to their core beliefs. Libertarians advocate a society where "anything that's peaceful and voluntary" is allowed so long as it does not infringe on anyone else's life, liberty, or property, or engender force or fraud. However, the exact nature of a right as "positive" or "negative" differs among libertarians, as some may believe that paying taxes for certain social programs is a necessary evil for the sake of national utility (sometimes a view espoused by both classical liberals and left libertarians), while many others on the right believe that the government has no right to take a person's hard earned money to contribute to programs like healthcare, which, while, in its own way, a fair argument from an individual liberty standpoint, is not necessarily for the "greater good", which has always been a principle of libertarian ethical philosophy. It is to be said, that many libertarians are opportunists who hate taxes, often seeing themselves as special and hip for lambasting taxes to the rest of society, when, in reality, everyone, except for maybe masochists hate taxes. That being said, most standard libertarians, left-libertarians, and classical liberals seem to agree that the state and taxes are unfortunate necessities.

All libertarians have an intertwined ethical and moral philosophy that derives from Millian Utilitarianism, in that one should be able to do as they please so long as they don't hurt others or the equally important collective. If one wants to pursue faux pleasure, particularly in the hedonistic sense, they should have a right to live their own life as they please, even if those choices have negative, even harmful, consequences. The idea is that those choices are life's natural learning experiences as a means to do something in a different way in the future. Unfortunately, and while a libertarian state (which are ironically funny words to use together) would (hopefully) never endorse such, actions that can harm the body physically and mentally would be allowed under a free society. For example, one might say smoking in public is a personal liberty that affects nobody, whereas another would say it forces second-hand smoke upon those around them, interfering with their own right to not inhale smoke (note that most libertarians who are fed their talking points from think tanks fall into the former category thanks to second-hand smoke denialism). This is where a divide would rise between classical liberals who believe in a minimal state and minarchists, who believe in a microstate. A classical liberal would most likely appeal to the utilitarian idea that the good of a few people is better for overall utility as opposed to the individual person's desire to smoke a cigarette at that exact location at that exact moment. It inconveniences the non-smokers more than it does the smoker. Mill's liberalism proposed that everyone is entitled to his or her own self-interest (yes, women too) up until he or she impede upon another person's right to exercise their own personal self-interest. The self-interest of classical liberalism, which is also economically applied to policy in Chicago School neoclassicism, differs from the self-interested notions espoused by many run-of-the-mill (No, not John Stuart Mill) conservatives and wingnut libertarians, who seem to misinterpret basic economic and social egoism with egotism. Many minarchists, and even certain Republicans who have never expressed a belief in any libertarian policy or platform in their entire political career have this weird fetish with the novel Atlas Shrugged, by Russian author and self-proclaimed "philosopher" Ayn Rand. To be fair, her anti-communist opinions and literal hatred of even the mixed economy of the free world's democratic system are semi-understandable, in view of her homeland's descent into tyranny under Lenin and Stalin, but she was hardly reasonable. Later on, she garnered a cult of personality that would constantly rave about her half-baked ideology, known as "Objectivism", which itself seems to be based on half-baked interpretations of Aristotle's (somewhat pro-government and ironically somewhat altruistic) philosophies and bad Friedrich Nietzsche readings.

Atlas isn't a terrible book per se, and Rand's ideas sound like gimmicky Evil fun, but then, once finishing it, it becomes clear that, after about a day or so of pondering its content, a logical person will come to realize that the Hobbit has a plot far more grounded in reality. Although, it is to be said that the Dwarves and that Dragon are goldbugs.

Objectivism and Utilitarianism are two completely contrasting philosophies, although both are often applied to modern libertarianism, and the pro-market factions differ in how their views on the topic are expressed. Classical liberals and moderate libertarians are generally more influenced by utilitarianism and other enlightenment philosophers, while objectivism is at the heart of many minarchism circles and paleolibertarianism, and it has since found its way into mainstream conservatism for some reason. Some Republicans, including the more religious folk, seem to have some fetish for Rand, seeming to, on their own, have half-baked interpretations of an already half-baked philosophy, also seeming not to take into account that Rand was an atheist and that objectivism is not all that compatible with Jesus Christ's teachings.

Most libertarians, with only a handful of exceptions, are generally opposed to expansionism and preemptive military aggression, with most being rather skeptical of globalism. This libertarian belief against the prior use of force also extends into foreign policy. This is sometimes referred to as a "non-interventionist" foreign policy. That does not automatically make them pacifists, necessarily. Some camps strongly promote the concept of self-defense, and usually accept national defense as one of the few legitimate functions of government, although they tend to agree that the size of the standing military needs to be drastically reduced.

Libertarianism, as a term, has become a sort of buzz-word used to describe anyone who wants to lower taxes and dislikes government oversight, both on the right and left. Many right-wingers often refer to themselves as libertarians, specifically because they have some obsessive vendetta against the federal government, and, in some cases, the establishments of their own party. Even so, this is pretty much "faux-libertarianism", as they, being conservatives, are generally opposed on a political level to social liberty, which is the original foundation of the movement. As a result, many people confuse libertarians and these Republicans, many of them being paleoconservatives and members of the Tea Party. The difference between the two are simple: libertarians want a limited government, while conservative Republicans want the decentralization of executive power. That being said, these Republicans tend to be "anti-federalist", in favor of states rights. Libertarians, on the other hand, simply want smaller government in all respects, both on a federal level and at a state level. To them, letting the states dictate tax policy, choose to exercise large government oversight, dictating social liberty, and having central executive power on its own is the exact same thing as the federal government having that kind of power.

Some more conservative-leaning libertarians, also known as paleolibertarians, often express a mixture of those opinions. Despite (or maybe because of) their extreme reverence for the United States Constitution (particularly an originalist reading of the Bill of Rights), these paleolibertarians are rarely elected to office. Cynics have suggested that refusal to provide adequate pork for their district hurts their chances in congressional elections. Other cynics point out that if they don't win an election in the first place, how can their "porcine provision" skills be tested? Libertarianism seems to function as more of a platform as opposed to an actual cohesive political movement these days, particularly because there is no specific set belief system to unite all libertarians, even within the Libertarian Party. Often times libertarians have proven that they have better chance of being elected when they run as Republican, as were the cases with Ron Paul, Rand Paul, Barry Goldwater, Emperor Trajan, Mike Lee, and another guy who's name our editor has forgotten. In his defense, it looks he just had an Aleppo moment.

The narrow usage of "libertarian" as a label is also a cause, as some who take moderate libertarian positions are frequently called a "free-market liberal/Democrat" or a "pro-____ rights conservative/Republican" - or even derisive epithets like "libt kiddies." Often-times, Republicans and reactionary populists appropriate the term for their own usage. So many wingnuts like Alex Jones and Glenn Beck have literally turned many rational people off from the idea of libertarianism, leading many who are not as politically knowledgeable that they are all crazy wingnuts. While this can be the case many times, as some conservatives hate the Republican establishment so much that they want to rebrand themselves as something else, libertarianism has nothing to do with conservatism at all, and it has never been. It just so happens that right-wing fiscal policy is more in line with that of libertarianism. Other than that, libertarians are basically just your average Democrat, but less, as they would put it, "statist".

Libertarianism is such a broad, yet, at the same time, almost stupidly simple concept to understand. Like anarchism and authoritarianism, it only describes a general opinion on how the government should be run on an institutional level. It is very similar to Atheism in that way. Atheism is not a religion. Very similarly, libertarianism is not one set ideological alignment. When one thinks of an atheist, a certain image may come to mind. One such applicable one would be the "common neckbeard", clearly representing the loudest atheist community. A respected scientist like Richard Dawkins may also very well come to mind. That being said, Atheists come in many different forms, with drastically different social and political beliefs, such as these types of folks: Alt-Right Loony Tunes, right-wing shitposters, conspiracy theorists, edgy middle schoolers, antifeminists, science nerds, secular humanists, your amiable next-door neighbor, smug comedians, philosophers, intellectuals, progressivists, someone's drunk uncle, and radical progressive types. Atheism, to reiterate, is not a religious ideology like some would have you believe. The only thing that unites Atheists is a common lack of belief in a deity of any kind. There is nothing more to it.

Libertarians come in many shapes and sizes too, and from different ideological backgrounds. There are conservative libertarians, fiscal right-wingers, more conspiracists, classical liberals, leftists, angry middle-aged white men, college kids who just want to smoke weed, registered Republicans, registered Democrats, registered Libertarians, social democrats, Christians, Atheists, progressives, non-progressives, objectivists, utilitarians, and even Marxists. The one thing that unites libertarianism is the common belief in the illegitimacy of the state, but a grounded realization that government is still a necessity as it relates to upholding the social order, all of such being centered around the idea that each and every human being is equal and has the right to pursue a means to exercise personal freedom.

Ayn Rand, Rand Paul and Paul Ryan walk into a bar. The bartender serves them tainted alcohol because there are no regulations. They die.

Many libertarians found the political philosophy through one of a small number of influential fiction books. The works of novelist Ayn Rand (The Fountainhead, Atlas Shrugged) and Robert Heinlein (The Moon Is a Harsh Mistress) are often cited. For example, many libertarians in the United States might quote Rand's Atlas Shrugged when they speak of government:

The only proper functions of a government are: the police, to protect you from criminals; the army, to protect you from foreign invaders; and the courts, to protect your property and contracts from breach or fraud by others, to settle disputes by rational rules, according to objective law.

Not that confusing, right?

Other libertarians may point to such works of non-fiction as Libertarianism in One Lesson by David Bergland, which posit a clear set of axioms and then delineate how society might follow them and how it would be best for everyone.

Many are the ideological descendants of "classical liberals" (by definition, they could arguably be considered more liberal than the American left) though many "classical liberals" who do not identify as libertarians per se were decidedly more moderate than the current U.S. libertarian movement in that they were willing to accept more government regulations and taxes.[21] In light of this, modern libertarianism can be better described as a radical offshoot of classical liberalism. Classical liberals tend to be more intellectual than libertarians, and often align themselves more with the two major parties for practical reasons. They tend to be centre-left to centre-right, and instead of adhering to the "philosophies" of Ayn Rand, they are more attracted to Utilitarianism, particularly the teachings suggested by John Stuart Mill, a liberal, an abolitionist, a feminist, and atheist who supported gay rights...over a century before the Civil Rights movement even began. They believe that all men and women are essentially good, and that the collective and the individual are both equally important. Taxes are important, and the greater good trumps individual happiness, since happiness can be collective. For instance, a classical liberal would most likely dislike something like Obamacare due to its statist implications, but they would be gladly willing to sacrifice a portion of their wealth to ensure that those who cannot afford healthcare could live a happy and healthy life that they are entitled to. After all, are we not all entitled to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness?

Internet libertarians have been compared to teenagers through the use of the argumentum ad cellarium fallacy. As an anonymous commenter on Charlie Stross's Bitcoin rant put it, their concerns precisely mirror those of privileged teenagers:[22]

And if you grow up in your parent's [sic] basement, then you are shaped by an environment where the fundamental constraints on what you want to do are shaped neither by scarcity nor malignance, but by genuine good intent. Your relatives probably don't want you to spend all day smoking pot and playing video games; in some cases they will over-estimate just how much of a bad thing that is. And even if they are right, it's not like anyone facing such hectoring is going to admit it.

Pretty much every libertarian position can be understood in that frame of restrictive but benevolent authority being the root of all 'real' problems. It's a rare parent who literally tortures their kids, so torture is, at best, not a 'real' issue, not a priority. But many make them do stuff for their health, so mandatory health insurance is a big deal. Pretty much no parents kill their child with drones, many read their diaries. And so on.

So to libertarians, Bitcoin is like wages from a fast food job as opposed to an allowance; lets you buy what you want without someone else having a veto. Only money that doesn't judge you can be considered entirely yours...

As described below in the section "Alleged racism", libertarianism, in practice, does not denote an anti-government philosophy as much as a co-optation of left-wing anti-authoritarianism as a means of justifying (or simply denying) the social and economic hierarchies under capitalism under the guise of freedom.

Murray Rothbard famously bragged that the movement stole the word "libertarian" from anarcho-socialists, something left-libertarians like Noam Chomsky have confirmed.

This is evidenced by the fact some of the most rabid sexists, racists and other bigots claim to be libertarians. This can range from anti-feminism and sexism under the guise of economic analysis (women choose lower-paying jobs!), justifying racist and ableist discrimination or, most commonly, classism and poor-shaming.

While a preference for maximum personal freedom is pretty much universal throughout most of the political spectrum (though less so on the fringes), libertarianism presents several difficulties:

Simply put, in the real world, they're actually property privileges, not property rights.

Systems that attempt to boil themselves down to "a few simple rules" are seldom actually simple; for example, ancient Judaism's Deuteronomic reforms started out as just about half of the modern book of Deuteronomy, but eventually grew to encompass the whole Torah, large swaths of the rest of the Jewish Bible,[34] and ultimately to the vast body of commentary known as the Talmud. Esperanto, though defined in only sixteen grammatical rules, is actually quite a complex language, since its rules are defined in direct relation to established rules in Indo-European linguistics. Even some sports particularly golf have a strong element of common law in their rule systems.

There is essentially no guarantee that a society built on a libertarian legal structure would remain that way without redeveloping some sort of common law structure, or even a statutory structure that codifies all precedents. Given that most societies governed by rule of law already have this, it's hard to see what would be accomplished other than a massive reinvention of the wheel.[35]

The United States, for instance, is technically almost a truly libertarian country, even today, since the only laws it has are to "adjudicate between free men." Starting with a base, at least at the federal level (after the collapse of the Articles of Confederation) of a fairly simple Constitution, and some Roman and English common law, the country's government has evolved as a balance between virtually total liberty, and adjudicating the inevitable conflicts that arise between free men (or, in the case of drug laws, sodomy laws, etc., between the government and one somewhat unfree man). This adjudication has taken the form both of legislation to deal with issues that arose, and judicial analysis of the application of such legislation. Of course, 240 years offers a lot of opportunity for "free men" to need adjudication, so now, to self-styled "libertarians," the results look needlessly complicated. Such is life in the real world.

Typically libertarians argue that people should be free to do whatever they like as long as it doesn't hurt others. While this idea may seem very simple at first glance, the problem is that what "hurts" people and what doesn't is very nuanced. For instance, it is common for libertarians to oppose laws which reduce air pollution even though the latter can have a severe impact on the health of others, even if it is assumed that global warming is a gummint conspiracy to justify raising our taxes; more so than many direct acts of violence. It is also common for them to oppose laws mandating car drivers to wear seatbelts, even though seeing a person die as the result of not wearing one can have a major psychological effect on onlookers. Similarly, they may oppose anti-smoking campaigns as an unwarranted intrusion on personal liberty, while ignoring the financial burden imposed by smoking-related illnesses on both private insurance and taxpayer-funded health care. [36]

While libertarians all generally agree on the premise of the Non-Aggression Axiom, there are internal rifts and disagreement over what extent the Non-Aggression Axiom applies to. On the one hand, there are the Libertarian Party types (colloquially called "minarchists") who take a position of advocating minimal government, and on the other there are the market anarchists who believe that all the services the government provides are unjust monopolies, which the free market can handle better if let go of by the state. Market anarchists can be split into two groups, "anarcho-mutualists" who believe in a free market but not in capitalism or class, and anarcho-capitalists who believe in completely unregulated capitalism.

There is usually little room in between these two, but even then, there are still different branches within these umbrella terms. On the Minarchist side of the libertarian ideology, there are paleolibertarians, who advocate a strong return to the Constitution and are somewhat conservative in their arguments to preserve moral law, much like the Old Right paleoconservatives. Ron Paul, who is often viewed as a libertarian, would more fit the paleoconservative/libertarian framework. Additionally, there exist the geo-libertarians (who advocate simply a tax on all land),[37] neo-libertarians (often regarded not in any sense as libertarians, as their political views conflict with the very principles of the Non-Aggression Axiom - they defend a mixture of traditional libertarian ideas with views more commonly grounded in neoconservatism, such as American exceptionalism and military interventionism and action to promote America's superiority in the international community), and other branches with their own nuances. On the anarchist side of the spectrum, things tend to be more homogeneous, with the major disagreements usually only amounting to how to achieve a libertarian society and solutions to ethical dilemmas.

This ideological division occurs not only externally in political theory, but philosophically as well. On the one side, there are the deontological natural rights theorists (Murray Rothbard being the most prominent advocate), and on the other are the utilitarian libertarians (David D. Friedman is often the most associated with this view). A few minority nihilists and radical subjectivists exist within these circles, but these views are often seen to be in conflict with the general premises laid out by the Non-Aggression Axiom.

The word "libertarianism" was used before the current usage came about to refer to anarchists, who are against hierarchies brought about by stratified classes and a state controlled by the wealthy elites, and thus oppose capitalism. Many call themselves 'libertarian socialists' a philosophy championed by Noam Chomsky. The use of "libertarianism" to describe anarchy dates back to the late 1850s, with Le Libertaire, Journal du Mouvement Social being the name of a journal published by anarchist Joseph Dejacque. The term 'libertarian communism' originated in the 1880s, when the French anarchist congress adopted it. As late as 1954, a largely anarcho-syndicalist movement named The Libertarian League was set up in the US.

The current Libertarian Party in the US only came into being in early 1970s, well over 100 years after anarchists had begun using the term to describe themselves. In the US, to quote Murray Bookchin:

As late as the 1990s, the Libertarian Labor Review newspaper promoted anarcho-syndicalism while still using the libertarian label. Samuel Edward Konkin III labeled his underground-economy based "agorism" as left-libertarianism, while claiming influence from right-libertarians like Rothbard. The term may also accurately describe Karl Hess, the former Goldwater Republican and Cold Warrior who aligned himself with Murray Rothbard for a few years, then swung to the hard left during the late 1960s and 1970s and joined the New Left.[38]

There are a number of areas where the more "rational" libertarians and liberals have overlapping concerns, notably, opposition to corporate welfare and the military-industrial complex, and valuing personal liberty and freedom of speech.

There is a good deal of overlap between these groups, but the hardliners tend to lavish hate on each other:

Deontological anarchists that adhere to the teachings of Murray Rothbard. Most anarcho-capitalists adhere to the Austrian School, though David D. Friedman opts for the utilitarian Chicago School, despite not being an anarcho-capitalist himself. A few others follow the pure pacifism of Robert LeFevre. Modern examples include Adam Kokesh, who claims the only real anarchists are anarcho-capitalists, and Walter Block of the LvMI.

Samuel Edward Konkin III's philosophy of agorism was described by Konkin himself as a particularly concentrated strain of Rothbardianism, but Konkin and adherents consider(ed) themselves part of the libertarian left. This may be fair, since Konkin coinages like Kochtopus have entered the general leftist lexicon. The main problem with anarcho-capitalism is that it advocates for getting rid of the government entirely, which could, hypothetically, lead to corporations and trusts becoming so large that they would ultimately become stand-ins for the state, therefore bringing everything back to square one. While their support of the free market is compatible with many other libertarian circles, this particular possibility puts anarcho-capitalism at odds with most other groups from an ideological perspective, as libertarianism is, at its core, anti-state. Additionally, actual libertarians believe in some degree of government, whereas ancaps do not believe in government at all.

Also known as Novacrats, these folks are the more utilitarian of the bunch and usually associated more with the Chicago school than the Austrian school. The term "Beltway" is used as a pejorative by the hardline anarchists, minarchists, and deontological types to paint them as sell-outs because they've gotten some traction in DC. Prominent Beltway types include Thomas Sowell, Nick Gillespie and the late Milton Friedman.

There exists a very disproportionate amount of libertarians in anti-feminist communities and vice versa. While there are certainly many libertarian feminists (like Cathy Reisenwitz and Sharon Presley), they're outnumbered many, many times to one by their opponents.

One of the possible reasons for this is the libertarian belief that the gender pay gap is a myth and that gender discrimination is impossible because capitalism is perfect. Another would be the kind of faux anti-authoritarianism many libertarians espouse, namely that using state intervention to lessen the impact of gendered hierarchies that arise under capitalism (affirmative action, fighting the pink tax, woman-specific welfare measures, etc.) is the devil but using military force to kill anti-capitalists or to steal indigenous land is totally justified. Moreover, libertarianism's recruiting base (young privileged white dudes on the internet) is typically chock-full of limerent, sexually frustrated losers that made up most of Gamergate's membership.

Paul Elam and Christopher Cantwell are stereotypical examples of this in action. Their anti-feminist views are justified using libertarian arguments. The fact libertarianism seems to constantly espouse every single anti-feminist issue under the sun (mansplaining the pink tax, denying the gender pay gap, spouting reactionary talking points about rape culture, etc.) indicates the cross-poolination is pretty thorough.

Usually conspiracy nuts, survivalists, sovereign citizen types, or gold bugs who think the gummint is out to get them. There are white supremacists who want to bring back "states' rights" to resurrect segregation, and dominionists who want to resurrect official state religions. Also includes fans of the seasteading, micronation, and vonu movements, "life extension," Galambosianism, Liberty Dollars, and pretty much anything from the Loompanics book catalog. May suffer from an excess of colloidal silver in the bloodstream. Alex Jones is the epitome of the crank magnet libertarian.

There are those who take up the mantle of libertarianism because it aligns with their opposition to some federal law they don't like. On the more benign end, this includes activists for sex workers and cannabis legalization, who typically overlap with the below-mentioned civil libertarians, while on the crankier end, one may find polygamists, woo-meisters, pedophiles, and peddlers of some form of illegal quackery, who can more often be found with the crank magnets. Another example of this would be college kids who claim to be libertarian just because they want weed to be legal.

A term coined by Lew Rockwell. Their policies are mostly the same as the "Taft Republicans" of the Old Right. They are advocates of the Austrian school, originalism, states' rights, and strict Constitutionalism, and are generally socially conservative despite opposing the drug war and "bedroom laws." Ron Paul falls into this camp. Many conspiracy nuts are also paleolibertarians, such as the almighty Alex Jones mentioned above, Texe Marrs, and Mark Dice.

Largely the venerable predecessors of the modern libertarian movement, who were an influence on Rothbard but rejected anarchism, influenced Rand but rejected orthodox Objectivism, etc. Minarchists today are not all necessarily influenced by Rand, but they tend to believe in the concept of a "Night-watchman State", which is defined as a radically minimalistic government that only exists to provide three basic public services: law enforcement, a legal system, and a small standing army to exist for defense purposes only. While many of today's minarchists tend to favor capitalism, the system is also applicable to socialist thought. Karl Marx could also accurately be described as a minarchist, as he believed that the government should only exist for minimal protection and the distribution of the wealth.

Usually generic deontological minarchist libertarians, the only difference being that they identify themselves with the tenets of Objectivism. Rand herself hated the Libertarian Party and denounced them as poseurs.[39] Alan Greenspan is probably the most famous Randroid, and we all know what happened there. Paul Ryan is also technically a Randroid, but he is extremely inconsistent. Despite his claims to be influenced by Rand, she would have probably laughed at him. He is literally an embodiment of Republican statism.

Generally Silicon Valley inhabitants who attempt to apply hacker culture to politics. Lots of overlap with techno-utopian movements like transhumanism and Singularitarianism. Also overlaps with the seasteading, life extension, and digital-currency crank magnets. See also Eric S. Raymond, Bitcoin, and Anonymous. Ironically, technological leaps have made surveillance of citizens easier than ever before in human history.

Their true ideological motivations are unknown, but they use the language of the "free market" to shill for corporations that don't want to deal with regulations or taxes. They can usually be found at some DC think tank cranking out bogus research while being bankrolled by Koch Industries or Exxon. Steve Milloy is a prime example.

People who say they are libertarians, but dutifully pull the lever for most anyone with an "R" after their name (not, however, for Ron Paul) every election. In between elections they shill for military interventionism, and attack liberals but never conservatives for being enemies of liberty. And a lot of Al Gore bashing. Their idea of a "libertarian Republican" is Rudy Giuliani. Their only real claim to being libertarians is their irreverent attitude, but this really just boils down to being a jerk for the sake of it. Glenn Reynolds and Matt Drudge have made a lucrative career pushing their buttons.

Those whose main attraction to libertarianism is civil liberties of the ACLU sort, anti-war issues, gay rights, marijuana, privacy, police abuses, women's lib, conscription, and so forth. They may view liberals as unreliable on these issues, or they may hold conservative economic views, and prefer to align with libertarians. The Cato Institute used to emphasize outreach to them in its early years via Inquiry magazine and The Libertarian Review. Today, Radley Balko, Conor Friedersdorf, and Carol Moore might be prominent examples, as was (until his recent death) American Indian Movement activist Russell Means. In Europe, these types are typically associated with pirate politics, though a few mainstream libertarians like Johan Norberg could be included. Along with classical liberals, they are arguably the most reasonable out of the bunch. Civil libertarians do not always have to be classical liberals or minarchists, as social democrats like Bernie Sanders (who is not a socialist) can be described as such.

Those for whom the Libertarian Party and the libertarian movement are one and the same thing. Ideologically suspect to the more hard-core, they differ from Beltway libertarians primarily in that they prefer to throw all their effort into building the Libertarian Party instead of trying to get cred inside the Beltway. They typically want to trim and gut the party platform to attract more people, and/or disseminate an oversimplified version of the libertarian message in the name of "effective communication." Fond of using the World's Smallest Political Quiz and other materials from the Advocates for Self-Government. See Michael Cloud, Carla Howell, former Alaska state representative Dick Randolph, 1980 LP presidential nominee Ed Clark, and 2013 Virginia gubernatorial candidate Robert Sarvis.

Usually refers to fans of Ron Paul, who express their rabid support for him through the Internet. More recently, it has come to refer to irritating "Internet libertarians" in general who find a home for themselves on certain Internet sites, especially YouTube, and proceed to "upvote" everything that agrees with their worldview while "downvoting" anyone who disagrees with it en masse. Any site with an upvote/downvote system (i.e. Urban Dictionary, ABC News hell, it's easier to list sites they haven't taken over at this point) is up for grabs for these people, and there tends to be heavy overlap with the crank magnets, Austrian schoolers, and, oddly, the online MRA movement. When not shilling for Ron Paul, being conspiracy nuts, or just being unbelievably self-righteous in general their favorite pastimes usually include rambling about Barack Obama, excessive quote mining of Paul Krugman (and it's always Krugman), and using snarl words such as "fascist," "sheeple," "statist," etc.

Refers to conservatives, neocons, Christian rightists, etc., who have no clue what libertarianism is, but simply identify as "libertarian" because it "sounds more hip," or to avoid association with the Republican Party. Many of these fake libertarians think that anti-federalism and libertarianism are the same thing (e.g. a Christian fundamentalist "libertarian" who complains about the Nanny state and cries for smaller federal government so that Alabama can criminalize homosexuality, pornography, and abortion on the state level). Another example would be right-wing talk radio host Neal Boortz who identifies as a libertarian, but supported the federal government spying on anti-Iraq war protesters.

Some self-proclaimed libertarians seem to espouse some racist views, and that often gives them a bad reputation. [40] Murray Rothbard,[41] although of Jewish origin himself, has been suggested to have possibly sympathized with white nationalists, paleoconservatives, and anti-state right-wing populists, many of whom claimed to be "libertarian". However, paleoconservatism is not a libertarian philosophy at all, and Rothbard was not a libertarian, but an anarcho-capitalist who really did nothing to advance the libertarian movement that was influenced by folks like Friedman.[42].

By pure definition, libertarianism is the least compatible political ideology in the history of free society with fascism, Nazism, and Stalinism, given that totalitarians teach that individuals only have worth if they serve the State, while libertarianism is opposed to the state. However, there have been those who seem to espouse both. Certain segments of the alt-right identify as libertarian yet also express sympathy for Nazism or neo-Nazism; the website "The Right Stuff" (which prominently features pictures of Hitler and broadcasts a radio show called The Daily Shoah, whose guests have included Christopher Cantwell) is one notable example. Another would be the Holocaust Denier and goat blood drinking pagan extraordinaire Augustus Sol Invictus, who actually ran on a libertarian ticket in Florida for the Senate. That being said, they are incredibly inconsistent in their beliefs

Quite a few libertarians hold to a paranoid or conspiracist worldview, which in some cases may include Holocaust denial. This, as well as the relationship between libertarianism and the gun culture, may partly explain the appeal of Nazi or Nazi-like ideas to some self-proclaimed libertarians.

Much like Marxism (which holds that a "dictatorship of the proletariat" is a necessary transitional stage between the capitalist status quo and true, stateless communism), it is also possible that some people might see libertarianism as the desired end state but believe that fascism (and the genocide of "undesirables") is necessary as a transitional stage. That being said, most libertarians simply believe in an immediate substitution of the state, and it is extremely easy to identify the wingnut factions of the movement. In other words, it is no different than every other political ideology. Situation normal.

The following institutions and groups are closely or loosely associated with modern libertarianism:

Excerpt from:

Libertarianism - RationalWiki

Nanotechnology | Britannica.com

Posted on by

Nanotechnology, the manipulation and manufacture of materials and devices on the scale of atoms or small groups of atoms. The nanoscale is typically measured in nanometres, or billionths of a metre (nanos, the Greek word for dwarf, being the source of the prefix), and materials built at this scale often exhibit distinctive physical and chemical properties due to quantum mechanical effects. Although usable devices this small may be decades away (see microelectromechanical system), techniques for working at the nanoscale have become essential to electronic engineering, and nanoengineered materials have begun to appear in consumer products. For example, billions of microscopic nanowhiskers, each about 10 nanometres in length, have been molecularly hooked onto natural and synthetic fibres to impart stain resistance to clothing and other fabrics; zinc oxide nanocrystals have been used to create invisible sunscreens that block ultraviolet light; and silver nanocrystals have been embedded in bandages to kill bacteria and prevent infection.

Possibilities for the future are numerous. Nanotechnology may make it possible to manufacture lighter, stronger, and programmable materials that require less energy to produce than conventional materials, that produce less waste than with conventional manufacturing, and that promise greater fuel efficiency in land transportation, ships, aircraft, and space vehicles. Nanocoatings for both opaque and translucent surfaces may render them resistant to corrosion, scratches, and radiation. Nanoscale electronic, magnetic, and mechanical devices and systems with unprecedented levels of information processing may be fabricated, as may chemical, photochemical, and biological sensors for protection, health care, manufacturing, and the environment; new photoelectric materials that will enable the manufacture of cost-efficient solar-energy panels; and molecular-semiconductor hybrid devices that may become engines for the next revolution in the information age. The potential for improvements in health, safety, quality of life, and conservation of the environment are vast.

At the same time, significant challenges must be overcome for the benefits of nanotechnology to be realized. Scientists must learn how to manipulate and characterize individual atoms and small groups of atoms reliably. New and improved tools are needed to control the properties and structure of materials at the nanoscale; significant improvements in computer simulations of atomic and molecular structures are essential to the understanding of this realm. Next, new tools and approaches are needed for assembling atoms and molecules into nanoscale systems and for the further assembly of small systems into more-complex objects. Furthermore, nanotechnology products must provide not only improved performance but also lower cost. Finally, without integration of nanoscale objects with systems at the micro- and macroscale (that is, from millionths of a metre up to the millimetre scale), it will be very difficult to exploit many of the unique properties found at the nanoscale.

Nanotechnology is highly interdisciplinary, involving physics, chemistry, biology, materials science, and the full range of the engineering disciplines. The word nanotechnology is widely used as shorthand to refer to both the science and the technology of this emerging field. Narrowly defined, nanoscience concerns a basic understanding of physical, chemical, and biological properties on atomic and near-atomic scales. Nanotechnology, narrowly defined, employs controlled manipulation of these properties to create materials and functional systems with unique capabilities.

In contrast to recent engineering efforts, nature developed nanotechnologies over billions of years, employing enzymes and catalysts to organize with exquisite precision different kinds of atoms and molecules into complex microscopic structures that make life possible. These natural products are built with great efficiency and have impressive capabilities, such as the power to harvest solar energy, to convert minerals and water into living cells, to store and process massive amounts of data using large arrays of nerve cells, and to replicate perfectly billions of bits of information stored in molecules of deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA).

There are two principal reasons for qualitative differences in material behaviour at the nanoscale (traditionally defined as less than 100 nanometres). First, quantum mechanical effects come into play at very small dimensions and lead to new physics and chemistry. Second, a defining feature at the nanoscale is the very large surface-to-volume ratio of these structures. This means that no atom is very far from a surface or interface, and the behaviour of atoms at these higher-energy sites have a significant influence on the properties of the material. For example, the reactivity of a metal catalyst particle generally increases appreciably as its size is reducedmacroscopic gold is chemically inert, whereas at nanoscales gold becomes extremely reactive and catalytic and even melts at a lower temperature. Thus, at nanoscale dimensions material properties depend on and change with size, as well as composition and structure.

Using the processes of nanotechnology, basic industrial production may veer dramatically from the course followed by steel plants and chemical factories of the past. Raw materials will come from the atoms of abundant elementscarbon, hydrogen, and siliconand these will be manipulated into precise configurations to create nanostructured materials that exhibit exactly the right properties for each particular application. For example, carbon atoms can be bonded together in a number of different geometries to create variously a fibre, a tube, a molecular coating, or a wire, all with the superior strength-to-weight ratio of another carbon materialdiamond. Additionally, such material processing need not require smokestacks, power-hungry industrial machinery, or intensive human labour. Instead, it may be accomplished either by growing new structures through some combination of chemical catalysts and synthetic enzymes or by building them through new techniques based on patterning and self-assembly of nanoscale materials into useful predetermined designs. Nanotechnology ultimately may allow people to fabricate almost any type of material or product allowable under the laws of physics and chemistry. While such possibilities seem remote, even approaching natures virtuosity in energy-efficient fabrication would be revolutionary.

Even more revolutionary would be the fabrication of nanoscale machines and devices for incorporation into micro- and macroscale systems. Once again, nature has led the way with the fabrication of both linear and rotary molecular motors. These biological machines carry out such tasks as muscle contraction (in organisms ranging from clams to humans) and shuttling little packets of material around within cells while being powered by the recyclable, energy-efficient fuel adenosine triphosphate. Scientists are only beginning to develop the tools to fabricate functioning systems at such small scales, with most advances based on electronic or magnetic information processing and storage systems. The energy-efficient, reconfigurable, and self-repairing aspects of biological systems are just becoming understood.

The potential impact of nanotechnology processes, machines, and products is expected to be far-reaching, affecting nearly every conceivable information technology, energy source, agricultural product, medical device, pharmaceutical, and material used in manufacturing. Meanwhile, the dimensions of electronic circuits on semiconductors continue to shrink, with minimum feature sizes now reaching the nanorealm, under 100 nanometres. Likewise, magnetic memory materials, which form the basis of hard disk drives, have achieved dramatically greater memory density as a result of nanoscale structuring to exploit new magnetic effects at nanodimensions. These latter two areas represent another major trend, the evolution of critical elements of microtechnology into the realm of nanotechnology to enhance performance. They are immense markets driven by the rapid advance of information technology.

In a lecture in 1959 to the American Physical Society, Theres Plenty of Room at the Bottom, American Nobelist Richard P. Feynman presented his audience with a vision of what could be done with extreme miniaturization. He began his lecture by noting that the Lords Prayer had been written on the head of a pin and asked,

Why cannot we write the entire 24 volumes of the Encyclopdia Britannica on the head of a pin? Lets see what would be involved. The head of a pin is a sixteenth of an inch across. If you magnify it by 25,000 diameters, the area of the head of the pin is then equal to the area of all the pages of the Encyclopdia Britannica. Therefore, all it is necessary to do is to reduce in size all the writing in the Encyclopdia by 25,000 times. Is that possible? The resolving power of the eye is about 1/120 of an inchthat is roughly the diameter of one of the little dots on the fine half-tone reproductions in the Encyclopdia. This, when you demagnify it by 25,000 times, is still 80 angstroms in diameter32 atoms across, in an ordinary metal. In other words, one of those dots still would contain in its area 1,000 atoms. So, each dot can easily be adjusted in size as required by the photoengraving, and there is no question that there is enough room on the head of a pin to put all of the Encyclopdia Britannica.

Feynman was intrigued by biology and pointed out that

cells are very tiny, but they are very active; they manufacture various substances; they walk around; they wiggle; and they do all kinds of marvelous thingsall on a very small scale. Also, they store information. Consider the possibility that we too can make a thing very small which does what we wantthat we can manufacture an object that maneuvers at that level!

He also considered using big tools to make smaller tools that could make yet smaller tools, eventually obtaining nanoscale tools for directly manipulating atoms and molecules. In considering what all this might mean, Feynman declared,

I can hardly doubt that when we have some control of the arrangement of things on a small scale we will get an enormously greater range of possible properties that substances can have, and of different things that we can do.

Perhaps the biggest barrier to following these prophetic thoughts was simply the immediate lack of tools to manipulate and visualize matter at such a small scale. The availability of tools has always been an enabling aspect of the advance of all science and technology, and some of the key tools for nanotechnology are discussed in the next section, Pioneers.

Starting with a 1981 paper in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences and following with two popular books, Engines of Creation (1986) and Nanosystems (1992), American scientist K. Eric Drexler became one of the foremost advocates of nanotechnology. In fact, Drexler was the first person anywhere to receive a Ph.D. in molecular nanotechnology (from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology). In his written works he takes a molecular view of the world and envisions molecular machines doing much of the work of the future. For example, he refers to assemblers, which will manipulate individual atoms to manufacture structures, and replicators, which will be able to make multiple copies of themselves in order to save time dealing with the billions of atoms needed to make objects of useful size. In an article for Encyclopdia Britannicas 1990 Yearbook of Science and the Future, Drexler wrote:

Cells and tissues in the human body are built and maintained by molecular machinery, but sometimes that machinery proves inadequate: viruses multiply, cancer cells spread, or systems age and deteriorate. As one might expect, new molecular machines and computers of subcellular size could support the bodys own mechanisms. Devices containing nanocomputers interfaced to molecular sensors and effectors could serve as an augmented immune system, searching out and destroying viruses and cancer cells. Similar devices programmed as repair machines could enter living cells to edit out viral DNA sequences and repair molecular damage. Such machines would bring surgical control to the molecular level, opening broad new horizons in medicine.

Drexlers futurist visions have stimulated much thought, but the assembler approach has failed to account for the strong influence of atomic and molecular forces (i.e., the chemistry) at such dimensions. The controversy surrounding these popularizations, and the potential dangers of entities such as intelligent replicators (however remote), have stimulated debate over the ethical and societal implications of nanotechnology.

A number of key technological milestones have been achieved by working pioneers. Molecular beam epitaxy, invented by Alfred Cho and John Arthur at Bell Labs in 1968 and developed in the 1970s, enabled the controlled deposition of single atomic layers. This tool provided for nanostructuring in one dimension as atomic layers were grown one upon the next. It subsequently became important in the area of compound semiconductor device fabrication. For example, sandwiching one-nanometre-thick layers of nonmagnetic-sensor materials between magnetic layers in computer disk drives resulted in large increases in storage capacity, and a similar use of nanostructuring resulted in more energy-efficient semiconductor lasers for use in compact disc players.

In 1981 Gerd Binnig and Heinrich Rohrer developed the scanning tunneling microscope at IBMs laboratories in Switzerland. This tool provided a revolutionary advance by enabling scientists to image the position of individual atoms on surfaces. It earned Binnig and Rohrer a Nobel Prize in 1986 and spawned a wide variety of scanning probe tools for nanoscale observations.

The observation of new carbon structures marked another important milestone in the advance of nanotechnology, with Nobel Prizes for the discoverers. In 1985 Robert F. Curl, Jr., Harold W. Kroto, and Richard E. Smalley discovered the first fullerene, the third known form of pure carbon (after diamond and graphite). They named their discovery buckminsterfullerene (buckyball) for its resemblance to the geodesic domes promoted by the American architect R. Buckminster Fuller. Technically called C60 for the 60 carbon atoms that form their hollow spherical structure, buckyballs resemble a football one nanometre in diameter (see figure). In 1991 Sumio Iijima of NEC Corporation in Japan discovered carbon nanotubes, in which the carbon ringlike structures are extended from spheres into long tubes of varying diameter. Taken together, these new structures surprised and excited the imaginations of scientists about the possibilities of forming well-defined nanostructures with unexpected new properties.

The scanning tunneling microscope not only allowed for the imaging of atoms by scanning a sharp probe tip over a surface, but it also allowed atoms to be pushed around on the surface. With a slight bias voltage applied to the probe tip, certain atoms could be made to adhere to the tip used for imaging and then to be released from it. Thus, in 1990 Donald Eigler spelled out the letters of his companys logo, IBM, by moving 35 xenon atoms into place on a nickel surface. This demonstration caught the publics attention because it showed the precision of the emerging nanoscale tools.

At nanoscale dimensions the properties of materials no longer depend solely on composition and structure in the usual sense. Nanomaterials display new phenomena associated with quantized effects and with the preponderance of surfaces and interfaces.

Quantized effects arise in the nanometre regime because the overall dimensions of objects are comparable to the characteristic wavelength for fundamental excitations in materials. For example, electron wave functions (see also de Broglie wave) in semiconductors are typically on the order of 10 to 100 nanometres. Such excitations include the wavelength of electrons, photons, phonons, and magnons, to name a few. These excitations carry the quanta of energy through materials and thus determine the dynamics of their propagation and transformation from one form to another. When the size of structures is comparable to the quanta themselves, it influences how these excitations move through and interact in the material. Small structures may limit flow, create wave interference effects, and otherwise bring into play quantum mechanical selection rules not apparent at larger dimensions.

Quantum mechanical properties for confinement of electrons in one dimension have long been exploited in solid-state electronics. Semiconductor devices are grown with thin layers of differing composition so that electrons (or holes in the case of missing electron charges) can be confined in specific regions of the structure (known as quantum wells). Thin layers with larger energy bandgaps can serve as barriers that restrict the flow of charges to certain conditions under which they can tunnel through these barriersthe basis of resonant tunneling diodes. Superlattices are periodic structures of repeating wells that set up a new set of selection rules which affect the conditions for charges to flow through the structure. Superlattices have been exploited in cascade lasers to achieve far infrared wavelengths. Modern telecommunications is based on semiconductor lasers that exploit the unique properties of quantum wells to achieve specific wavelengths and high efficiency.

The propagation of photons is altered dramatically when the size and periodicity of the transient structure approach the wavelength of visible light (400 to 800 nanometres). When photons propagate through a periodically varying dielectric constantfor example, semiconductor posts surrounded by airquantum mechanical rules define and limit the propagation of the photons depending on their energy (wavelength). This new behaviour is analogous to the quantum mechanical rules that define the motion of electrons through crystals, giving bandgaps for semiconductors. In one dimension, compound semiconductor superlattices can be grown epitaxially with the alternating layers having different dielectric constants, thus providing highly reflective mirrors for specific wavelengths as determined by the repeat distance of layers in the superlattice. These structures are used to provide built-in mirrors for vertical-cavity surface-emitting lasers, which are used in communications applications. In two and three dimensions, periodic structures known as photonic crystals offer additional control over photon propagation.

Photonic crystals are being explored in a variety of materials and periodicities, such as two-dimensional hexagonal arrays of posts fabricated in compound semiconductors or stacked loglike arrays of silicon bars in three dimensions. The dimensions of these structures depend on the wavelength of light being propagated and are typically in the range of a few hundred nanometres for wavelengths in the visible and near infrared. Photonic crystal properties based on nanostructured materials offer the possibility of confining, steering, and separating light by wavelength on unprecedented small scales and of creating new devices such as lasers that require very low currents to initiate lasing (called near-thresholdless lasers). These structures are being extensively investigated as the tools for nanostructuring materials are steadily advancing. Researchers are particularly interested in the infrared wavelengths, where dimensional control is not as stringent as at the shorter visible wavelengths and where optical communications and chemical sensing provide motivation for potential new applications.

Nanoscale materials also have size-dependent magnetic behaviour, mechanical properties, and chemical reactivity. At very small sizes (a few nanometres), magnetic nanoclusters have a single magnetic domain, and the strongly coupled magnetic spins on each atom combine to produce a particle with a single giant spin. For example, the giant spin of a ferromagnetic iron particle rotates freely at room temperature for diameters below about 16 nanometres, an effect termed superparamagnetism. Mechanical properties of nanostructured materials can reach exceptional strengths. As a specific example, the introduction of two-nanometre aluminum oxide precipitates into thin films of pure nickel results in yield strengths increasing from 0.15 to 5 gigapascals, which is more than twice that for a hard bearing steel. Another example of exceptional mechanical properties at the nanoscale is the carbon nanotube, which exhibits great strength and stiffness along its longitudinal axis.

The preponderance of surfaces is a major reason for the change in behaviour of materials at the nanoscale. Since up to half of all the atoms in nanoparticles are surface atoms, properties such as electrical transport are no longer determined by solid-state bulk phenomena. Likewise, the atoms in nanostructures have a higher average energy than atoms in larger structures, because of the large proportion of surface atoms. For example, catalytic materials have a greater chemical activity per atom of exposed surface as the catalyst is reduced in size at the nanoscale. Defects and impurities may be attracted to surfaces and interfaces, and interactions between particles at these small dimensions can depend on the structure and nature of chemical bonding at the surface. Molecular monolayers may be used to change or control surface properties and to mediate the interaction between nanoparticles.

Surfaces and their interactions with molecular structures are basic to all biology. The intersection of nanotechnology and biotechnology offers the possibility of achieving new functions and properties with nanostructured surfaces. In this surface- and interface-dominated regime, biology does an exquisite job of selectively controlling functions through a combination of structure and chemical forces. The transcription of information stored in genes and the selectivity of biochemical reactions based on chemical recognition of complex molecules are examples where interfaces play the key role in establishing nanoscale behaviour. Atomic forces and chemical bonds dominate at these dimensions, while macroscopic effectssuch as convection, turbulence, and momentum (inertial forces)are of little consequence.

As discussed in the section Properties at the nanoscale, material propertieselectrical, optical, magnetic, mechanical, and chemicaldepend on their exact dimensions. This opens the way for development of new and improved materials through manipulation of their nanostructure. Hierarchical assemblies of nanoscale-engineered materials into larger structures, or their incorporation into devices, provide the basis for tailoring radically new materials and machines.

Natures assemblies point the way to improving structural materials. The often-cited abalone seashell provides a beautiful example of how the combination of a hard, brittle inorganic material with nanoscale structuring and a soft, tough organic material can produce a strong, durable nanocompositebasically, these nanocomposites are made of calcium carbonate bricks held together by a glycoprotein glue. New engineered materials are emergingsuch as polymer-clay nanocompositesthat are not only strong and tough but also lightweight and easier to recycle than conventional reinforced plastics. Such improvements in structural materials are particularly important for the transportation industry, where reduced weight directly translates into improved fuel economy. Other improvements can increase safety or decrease the impact on the environment of fabrication and recycling. Further advances, such as truly smart materials that signal their impending failure or are even able to self-repair flaws, may be possible with composites of the future.

Sensors are central to almost all modern control systems. For example, multiple sensors are used in automobiles for such diverse tasks as engine management, emission control, security, safety, comfort, vehicle monitoring, and diagnostics. While such traditional applications for physical sensing generally rely on microscale sensing devices, the advent of nanoscale materials and structures has led to new electronic, photonic, and magnetic nanosensors, sometimes known as smart dust. Because of their small size, nanosensors exhibit unprecedented speed and sensitivity, extending in some cases down to the detection of single molecules. For example, nanowires made of carbon nanotubes, silicon, or other semiconductor materials exhibit exceptional sensitivity to chemical species or biological agents. Electrical current through nanowires can be altered by having molecules attached to their surface that locally perturb their electronic band structure. By means of nanowire surfaces coated with sensor molecules that selectively attach particular species, charge-induced changes in current can be used to detect the presence of those species. This same strategy is adopted for many classes of sensing systems. New types of sensors with ultrahigh sensitivity and specificity will have many applications; for example, sensors that can detect cancerous tumours when they consist of only a few cells would be a very significant advance.

Nanomaterials also make excellent filters for trapping heavy metals and other pollutants from industrial wastewater. One of the greatest potential impacts of nanotechnology on the lives of the majority of people on Earth will be in the area of economical water desalination and purification. Nanomaterials will very likely find important use in fuel cells, bioconversion for energy, bioprocessing of food products, waste remediation, and pollution-control systems.

A recent concern regarding nanoparticles is whether their small sizes and novel properties may pose significant health or environmental risks. In general, ultrafine particlessuch as the carbon in photocopier toners or in soot produced by combustion engines and factorieshave adverse respiratory and cardiovascular effects on people and animals. Studies are under way to determine if specific nanoscale particles pose higher risks that may require special regulatory restrictions. Of particular concern are potential carcinogenic risks from inhaled particles and the possibility for very small nanoparticles to cross the blood-brain barrier to unknown effect. Nanomaterials currently receiving attention from health officials include carbon nanotubes, buckyballs, and cadmium selenide quantum dots. Studies of the absorption through the skin of titanium oxide nanoparticles (used in sunscreens) are also planned. More far-ranging studies of the toxicity, transport, and overall fate of nanoparticles in ecosystems and the environment have not yet been undertaken. Some early animal studies, involving the introduction of very high levels of nanoparticles which resulted in the rapid death of many of the subjects, are quite controversial.

Nanotechnology promises to impact medical treatment in multiple ways. First, advances in nanoscale particle design and fabrication provide new options for drug delivery and drug therapies. More than half of the new drugs developed each year are not water-soluble, which makes their delivery difficult. In the form of nanosized particles, however, these drugs are more readily transported to their destination, and they can be delivered in the conventional form of pills.

More important, nanotechnology may enable drugs to be delivered to precisely the right location in the body and to release drug doses on a predetermined schedule for optimal treatment. The general approach is to attach the drug to a nanosized carrier that will release the medicine in the body over an extended period of time or when specifically triggered to do so. In addition, the surfaces of these nanoscale carriers may be treated to seek out and become localized at a disease sitefor example, attaching to cancerous tumours. One type of molecule of special interest for these applications is an organic dendrimer. A dendrimer is a special class of polymeric molecule that weaves in and out from a hollow central region. These spherical fuzz balls are about the size of a typical protein but cannot unfold like proteins. Interest in dendrimers derives from the ability to tailor their cavity sizes and chemical properties to hold different therapeutic agents. Researchers hope to design different dendrimers that can swell and release their drug on exposure to specifically recognized molecules that indicate a disease target. This same general approach to nanoparticle-directed drug delivery is being explored for other types of nanoparticles as well.

Another approach involves gold-coated nanoshells whose size can be adjusted to absorb light energy at different wavelengths. In particular, infrared light will pass through several centimetres of body tissue, allowing a delicate and precise heating of such capsules in order to release the therapeutic substance within. Furthermore, antibodies may be attached to the outer gold surface of the shells to cause them to bind specifically to certain tumour cells, thereby reducing the damage to surrounding healthy cells.

A second area of intense study in nanomedicine is that of developing new diagnostic tools. Motivation for this work ranges from fundamental biomedical research at the level of single genes or cells to point-of-care applications for health delivery services. With advances in molecular biology, much diagnostic work now focuses on detecting specific biological signatures. These analyses are referred to as bioassays. Examples include studies to determine which genes are active in response to a particular disease or drug therapy. A general approach involves attaching fluorescing dye molecules to the target biomolecules in order to reveal their concentration.

Another approach to bioassays uses semiconductor nanoparticles, such as cadmium selenide, which emit light of a specific wavelength depending on their size. Different-size particles can be tagged to different receptors so that a wider variety of distinct colour tags are available than can be distinguished for dye molecules. The degradation in fluorescence with repeated excitation for dyes is avoided. Furthermore, various-size particles can be encapsulated in latex beads and their resulting wavelengths read like a bar code. This approach, while still in the exploratory stage, would allow for an enormous number of distinct labels for bioassays.

Another nanotechnology variation on bioassays is to attach one half of the single-stranded complementary DNA segment for the genetic sequence to be detected to one set of gold particles and the other half to a second set of gold particles. When the material of interest is present in a solution, the two attachments cause the gold balls to agglomerate, providing a large change in optical properties that can be seen in the colour of the solution. If both halves of the sequence do not match, no agglomeration will occur and no change will be observed.

Approaches that do not involve optical detection techniques are also being explored with nanoparticles. For example, magnetic nanoparticles can be attached to antibodies that in turn recognize and attach to specific biomolecules. The magnetic particles then act as tags and handlebars through which magnetic fields can be used for mixing, extracting, or identifying the attached biomolecules within microlitre- or nanolitre-sized samples. For example, magnetic nanoparticles stay magnetized as a single domain for a significant period, which enables them to be aligned and detected in a magnetic field. In particular, attached antibodymagnetic-nanoparticle combinations rotate slowly and give a distinctive magnetic signal. In contrast, magnetically tagged antibodies that are not attached to the biological material being detected rotate more rapidly and so do not give the same distinctive signal.

Microfluidic systems, or labs-on-chips, have been developed for biochemical assays of minuscule samples. Typically cramming numerous electronic and mechanical components into a portable unit no larger than a credit card, they are especially useful for conducting rapid analysis in the field. While these microfluidic systems primarily operate at the microscale (that is, millionths of a metre), nanotechnology has contributed new concepts and will likely play an increasing role in the future. For example, separation of DNA is sensitive to entropic effects, such as the entropy required to unfold DNA of a given length. A new approach to separating DNA could take advantage of its passage through a nanoscale array of posts or channels such that DNA molecules of different lengths would uncoil at different rates.

Other researchers have focused on detecting signal changes as nanometre-wide DNA strands are threaded through a nanoscale pore. Early studies used pores punched in membranes by viruses; artificially fabricated nanopores are also being tested. By applying an electric potential across the membrane in a liquid cell to pull the DNA through, changes in ion current can be measured as different repeating base units of the molecule pass through the pores. Nanotechnology-enabled advances in the entire area of bioassays will clearly impact health care in many ways, from early detection, rapid clinical analysis, and home monitoring to new understanding of molecular biology and genetic-based treatments for fighting disease.

Another biomedical application of nanotechnology involves assistive devices for people who have lost or lack certain natural capabilities. For example, researchers hope to design retinal implants for vision-impaired individuals. The concept is to implant chips with photodetector arrays to transmit signals from the retina to the brain via the optic nerve. Meaningful spatial information, even if only at a rudimentary level, would be of great assistance to the blind. Such research illustrates the tremendous challenge of designing hybrid systems that work at the interface between inorganic devices and biological systems.

Closely related research involves implanting nanoscale neural probes in brain tissue to activate and control motor functions. This requires effective and stable wiring of many electrodes to neurons. It is exciting because of the possibility of recovery of control for motor-impaired individuals. Studies employing neural stimulation of damaged spinal cords by electrical signals have demonstrated the return of some locomotion. Researchers are also seeking ways to assist in the regeneration and healing of bone, skin, and cartilagefor example, developing synthetic biocompatible or biodegradable structures with nanosized voids that would serve as templates for regenerating specific tissue while delivering chemicals to assist in the repair process. At a more sophisticated level, researchers hope to someday build nanoscale or microscale machines that can repair, assist, or replace more-complex organs.

Semiconductor experts agree that the ongoing shrinkage in conventional electronic devices will inevitably reach fundamental limits due to quantum effects such as tunneling, in which electrons jump out of their prescribed circuit path and create atomic-scale interference between devices. At that point, radical new approaches to data storage and information processing will be required for further advances. For example, radically new systems have been imagined that are based on quantum computing or biomolecular computing.

The use of molecules for electronic devices was suggested by Mark Ratner of Northwestern University and Avi Aviram of IBM as early as the 1970s, but proper nanotechnology tools did not become available until the turn of the 21st century. Wiring up molecules some half a nanometre wide and a few nanometres long remains a major challenge, and an understanding of electrical transport through single molecules is only beginning to emerge. A number of groups have been able to demonstrate molecular switches, for example, that could conceivably be used in computer memory or logic arrays. Current areas of research include mechanisms to guide the selection of molecules, architectures for assembling molecules into nanoscale gates, and three-terminal molecules for transistor-like behaviour. More-radical approaches include DNA computing, where single-stranded DNA on a silicon chip would encode all possible variable values and complementary strand interactions would be used for a parallel processing approach to finding solutions. An area related to molecular electronics is that of organic thin-film transistors and light emitters, which promise new applications such as video displays that can be rolled out like wallpaper and flexible electronic newspapers.

Carbon nanotubes have remarkable electronic, mechanical, and chemical properties. Depending on their specific diameter and the bonding arrangement of their carbon atoms, nanotubes exhibit either metallic or semiconducting behaviour. Electrical conduction within a perfect nanotube is ballistic (negligible scattering), with low thermal dissipation. As a result, a wire made from a nanotube, or a nanowire, can carry much more current than an ordinary metal wire of comparable size. At 1.4 nanometres in diameter, nanotubes are about a hundred times smaller than the gate width of silicon semiconductor devices. In addition to nanowires for conduction, transistors, diodes, and simple logic circuits have been demonstrated by combining metallic and semiconductor carbon nanotubes. Similarly, silicon nanowires have been used to build experimental devices, such as field-effect transistors, bipolar transistors, inverters, light-emitting diodes, sensors, and even simple memory. A major challenge for nanowire circuits, as for molecular electronics, is connecting and integrating these devices into a workable high-density architecture. Ideally, the structure would be grown and assembled in place. Crossbar architectures that combine the function of wires and devices are of particular interest.

At nanoscale dimensions the energy required to add one additional electron to a small island (isolated physical region)for example, through a tunneling barrierbecomes significant. This change in energy provides the basis for devising single-electron transistors. At low temperatures, where thermal fluctuations are small, various single-electron-device nanostructures are readily achievable, and extensive research has been carried out for structures with confined electron flow. However, room-temperature applications will require that sizes be reduced significantly, to the one-nanometre range, to achieve stable operation. For large-scale application with millions of devices, as found in current integrated circuits, the need for structures with very uniform size to maintain uniform device characteristics presents a significant challenge. Also, in this and many new nanodevices being explored, the lack of gain is a serious drawback limiting implementation in large-scale electronic circuits.

Spintronics refers to electronic devices that perform logic operations based on not just the electrical charge of carriers but also their spin. For example, information could be transported or stored through the spin-up or spin-down states of electrons. This is a new area of research, and issues include the injection of spin-polarized carriers, their transport, and their detection. The role of nanoscale structure and electronic properties of the ferromagnetic-semiconductor interface on the spin injection process, the growth of new ferromagnetic semiconductors with nanoscale control, and the possible use of nanostructured features to manipulate spin are all of interest.

Current approaches to information storage and retrieval include high-density, high-speed, solid-state electronic memories, as well as slower (but generally more spacious) magnetic and optical discs (see computer memory). As the minimum feature size for electronic processing approaches 100 nanometres, nanotechnology provides ways to decrease further the bit size of the stored information, thus increasing density and reducing interconnection distances for obtaining still-higher speeds. For example, the basis of the current generation of magnetic disks is the giant magnetoresistance effect. A magnetic read/write head stores bits of information by setting the direction of the magnetic field in nanometre-thick metallic layers that alternate between ferromagnetic and nonferromagnetic. Differences in spin-dependent scattering of electrons at the interface layers lead to resistance differences that can be read by the magnetic head. Mechanical properties, particularly tribology (friction and wear of moving surfaces), also play an important role in magnetic hard disk drives, since magnetic heads float only about 10 nanometres above spinning magnetic disks.

Another approach to information storage that is dependent on designing nanometre-thick magnetic layers is under commercial development. Known as magnetic random access memory (MRAM), a line of electrically switchable magnetic material is separated from a permanently magnetized layer by a nanoscale nonmagnetic interlayer. A resistance change that depends on the relative alignment of the fields is read electrically from a large array of wires through cross lines. MRAM will require a relatively small evolution from conventional semiconductor manufacturing, and it has the added benefit of producing nonvolatile memory (no power or batteries are needed to maintain stored memory states).

Still at an exploratory stage, studies of electrical conduction through molecules have generated interest in their possible use as memory. While still very speculative, molecular and nanowire approaches to memory are intriguing because of the small volume in which the bits of memory are stored and the effectiveness with which biological systems store large amounts of information.

Nanoscale structuring of optical devices, such as vertical-cavity surface-emitting lasers (VCSELs), quantum dot lasers, and photonic crystal materials, is leading to additional advances in communications technology.

VCSELs have nanoscale layers of compound semiconductors epitaxially grown into their structurealternating dielectric layers as mirrors and quantum wells. Quantum wells allow the charge carriers to be confined in well-defined regions and provide the energy conversion into light at desired wavelengths. They are placed in the lasers cavity to confine carriers at the nodes of a standing wave and to tailor the band structure for more efficient radiative recombination. One-dimensional nanotechnology techniques involving precise growth of very thin epitaxial semiconductor layers were developed during the 1990s. Such nanostructuring has enhanced the efficiency of VCSELs and reduced the current required for lasing to start (called the threshold current). Because of improving performance and their compatibility with planar manufacturing technology, VCSELs are fast becoming a preferred laser source in a variety of communications applications.

More recently, the introduction of quantum dots (regions so small that they can be given a single electric charge) into semiconductor lasers has been investigated and found to give additional benefitsboth further reductions in threshold current and narrower line widths. Quantum dots further confine the optical emission modes within a very narrow spectrum and give the lowest threshold current densities for lasing achieved to date in VCSELs. The quantum dots are introduced into the laser during the growth of strained layers, by a process called Stransky-Krastanov growth. They arise because of the lattice mismatch stress and surface tension of the growing film. Improvements in ways to control precisely the resulting quantum dots to a more uniform single size are still being sought.

Photonic crystals provide a new means to control the steering and manipulation of photons based on periodic dielectric lattices with repeat dimensions on the order of the wavelength of light. These materials can have very exotic properties, such as not allowing light within certain wavelengths to be propagated in a material based on the particular periodic structure. Photonic lattices can act as perfect wavelength-selective mirrors to reflect back incident light from all orientations. They provide the basis for optical switching, steering, and wavelength separation on unprecedented small scales. The periodic structures required for these artificial crystals can be configured as both two- and three-dimensional lattices. Optical sources, switches, and routers are being considered, with two-dimensional planar geometries receiving the most attention, because of their greater ease of fabrication.

Another potentially important communications application for nanotechnology is microelectromechanical systems (MEMS), devices sized at the micrometre level (millionths of a metre). MEMS are currently poised to have a major impact on communications via optical switching. In the future, electromechanical devices may shrink to nanodimensions to take advantage of the higher frequencies of mechanical vibration at smaller masses. The natural (resonant) frequency of vibration for small mechanical beams increases as their size decreases, so that little power is needed to drive them as oscillators. Their efficiency is rated by a quality factor, known as Q, which is a ratio of the energy stored per cycle versus the energy dissipated per cycle. The higher the Q, the more precise the absolute frequency of an oscillator. The Q is very high for micro- and nanoscale mechanical oscillators, and these devices can reach very high frequencies (up to microwave frequencies), making them potential low-power replacements for electronic-based oscillators and filters.

Mechanical oscillators have been made from silicon at dimensions of 10 100 nanometres, where more than 10 percent of the atoms are less than one atomic distance from the surface. While highly homogeneous materials can be made at these dimensionsfor example, single-crystal silicon barssurfaces play an increasing role at nanoscales, and energy losses increase, presumably because of surface defects and molecular species absorbed on surfaces.

It is possible to envision even higher frequencies, in what might be viewed as the ultimate in nanomechanical systems, by moving from nanomachined structures to molecular systems. As an example, multiwalled carbon nanotubes are being explored for their mechanical properties. When the ends of the outer nanotube are removed, the inner tube may be pulled partway out from the outer tube where van der Waals forces between the two tubes will supply a restoring force. The inner tube can thus oscillate, sliding back and forth inside the outer tube. The resonant frequency of oscillation for such structures is predicted to be above one gigahertz (one billion cycles per second). It is unknown whether connecting such systems to the macro world and protecting them from surface effects will ever be practical.

Link:

Nanotechnology | Britannica.com

UK NEA

Posted on by

New publications from the UK NEA Follow-on Phase, 26 June 2014

Findings of the interdisciplinary research conducted under the UK NEA Follow-on Phase were released today at an event hosted by the Living With Environmental Change. The event combines the launch of the Follow-on publications with a workshop, facilitated by the Ecosystems Knowledge Network, on sharing experiences of implementing the ecosystem approach.

The Synthesis and Technical reports of the UK NEA Follow-on can be downloaded from here.

UK NEA Follow-on Phase: New report released, 16 July 2013

The value of potential marine protected areas in the UK to divers and sea anglers - Final Report. Read more

Announcement of Opportunity for BESS workshops, 19 Feb 2013

The BESS (Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services Sustainability) programme is a 6-year, 13 million research programme addressing NERC strategic challenges and societal needs and the UK Governments strategic priorities with respect to biodiversity, ecosystems and their services. This funding call is for workshops which contribute to the goals of the BESS programme, with an indicative cost of up to 8000 per workshop or series of workshops.

More information | Application proforma

National Ecosystem Assessment achieves international impact, 24 April 2012

LWEC has published an article on how the UK NEA is continuing to generate international interest and is proving influential in the way other nations approach their own assessments.

Environment Secretary unveils the UK NEA follow-up phase, 27 March 2012

Environment Secretary Caroline Spelman spoke of the UK NEA follow-up phase in her speech at the Planet Under Pressure conference in London.

The Guardian | Speech | Business Green

Click here to view past updates from the UK NEA and subscribe to our News Feed

Excerpt from:

UK NEA

Puget Sound Nearshore Ecosystem Restoration Project

Posted on by

Puget Sound Nearshore Ecosystem Restoration Project

Puget Sound Nearshore Ecosystem Recovery

ThePuget Sound Nearshore Ecosystem Restoration Project(PSNERP) is a comprehensive assessment of Puget Sounds 2,500 miles of shoreline to understand how humans have impacted the nearshore zone our beaches, bluffs, inlets and river deltas - and what opportunities exist to improve the health of the nearshore zone and its ability to support biological features humans value such as shorebirds, shellfish, salmon, orcas and great blue herons.

As a partnership between the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps), staff and many partners have worked since 2001 to complete the feasibility phase of a Corps General Investigation study of Puget Sounds nearshore zone. The Corps recognition of the importance of Puget Sound and its nearshore zone can bring Federal funds to Washington State to complete projects that will restore the health of the nearshore zone.

TheEstuary and Salmon Restoration Program(ESRP) is a grant program developed in 2006 that is based on the principles developed by PSNERP and rooted in the scientific foundation of process-based ecosystem restoration. The ESRP grant program is a cooperative initiative between Washington States Department of Fish and Wildlife, Recreation and Conservation Office, and Puget Sound Partnership.

Together, the PSNERP and ESRP, along with work focused understanding shoreline armoring in Puget Sound, make up WDFWs Nearshore Section.

Nearshore restoration benefits public access to beaches as well as Puget Sound nearshore ecosystems. The Seahurst Park Shoreline Restoration Project is more than improving a local treasure, its a piece of Puget Sound recovery.

Featured Local Stories

More

Originally posted here:

Puget Sound Nearshore Ecosystem Restoration Project

Careers – Peterson and Control Union – Peterson and Control Union

Posted on by

We think it is important for you to discover where your passions and strengths lie. In addition to the opportunity to explore different areas under the guidance of a line manager, we will also assign you a 'buddy' (normally a former trainee who has been through the process, a mentor (who will be an experienced manager) and a talent manager to support you in your development.

Read more

Whichever area holds your interest, you will need to demonstrate that you share our values and have your own distinct strengths. Peterson andControl Unionhave a reputation based on mutual entrepreneurial attitude, winning partnerships, honesty, integrity and cooperation; this is how we wish to continue growing.

Read more

If you recognise yourself in the outline profile, please apply for the traineeship. We have three starting dates: January 1,May 1 and September 1. The application date will determine the start date of the Global Graduate Program.

Read more

Once atrainee has successfully completed the global graduate program, ourintention is to offer a challenging position within Peterson orControl Union where we will continue to support your growth within the company.

Read more

Read more:

Careers - Peterson and Control Union - Peterson and Control Union

Peterson – Pipedia

Posted on by

Late Breaking News!: Smokingpipes.com announced the following. "Smokingpipes.com is pleased to share that its parent company, Laudisi Enterprises, will acquire Kapp & Peterson, Ltd., specifically the Peterson pipe factory in Sallynoggin and the Peterson of Dublin shop on Nassau Street." In the following Blog Post, Sykes Wilford, President and CEO of Laudisi Enterprises, reflects upon the acquisition and what it means for the two brands. See Sykes's full blog post.

Peterson website

By Jim Lilley

The Peterson brand of pipes are one of the most recognised in the world. They have been manufacturing pipes as a business in Ireland since the 19th century. Today the business is owned and managed by Tom Palmer from their head ofce at the Sallynoggin factory in Dublin, Ireland.

The commencement of the year 2015 will see the Peterson brand celebrating it's 150th anniversary. This event will coincide with the publication and launch of a new detailed Peterson reference book , in tandem with a new commemorative pipe issue. It is hoped that the launch will take place in May of 2015 at the Chicagoland Pipe Show, held every year at the Pheasant Run Resort in St Charles, Illinois. USA.

The Kapp brothers, George and Frederick originally emigrated to Great Britain from Nuremburg in Bavaria .They rst appear in the London trade directories in 1866,when they are listed as Meerschaum pipe makers of 98 Dean Street,Soho ,London. They then parted company in 1869 and established their own pipe shops independently of each other.At some time around 1874 Fredrick moved to Dublin.while brother George remained in London until his death 5 years later. Fredrick and his young family settled in the Rathmines district of Dublin. In July of the same year he opened a new shop in 53 Grafton Street selling Briar and Meerschaum pipes.Around 1876 Charles Peterson, a young, newly arrived, Latvian immigrant was hired byFredrick as a pipe craftsman,primarily to make custom ordered briar pipes. However Fredrick had not long to live and died in 1881. Exactly one year later Fredrick's widow also died.The business was then inherited by their 10 and 12 year old sons and was renamed Kapp Brothers after executors were appointed.Charles Peterson by then was the lead craftsman and managed the business on behalf of Fredrick and his wife's executors until the boys came of age.When the Kapp brothers did eventually come of age, Alfred and Charles Peterson bought out Christian's shareholding and renamed the business Kapp & Peterson.Christian chose to become a Doctor and moved to England .

Charles Peterson applied for a patent for an improved tobacco pipe on the 8th of August 1890.

He was awarded patent number 12393 on the 16th of June 1891 for Great Britain and Ireland.This came to be known as the famous 'System Pipe' patent.The French patent,No. 210944 was issued to them on January 1891.The USA issued patent No. 519,135 on May 1st 1894.In later years they went on to be successful in being awarded additional patents associated with their innovative pipes and pipe stems,including the famous P-lip patent in 1898.

1895 Kapp and Peterson moved to bigger premises at 111 Grafton Street Dublin and also opened a new depot in Broad Street London.1900 K & P exhibited with great success at the Paris International exhibition winning several gold medals and accolades for the quality of their pipes.Fredrick Henry Kapp, son of Alfred and known as Harry, joined his father's business in 1914 at the outbreak of the rst World War.

This was a turbulent period for the company with

the outbreak of World war 1 and the start of the Easter uprising in 1916.The K&P shop was extensively damaged during the military action at this time ( see attached newspaper report). Following quote by Kapp & Peterson.-

"Kelly's, the well known Dublin landmark at the corner of Sackville Street and Bachelor's Walk, one of the most shot at and fully punctured premises in Dublin, was in our possession practically before the smoke ceased over the ashes of our ne shop under the Metropole Hotel. This was one of the most sensational business captures arising out of the Rebellion."

Around 1916, Peterson began stamping their pipes "Made in Ireland" in what is referred to as a block format.

Charles Peterson died shortly after retiring and moving to Hamburg in Germany in 1919 where he is buried.

The original 1890 'system' pipe patent expired at around this time.The Irish free state came into being in December 1922. The Free State Era was from 1922 through to 1937.

Peterson followed with a stamp of "Irish Free State" in either one or two lines, either parallel or perpendicular to the shanks axis and extremely close to the stem.Ireland was a republic in all but name. Eventually the Irish people voted for a new constitution in 1937 and Ireland then formally became Eire (Ireland in Irish).The Made in Eire era stamps were from 1938 through till 1941. Peterson now stamped their pipes with "Made in Eire" in a circle format with "Made" and "Eire" in a circle with the "in" located in the centre of the circle. This was used during the years of 1938 - 41. Later they stamped their pipes with "Made in Ireland" in a circle format 1945-1947 and still later with "Made in Ireland" in a block format 1947-1949. The "Made in Ireland" block format came in either one line or two lines.The Republic of Ireland was formed on 17 April 1949.

From 1950 to the present time, the stamp for this era is

"Made in the Republic of Ireland" in a block format generally in three lines but two lines have been used with or without Republic being abbreviated.

During the 1950's and 60's the Kapp & Peterson company was still in the ownership of the Kapp family. However 1964 saw the retiral of the company Managing Director Frederick Henry(Harry) Kapp.

In the 1960's Peterson hallmarked all gold mounted pipes but apparently they used their own marks on silver. This practice stopped at the end of that decade when they started to have all silver bands hallmarked.In 1966 a "Jubilee " fourth hallmark was introduced, only for that year, to commemorate the ftieth anniversary of the Easter Rising of 1916. Designed as a hand holding a aming sword in Irish "an cliomh solais" or "sword of light" the mark bears the date 1916 to the right above and 1966 to the left below. An Claidheamh Soluis (Old Irish spelling), this was hallmarked with the letter Y. This very unusual and special date mark has in recent years become very scarce, mainly because it was only used for that year. Pipes that were marked thus, are much sought after by Peterson pipe collectors.

1969/70 The 'Made in England' stamp was discontinued with the closing down of the London based factory. Although Peterson has always prided itself in being an Irish made pipe, Peterson had also maintained a pipe factory in London since 1899.

English made Peterson pipes actually spanned the period between the pre Republic and Republic eras.In 1899, Peterson opened the rst in a series of several successive shops in London, England, that lasted until the late 1960's/70s.

1899 53, New Broad St. E.C.1910 7, Hills Pl., Oxford St. W.1915 21, Mortimer St. W.Finally moving to 74/77 White Lion Street until 1970.So the English Era, for a simplied date, will be from 1899 through to around 1970. The stamps Peterson used in London are:

Harry Kapp died on 20th February 1972. Shortly after, 1973/4 Kapp & Peterson merged with Tennant and Ruttle and the name of the company changed to Peterson Tennant. It was subsequently taken over by James Crean Ltd,but later the manufacturing concern was

separated from the rest of the company and began trading once more under it's historical name of Kapp and Peterson.

During the 1970s Peterson had a large display of pipes in the Shannon Airport Duty Free Shop for passengers. These were on display in a oor cabinet measuring approximately 6 x 3. Shannon airport outlet sold a considerable amount of pipes during its period of existence, covering all qualities, from the basic entry level Aran series up to the De Luxe Systems. They also stamped some mid range pipes with the mark 'SHANNON'. This was only for pipes issued and sold from Shannon airport and was not the same as the present day Shannon series.

With Ireland's joining of the European Community in 1973, a fourth miniature hallmark representation of the Celtic Glenisheen collar was added to the right of the date stamp for that year, hallmark letter F.

In 1975 Peterson issued the Centennial Limited Edition 1875 - 1975. The Peterson Centennial

pipes, were released in celebration of 100 years of the company's pipe making. Two pipes were issued, 100 of each shape,a sterling silver banded straight and a bent shape 69, both were offered for sale individually.

In 1979 and 1980 Peterson commenced production of the Mark Twain gold banded numbered limited edition, numbered 1 through to 400. The pipe proved to be so popular that the number was quietly increased to 1000. They sold originally for around $350. The issue was such a great success and prompted further production of more pipes in 1981 to satisfy demand, with the Mark Twain second numbered silver banded edition, numbered 1 through to 1000, each in special presentation boxes. Some were also issued with limited edition pewter statues of the famous author.Peterson then went on to produce more non limited versions of the Mark Twain pipes, this time without numbers, from 1983 through to 1989.

In 1985 there was a 3rd numbered limited edition of 1000 pipes issued to commemorate the writer's 150th birthday anniversary.1835 1985. These were all gold banded and in a special presentation box in the shape of a Twain book. There must have been a fourth production of Mark Twain pipes, for there is evidence of Mark Twain pipes with silver dates for the 1990's.

In 1988 Peterson decided to issue a special Millennium Edition set of two pipes commemorating the City of Dublin's 1000 year founding (9881988). Hallmark letter C.

The Peterson Manx (Laxey) Isle of Man factory partnership ceased operation about 1981 and the production of all African Meerschaum pipes was moved to Dublin and continued there until 1986.

1987 The Issue of the rst Sherlock Holmes Series. Probably the most famous Peterson issue/series of pipes.

The 'Original' series was introduced piece meal, every 6 months a new shape until the 7 day set was complete. The same procedure was later adopted for the next series, Return of Sherlock Holmes.

The second issue was called 'The Return of' and was based on the success of 'the Original',with seven additional new shapes and dedicated wooden rack being created. All similar to the rst issue,with XL bowl sizes and similar sterling silver bands with the SH stamp.

There was also a miniature version of Sherlock Holmes pipes issued around the same time. It was named the 'Junior' Sherlock series. These were smaller bowled pipes at around two thirds the size of the originals and replicated those shapes.

Tom Palmer, a charted accountant by profession, bought the Peterson business in the early1990's in partnership with some other investors, he eventually bought them all out in 1995.

On looking back over the previous Peterson history,Tom considers that most of the changes which he has initiated between 1995 and the present, came in the very large extension to the modern pipe range and the constant issuing of new shapes and series. He considers that at the end of the day, a pipe is a consumer product,loosely dened and the consumer wants something new every so often.

Tom also believes that,the major changes have been refocussing our outlook on the smoker and given him variety and something to look forward to every year."

"We have always stayed close to our roots our pipes are still seen as 'traditional' and I think that this is very important. This philosophy is seen in evidence each year now with enthusiasts eagerly awaiting the annual issue of new pipes,tobacco and accessories.

If I was asked if there was one single reason that motivates me to collect Peterson pipes, I would most probably respond that it was their distinct and marvellous design history. Which to my mind, as a self confessed old romantic opens a portal to more elegant times past and established Peterson as one of the forerunners of distinctive classic pipe designs of today.

I must admit I am really into this particular period of Peterson's pipe production and the pipes that were produced during the so called Patent era. In my humble opinion they are elegance personied!

Whenever I go through the old Peterson catalogues, it is like being a big kid all over again,drooling over illustrations and line drawings of pipes which I long to hold and admire. Owning such pipes is like having access to miniature time capsules.

The original patent No.12393 was issued to K&P in Great Britain and Ireland on Aug. 8, 1890, and in France Patent No.210944 on Jan. 22, 1891.On May 1, 1894, U.S. Patent 519,135 was issued to Peterson for his unique construction of a pipe and mouthpiece, described as a certain new and useful Improvement in Tobacco-Pipes, thats come to be known as the world famous Peterson 'System' pipe.In 1898 another of Peterson's innovative pipe inventions became available, the Peterson-Lip (P-Lip) mouthpiece, designed to offset the inhaled smoke to the roof of the mouth,thus avoiding tongue bite.There were several other similar patents awarded to K&P at around the same period(1900's).

For collectors the Patent Era appears to have been from K&P's formation in 1890, until the expiration of the patent; through to approximately 1915. The late Mike Leverette in his 'A Peterson Dating Guide' extended this period to 1922.I believe this was purely to take cognisance of the P-lip patent which expired at around this time.

I would suggest the period 1890 to 1915 is the true 'Patent era'. From my humble observations the Patent stamping on pipes from that time, were more apparent and attributable with some degree of accuracy. Peterson pipes made during the majority of this period had no "Country of Manufacture" (COM) stamped on them. However, later around 1916, they began stamping their pipes "Made in Ireland" in a block format.

Something Special

I Recently I acquired a wonderful and very unique Peterson pipe . The pipe was in need of some restoration,as it's original stem was missing. It is an 1896 bent Patent Deluxe.The original saddle stem which was missing, was probably an Amber one.

So what is so special apart from it's age? Well, it is otherwise in pristine un-smoked, brand new condition, as fresh as the day it came from the factory. The pipe is probably the oldest un-smoked Peterson in existence!!

My recent enquiry to Peterson's Dublin factory, has born fruit, those magicians have just returned the pipe with it's newly restored, made to measure, black acrylic saddle stem.I am very pleased with the new replacement stem, as I consider this to be a very significant pipe from Petersons wonderful past.

At left and right are photo's of this marvelous unique pipe, now complete once more.

A unique Victorian Peterson Pipe

Occasionally I am amazed at the rare and unique Peterson pipes that surface .The hallmarks on this specimen are English(Birmingham) and dated the pipe at 1893,(date letter T).I have seen a few patent Pete's over the years,however this example is a first for me.The most obvious characteristic is the magnificent silver fretwork which encases the briar bowl.Such skilled silver-work was typical Victorian high-end surface embellishment, typical of the time.It shows intricate show stopping art, through the antique floral and leaf decoration.The stem is well worn and damaged and the case was a bit grubby. But hey! it is 119 years old!! I am happy with it.It is a very rare example of an art form, not normally associated with early Petersons and as such is a prime candidate for the Sandpiper Peterson Museum. See photos bellow:

1893 Patent, courtesy Jim Lilley Collection

1893 Patent, courtesy Jim Lilley Collection

1893 Patent, courtesy Jim Lilley Collection

An unusual 1916 Deluxe Squash Tomato shape with Amber Stem and magnificent Briar

3 Early Patent House Pipes, Jim Lilley Collection

A patent bent, Jim Lilley Collection

1900 Patent, Jim Lilley Collection

1901 patent, Jim Lilley Collection

1913 Patent, Jim Lilley Collection

1901 Amber stem cased, Jim Lilley Collection

Patent 1910 Bulldog, Jim Lilley Collection

Large Amber Patent Bent, Jim Lilley Collection

An example of a repair to the damaged 1903 Patent Amber stem with a Silver lip protector

1908 Patent Silver Cap House Pipe

Silver stamping showing 2nd patent number & date

This 1906 Patent has a rare "DUBLIN" stamping

Stampings on sterling mount

Stampings on bowl & sterling mount

The pre-republic Peterson's are often considered to be rather special by Peterson pipe smokers.They hark back to a time when quality briar was in abundance and craftsmanship was of the highest level.

Like all collecting desirables, pre-republic pipes are now relatively hard to come by, with availability declining with each passing year. The amazing thing that I nd with pre-Republic's is the consistently high smoking qualities that they show,regardless of being a high or low grade issue. No it is not that I am looking through rose tinted glasses and being sentimental,they really were very well made. I base my judgement on owning and smoking quite a few of them.

For the purpose of this exercise and bearing in mind the eccentric vagaries of Peterson nomenclature,I am suggesting that an acceptable criteria or starting point for when the Pre Republic era begins and ends,requires a short historical resume.:- The Irish Free State came into being in December 1922. The British sovereign, as King of Ireland, was nominal head of state, but Ireland was a republic in all but name.An entirely new constitution was voted by the Irish people in 1937, with provision for a President Of Ireland as head of state. Therefore, Ireland became a republic in 1937, but was not called that. It was called simply EIRE (Ireland in Irish.)When, in 1945, the British government inquired of prime minister Eamon de Valera weather he intended to proclaim a republic, his answer was: "we are a republic", having refused to say so before for eight years. This was news to the British: when George VI ascended the British throne in 1936, he had been crowned King of Ireland, as well, little knowing that there no longer was a Kingdom of Ireland!

As usual when trying to get accurate facts in regard to Peterson history,something will jump up and get in the way. They are missing many of their records. The following is the best that we can do for a guide to the myriad markings during the period 1922 1949.Prior to 1920 it was rare for a country of origin to be stamped on the pipe, just Peterson's Dublin on the band. After 1921/22,If it is stamped "MADE IN IRELAND" and the "Made in" is stacked over "Ireland" or "MADE IN EIRE" or several other forms, it was made between 1922 and 1938. A considerable number of Peterson pipes were stamped "Irish Free State". From about 1930 to 1949, most of the pipes (those which were stamped) were stamped "Made in Ireland"." If the stamp reads "MADE IN IRELAND" in a circle, the pipe was made between 1939 and 1948. These are all "prerepublic" pipes. I can tell you that the mark "Irish Free State" was adopted in 1922;and replaced by "Eire" in 1937 and then by "Republic of Ireland" in 1949.Phew! So there you have it. easy and straight forward,oh yeah! Peterson initially graded their mass -produced System pipes, i.e., regular catalogue pipes (in descending order) "Deluxe," "First Quality," "0" grade, "2nd grade," and "3rd grade."You will also nd old Peterson Systems stamped System 4 or System 5. The shape number is also indicative of briar quality; for example,- 364 is Peterson's 3rd quality shape number (the 2nd quality sister pipe is a 314.)

Pre-Republic Era 1922 Kapet Rhodesian

Pre-Republic Era 1938 Made in Eire 308 System

Sometime in the 1940s they introduced the "Premier" and "Standard" stampings. The "Premier" falling just under the "Deluxe," and the "Standard" becoming the former "2nd grade" quality.The stampings on the silver bands are "faux" hallmarks and are just decorative symbols of Ireland ... a Shamrock,a wolfhound , and a castle or tower.In regard to the silver and nickel markings of this period,well nu-ff said,it is a blooming mineeld!Hallmarks are only required on precious metals not nickel. Also a pipe made in England must meet English requirements which now (and for a number of years)are only 925 for sterling. This is an EU standard I believe. The shamrock, wolfhound and tower are not hallmarks. Dublin hallmarks for sterling are Hibernia, crowned harp and a letter denoting the year. They are still required for silver and gold in Ireland.On the faux "hallmarks" v Dublin silver hallmarks. There are many Peterson pipes with sterling silver bands that do not have hallmarks though, even some in the Premier and Deluxe grades.

At the start of the 1950's, all pipes at Kapp & Peterson were stamped with Made in the Republic of Ireland stamp and also starting off the decade with the hallmark letter I on any silverware.

Apparently nickel was scarce in those days, just after the war and the company tried to use aluminium instead. Needless to say It was not very successful.!

I have adapted this section concentrating on the period following 1950,the made in the Irish Republic era and the different near modern Peterson grades and series,which should bring us up to the time period from the 1990's onward.

Again this was a time of great change for the brand, the company having changed ownership on several ocassions. However it was also one of great creativity,with the introduction of several commemorative series and some new literary character series of pipes that would leave a very lasting impression on the pipe smoking fraternity.

With Ireland's joining of the European Community in 1973, a fourth miniature hallmark representation of the Celtic Glenisheen collar was added to the right of the date stamp for that year, hallmark letter F.In 1975 Peterson issued the Centennial Limited Edition 1875 1975. The Peterson Centennial pipes, were released in celebration of 100 years of the company's pipe making. Two pipes were issued, 100 of each shape,a sterling silver banded straight and a bent shape 69, both were offered for sale individually.

The rst series to make a real global impact during this period was the Mark Twain pipes introduced in 1979.The issue of this series has become the stuff of legend for Peterson.I think they were taken aback and were unprepared for the series's eventual worldwide popularity and success.

Throughout the early eighties they made several batches of so-called numbered limited editions.Culminating in 1985 with their Mark Twain 150th Gold anniversary.

1987 saw the introduction and Issue of the rst Sherlock Holmes 'Original' Series of pipes. The Sherlock Holmes series is probably the most successful series of pipes ever introduced by Peterson in terms of numbers. It was rst issued to honour Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's famous ctitious detective character, Sherlock Holmes. Holmes is perhaps the most famous pipe smoking character in ction.

In 1988 Peterson decided to issue a special Millennium Edition set of two pipes commemorating the City of Dublin's 1000 year founding (9881988). Hallmark letter C. The rst pipe was a Dublin shape (what else!) and an Oom Paul. Each pipe was sold individually featuring a special sterling silver hallmarked band and came with a ribbon wrapped parchment scroll in a blue presentation box.

The Captain Pete Pipes. At the end of the eighties just as the Sherlock Holmes range was being issued, Peterson reintroduced the modern Captain Pete series. The pipe bowls on these modern versions are all based on the Sherlock Holmes shapes.

The modern Captain Pete line available from Cup O'Joe's is an exclusive issue by Peterson for the US retailer. They are XL size pipes that mirror the Kinsale and SH series of pipes with slightly shorter plip mouthpieces.

Previously there were two separate issues of pipes which had the Captain Pete name. "Captain Pete" and "Captain Peterson" were two Peterson's subbrand issues made in England and were also sometimes manufactured in Dublin until the late 1960's when the London premises closed. I have a London made 1940's issue Oom Paul shape Captain Pete in my own collection. A ne pipe it is!

When Tom Palmer bought the Peterson business at the beginning of the nineteen nineties', he adopted the policy of "if it ain't broke don't x it". Basically sticking wisely to what the business had historically been famous for, good quality,value for money, popular, classic shaped pipes.

Peterson had been around for over 120 years before he got involved so he decided to tread carefully before making any real major changes.

On looking back over the previous Peterson history,Tom considered that most changes should come in the extension to the main pipe range and with the regular issuing of new shapes and series. He considered that at the end of the day, a pipe is basically a consumer product and the consumer does like something new every so often.

A consequence of this policy has, in my opinion, led to a rather complex list of new and established lists of series.

The following lists and groupings are hopefully an easier and more practical method, making it much simpler to come to terms with the huge array of Peterson's modern pipes. This can be rather complex for the novice, as Peterson continue to annually introduce new issues and remove older ones. Over the years I have found this to be a recurring problem for new entrants to the world of Peterson pipes. Regular Email correspondence requesting clarication on grades has shown me that it begs clarication. I have attempted to make this process somewhat easier for those not familiar with the various ranges, by adjusting the current system of Petersons nomenclature in line with 4 simple qualitative grouping criteria. For example with Group 1 being the highest in qualitative and monetary value terms, the others then in descending order of quality,cost etc.

Straight grains: Peterson's catalogue states that these pipes have Briars which are carefully examined for imperfections and have selected Briars of exceptional grain, known as Straight Grains, they are carefully selected, hand crafted and the increasingly rare skill required to make them is unique. Craftsmen shape, turn, sand and polish 150 year old roots of the Erica arborea tree/shrub. Only a very limited quantity of Straight Grains are available in any twelve month period. To my mind the sight of a beautiful natural straight grain bowl is truly a sight to behold. Pure class, they can be spotted a mile off! When coupled to the traditional high class Peterson gold or silverwork, these pipes are in a different quality league. Considering that such quality pipes when available, can be bought for prices starting at around $400 and upwards, they are to my mind a real bargain.

Supreme Gold and Silver mounted: Exceptionally rich in grain, these pipes are also made from the nest briar and are almost as rare as the straight grains. Each pipe has a highly polished natural nish and is tted with a slender gold or silver band. With Peterson lip or shtail mouthpiece and available in most of Petersons classic shapes they are subject to the availability of suitable quality briar. Prices can vary between $330 and $850.

Peterson craftsmanship at its very best.

The pipes in this range are amongst the best and most select briars that Peterson produce. They vary in price from the Grafton,Rosslare Royal Irish and Silver Spigots starting at around $250. To the slightly more expensive Silver Caps and Lids, Plato, Royal Irish and Celtic Naturals and on up to $800 plus for Gold spigots.

Here is the original post:

Peterson - Pipedia

Ethereum – Official Site

Posted on by

SECURITY WARNINGS

You are responsible for your own computer security. If your machine is compromised you will lose your ether, access to any contracts and possibly more.

You are responsible for your own actions. If you mess something up or break any laws while using this software, it's your fault, and your fault only.

You are responsible for your own karma. Don't be a jerk and respect the rights of others. What goes around comes around.

The following Terms and Conditions (Terms) govern the use of the Ethereum open source software platform (Ethereum Platform). Prior to any use of the Ethereum Platform, the User confirms to understand and expressly agrees to all of the Terms. All capitalized terms in this agreement will be given the same effect and meaning as in the Terms. The group of developers and other personnel that is now, or will be, employed by, or contracted with, Stiftung Ethereum (Stiftung Ethereum) is termed the Ethereum Team. The Platform will be developed by persons and entities who support Ethereum, including both volunteers and developers who are paid by nonprofit entities interested in supporting the Ethereum Platform.

The user acknowledges the following serious risks to any use the Ethereum Platform and ETH and expressly agrees to neither hold Ethereum Stiftung nor the Ethereum Team liable should any of the following risks occur:

The Ethereum Platform and ETH could be impacted by one or more regulatory inquiries or regulatory actions, which could impede or limit the ability of Stiftung Ethereum to continue to develop the Ethereum Platform, or which could impede or limit the ability of a User to use Ethereum Platform or ETH.

It is possible that alternative Ethereum-based networks could be established, which utilize the same open source source code and open source protocol underlying the Ethereum Platform. The Ethereum network may compete with these alternative Ethereum-based networks, which could potentially negatively impact the Ethereum Platform and ETH.

It is possible that the Ethereum Platform will not be used by a large number of external businesses, individuals, and other organizations and that there will be limited public interest in the creation and development of distributed applications. Such a lack of interest could impact the development of the Ethereum Platform and potential uses of ETH. It cannot predict the success of its own development efforts or the efforts of other third parties.

The User recognizes that the Ethereum Platform is under development and may undergo significant changes before release. The User acknowledges that any expectations regarding the form and functionality of the Ethereum Platform held by the User may not be met upon release of the Ethereum Platform, for any number of reasons including a change in the design and implementation plans and execution of the implementation of the Ethereum Platform.

The Ethereum Platform rests on open-source software, and there is a risk that the Ethereum Stiftung or the Ethereum Team, or other third parties not directly affiliated with the Stiftung Ethereum, may introduce weaknesses or bugs into the core infrastructural elements of the Ethereum Platform causing the system to lose ETH stored in one or more User accounts or other accounts or lose sums of other valued tokens issued on the Ethereum Platform.

Cryptography is an art, not a science. And the state of the art can advance over time. Advances in code cracking, or technical advances such as the development of quantum computers, could present risks to cryptocurrencies and the Ethereum Platform, which could result in the theft or loss of ETH. To the extent possible, Stiftung Ethereum intends to update the protocol underlying the Ethereum Platform to account for any advances in cryptography and to incorporate additional security measures, but it cannot predict the future of cryptography or guarantee that any security updates will be made in a timely or successful manner.

As with other cryptocurrencies, the blockchain used for the Ethereum Platform is susceptible to mining attacks, including but not limited to:

Any successful attacks present a risk to the Ethereum Platform, expected proper execution and sequencing of ETH transactions, and expected proper execution and sequencing of contract computations. Despite the efforts of the Ethereum Stiftung and Team, known or novel mining attacks may be successful.

If the Ethereum Platform is rapidly adopted, the demand for ETH could rise dramatically and at a pace that exceeds the rate with which ETH miners can create new ETH tokens. Under such a scenario, the entire Ethereum Platform could become destabilized, due to the increased cost of running distributed applications. In turn, this could dampen interest in the Ethereum Platform and ETH. Instability in the demand of for ETH may lead to a negative change of the economical parameters of an Ethereum based business which could result in the business being unable to continue to operate economically or to cease operation.

If the Ethereum Platform is rapidly adopted, the demand for transaction processing and distributed application computations could rise dramatically and at a pace that exceeds the rate with which ETH miners can bring online additional mining power. Under such a scenario, the entire Ethereum Platform could become destabilized, due to the increased cost of running distributed applications. In turn, this could dampen interest in the Ethereum Platform and ETH. Insufficiency of computational resources and an associated rise in the price of ETH could result in businesses being unable to acquire scarce computational resources to run their distributed applications. This would represent revenue losses to businesses or worst case, cause businesses to cease operations because such operations have become uneconomical due to distortions in the crypto-economy.

Acknowledgment, Acceptance of all Risks and Disclaimer of Warranties and LiabilitiesTHE USER EXPRESSLY KNOWS AND AGREES THAT THE USER IS USING THE Ethereum PLATFORM AT THE USERS SOLE RISK. THE USER REPRESENTS THAT THE USER HAS AN ADEQUATE UNDERSTANDING OF THE RISKS, USAGES AND INTRICACIES OF CRYPTOGRAPHIC TOKENS AND BLOCKCHAIN-BASED OPEN SOURCE SOFTWARE, ETH PLATFORM AND ETH. THE USER ACKNOWLEDGES AND AGREES THAT, TO THE FULLEST EXTENT PERMITTED BY ANY APPLICABLE LAW, THE DISCLAIMERS OF LIABILITY CONTAINED HEREIN APPLY TO ANY AND ALL DAMAGES OR INJURY WHATSOEVER CAUSED BY OR RELATED TO RISKS OF, USE OF, OR INABILITY TO USE, ETH OR THE Ethereum PLATFORM UNDER ANY CAUSE OF ACTION WHATSOEVER OF ANY KIND IN ANY JURISDICTION, INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, ACTIONS FOR BREACH OF WARRANTY, BREACH OF CONTRACT OR TORT (INCLUDING NEGLIGENCE) AND THAT NEITHER Stiftung Ethereum NOR ETHEREUM TEAM SHALL BE LIABLE FOR ANY INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, EXEMPLARY OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES, INCLUDING FOR LOSS OF PROFITS, GOODWILL OR DATA. SOME JURISDICTIONS DO NOT ALLOW THE EXCLUSION OF CERTAIN WARRANTIES OR THE LIMITATION OR EXCLUSION OF LIABILITY FOR CERTAIN TYPES OF DAMAGES. THEREFORE, SOME OF THE ABOVE LIMITATIONS IN THIS SECTION MAY NOT APPLY TO A USER. IN PARTICULAR, NOTHING IN THESE TERMS SHALL AFFECT THE STATUTORY RIGHTS OF ANY USER OR EXCLUDE INJURY ARISING FROM ANY WILLFUL MISCONDUCT OR FRAUD OF Stiftung Ethereum.

We recommend any groups handling large or important transactions to maintain a voluntary 24 hour waiting period on any ether deposited. In case the integrity of the network is at risk due to issues in the clients, we will endeavor to publish patches in a timely fashion to address the issues. We will endeavour to provide solutions within the voluntary 24 hour waiting period.

All disputes or claims arising out of, relating to, or in connection with the Terms, the breach thereof, or use of the Ethereum Platform shall be finally settled under the Rules of Arbitration of the International Chamber of Commerce by one or more arbitrators appointed in accordance with said Rules. All claims between the parties relating to these Terms that are capable of being resolved by arbitration, whether sounding in contract, tort, or otherwise, shall be submitted to ICC arbitration. Prior to commencing arbitration, the parties have a duty to negotiate in good faith and attempt to resolve their dispute in a manner other than by submission to ICC arbitration. The arbitration panel shall consist of one arbitrator only, unless the ICC Court of Arbitration determines that the dispute is such as to warrant three arbitrators. If the Court determines that one arbitrator is sufficient, then such arbitrator shall be Swiss resident. If the Court determines that three arbitrators are necessary, then each party shall have 30 days to nominate an arbitrator of its choice -- in the case of the Claimant, measured from receipt of notification of the ICC Courts decision to have three arbitrators; in the case of Respondent, measured from receipt of notification of Claimants nomination. All nominations must be Swiss resident. If a party fails to nominate an arbitrator, the Court will do so. The Court shall also appoint the chairman. All arbitrators shall be and remain independent of the parties involved in the arbitration. The place of arbitration shall be Zug, Switzerland. The language of the arbitration shall be English. In deciding the merits of the dispute, the tribunal shall apply the laws of Switzerland and any discovery shall be limited and shall not involve any depositions or any other examinations outside of a formal hearing. The tribunal shall not assume the powers of amiable compositeur or decide the case ex aequo et bono. In the final award, the tribunal shall fix the costs of the arbitration and decide which of the parties shall bear such costs in what proportion. Every award shall be binding on the parties. The parties undertake to carry out the award without delay and waive their right to any form of recourse against the award in so far as such waiver can validly be made.

Stiftung Ethereum is finally not liable for:

See the rest here:

Ethereum - Official Site

Neurohacking – Wikipedia

Posted on by

Neurohacking is the colloquial term for (usually personal or 'DIY') neuroengineering. It is a form of biohacking (qv) focusing on the brain and CNS. Strictly speaking it is any method of manipulating or interfering with the structure and/or function of neurons for improvement or repair.

The main goal of neurohacking is optimal mental health. Other goals include damage repair, simulated reality, prevention of disease and augmentation of abilities or of intelligence overall. It utilises information and technology mainly from the fields of epigenetics, bio/neurofeedback, psychopharmacology, biological psychology and functional analysis, but many practitioners also employ physical exercise, nutritional guidelines, vitamins & supplements, meditation and/or self-hypnosis. Some avoid all neuroactive substances including caffeine, alcohol, food additives and fast-release sugars.Current research focus on the nature and development of intelligence and how to increase or improve it. The works of Dr. Herman Epstein, Joseph LeDoux, Alex Ramonsky, Frederick Starr/Sean and David Barker are influential. The ethical basis of Neurohacking for health is that it should be practiced strictly with informed consent.

There are numerous examples of the use of neural implants for therapy, however the only experiments involving hacking into the nervous system for enhancement appear to be those conducted by Kevin Warwick. In a series of experiments at the University of Reading, Warwick became the first human recipient of a BrainGate electrode array implant on 14 March 2002, into the median nerve of his left arm. With this in place he was able to control a robot arm to copy his own hand movements.[1] Warwick's nervous system was also connected with the internet in Columbia University, New York to enable him to control the robot arm in the University of Reading, also receiving feedback from sensors in the finger tips. A simpler array was implanted into the arm of Warwick's wife. With this in place they were able to achieve the first direct electronic communication between the nervous systems of two humans.[2]

The term neurohacking is also used for a method of attempting to retrieve information from the brain (such as passwords, locations, etc..) without consent; presently no technology exists for such a tactic. The concept has been used much in science fiction (e.g. the film "The Matrix"). In data retrieval, some sort of braincomputer interface (BCI) is typically used, where the brains neuron synapses are somehow captured or recorded to be processed for information. Promoters of this concept generally refer to the MRI (magnetic resonance imaging) or MEG (magnetoencephalography) to support the plausibility of this concept. Although some sort of neuroimaging could someday be used, the accuracy of any present day method is not nearly close enough. For instance, it is assumed that neurohacking requires detection of the state of individual neurons (approximately 1 micrometer diameter) while the resolution of the MEG is several thousand neurons and other imaging systems may be even larger. It is estimated that usable neurohacking of this type is still many decades away.

Caffeine, alcohol, modafinil, over the counter medicine, and other drugs are all forms of neurohacking. Every one of these substances alters or "tricks" the brain into desirable conditions. When ingesting caffeine, the brain is fooled into thinking the body has energy and keeps the consumer awake. The brain's neurons naturally produce adenosine as a byproduct which is monitored by the nervous system. Once the level of adenosine is at a certain point, the body will feel tired. Caffeine acts as fake adenosine and binds to the body's receptors. However, instead of disappearing, it blocks the adenosine receptors so the brain's stimulants, dopamine and glutamate, can work more freely. Since neurohacking is the interference with the structure and function of neurons, caffeine consumption is in fact a neurohack. Similarly, other substances that affect the brain and functions of neurons are also neurohacks.Alcohol is an example for a form of neurohacking which affects multiple neurotransmitters instead of just one. This is because alcohol is a fat soluble molecule. Since lipids are a major component of cell membranes, alcohol is able to enter the membranes of neurons and change their properties. Specifically, alcohol inhibits the glutamate receptor function, enhances GABA receptor function, as well as raises dopamine and endorphin levels. This causes all sorts of reactions, including liveliness and excitement. Alcohol also causes one to lose their anxieties, because of the effect of alcohol on GABA receptors. After alcohol affects the system, it causes the body to go through what is called neurotransmitter rebound. This is because when alcohol takes effect, it overuses the GABA system, so when it wears off, the GABA system makes the body feel restless, resulting in its severe withdrawal symptoms.

View post:

Neurohacking - Wikipedia

DIY Neurohacking Tech Top 10 List

Posted on by

Dont try this at home

In previous years, weve covered the RoboRoach, brain hacking, and other at-home experiments in neuroscience, but this yearwere living in a brave new world of brain zapping now that people are making their own at-home neurostimulation devices. Sure, companies sell them, but wheres the craftiness in that?

Photo via diytdcs.com

There are nearly a dozen neurostimulation devices on the market that allow you to zap your brain with a small electrical current in the hopes of improving your cognitive function. But you can also find instructions online to build your own devices.Gamers, in particular, are interested in DIY neurostimulation aftera 2002 studyshowed that transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS) could improve motor skills. In fact,DIYers and scientists are hoping to cooperatein order to gather data on the use of these neurostimulation devices.

The dangers are obvious. The science is shoddy, the risks are unknown, vulnerable people are being encouraged to build and use devices that could cause everything from slight burns now to cognitive issues down the line.

On the other hand, in the case of at-home brain stimulation devices, many people lack basic medical care and large parts of the world are devoid of mental health services. Unless your body has been ravaged by depression, anxiety, or months of insomnia, it can be hard to understand that these experiments are better than nothing.

But when it comes to at-home tinkering among young people or experimentation among adults looking for a jolt of motivation, there needs to be some oversight. Be careful out there.

Resources:

DIY Electrical Brain Stimulation Is A Worrying New Trend (Big Think, 2018)

At-Home Brain Stimulation: What Could Possibly Go Wrong? (Forbes, 2018) disclaimer, I wrote this piece

Do DIY Brain-Booster Devices Work? (Scientific American, 2017)

The Practices of Do-It-Yourself Brain Stimulation: Implications for Ethical Considerations and Regulatory Proposals (Journal of Medical Ethics, 2016)

DIY Brain Stimulation Could Have Scary Side Effects, Doctors Say (Motherboard, 2016)

Inside The Strange New World of DIY Brain Stimulation (Wired, 2014)

Like Loading...

Read this article:

DIY Neurohacking Tech Top 10 List

Minerva Reef Directions | Island Cruising NZ

Posted on by

Minerva sailing directionsSouth Pacific voyagers, particularly those bound from Tonga orFiji for largely cyclone-free New Zealand, should keepNorth and South Minerva Reef in mind for a possible storm refuge,rest stop, adventure destination, or at the very least as apotential hazard to navigation. These two atolls also representan opportunity to see tropical Indo-Pacific sea life in a nearlyundisturbed condition.Weather windowsThe best times to visit the Minervas are either northboundduring the late Southern Hemisphere fall near the end of May/early June or southbound during the late spring in October.Arriving too early (northbound) or too late (southbound) invitesexposure to severe weather conditions. Depart New Zealandfor the voyage north right behind an outgoing low, not in themiddle of a high, and embark from the Minervas southward justas the leading edge of a preferably mild high reaches the area.

Information sourcesBritish Admiralty Chart 985, Mi nerva Reefs.: accurately depictsboth atolls and includes a close-up of the pass into South Minervauseful for orientation. Approximate CPSentrance coordinates, foruse in good light in conjunction with the chart and a lookout only,are 230 37.36 S, 178056.11 W (North Minerva) and 23 56.55S, 179007.60 W (South Minerva). Sailing Directions PlanningGuide for the South Pacific Ocean (Publication 122) also containsuseful data for a visit to the Minervas.General layoutNorth Minerva Reef is nearly circular, with an approximate diameterof 3.5 nm. Using a proper lookout, one can move aroundinside the atoll in order to anchor in the greatest protection for theprevailing wind. South Minerva Reef consists of two roughly circularrings of reef joined in the middle, like a number 8 tiltedslightly in a northeast-southwest orientation. Only the two-milediametereastern lagoon is accessible to larger vessels, and anchoringin Herald Bight, outside the pass, is tenable for wind directionslacking a northerly component. Like North Minerva,movement throughout this eastern lagoon for optimal anchoring ispossible with a vigilant lookout. We noted a narrow pass on thenorthern rim of the western lagoon not shown on the chart, potentiallynavigable for centerboarders and dinghies. Good holdingground is prevalent inside both Minervas, and both feature slightly

bumpy conditions at higher tides in normal weather conditions.GearA fully stocked medical kit, manuals, and training; good longdistancecommunication capability, such as single-sideband or hamradio or an Inmarsat transceiver; and survival fishing and watermakingequipment are all critical for a trip to the Minervas. Fishingand diving gear will greatly enhance your pleasure and dinnermenu. Specifically, bring medium to heavy trolling gear for offshorefishing, 10- and 20-poundclass spinning rods for lagoon fishing,wetsuits for diving and snorkeling in the cool water, thick diveboots or other protective footwear for reef walking, and a Hawaiiansling and lobster snare.JurisdictionThe Minerva Reefs were ceded to Tonga in 1972 and ratified by the South Pacific Forum the same year. In 2010 Fiji disputed the Tongan ownership and placed gunboats at North Minerva to try and force their claim. The claim is currently under dispute.

Obviously,you will have either cleared customs out of Tonga or not yetchecked in when you visit. The Minervas, however, have been longconsidered a stopover between countries, certainly in severe weather or for vessel repairs.Nevertheless, go easy on the seafood harvest, never taking more than you can consume in a short time, anddo not disturb giant clams, sea turtles, or other threatened creatures.A visit from a Tongan patrol boat should not, under theseconditions, be cause for concern.

This entry was postedon Monday, April 25th, 2011 at 2:19 pmand is filed under Resources.You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.Both comments and pings are currently closed.

Original post:

Minerva Reef Directions | Island Cruising NZ

Chesterfield Islands – Wikipedia

Posted on by

Chesterfield Islands (les Chesterfield in French) are a French archipelago of New Caledonia located in the Coral Sea, 550km northwest of Grande Terre, the main island of New Caledonia. The archipelago is 120km long and 70km broad, made up of 11 uninhabited islets and many reefs. The land area of the islands is less than 10km.[citation needed]

During periods of lowered sea level during the Pleistocene ice ages an island of considerable size (Greater Chesterfield Island) occupied the location of the archipelago.

Bellona Reef, 164km south-southeast of Chesterfield, is geologically separated from the Chesterfield archipelago but commonly included.

The reef complex is named after the ship Chesterfield, commanded by Matthew Bowes Alt, which explored the Coral Sea in the 1790s.[1]

The Chesterfield Islands, sometimes referred to as the Chesterfield Reefs or Chesterfield Group, are the most important of a number of uninhabited coral sand cays. Some are awash and liable to shift with the wind while others are stabilized by the growth of grass, creepers and low trees. The reefs extend from 19 to 22S between 158160E in the southern Coral Sea halfway between Australia and New Caledonia. The Chesterfield Reefs are now part of the territory of New Caledonia while the islands farther west are part of the Australian Coral Sea Islands Territory.

Chesterfield lagoon, located between 1900' and 2030' S and 15810' and 159E covers an area of approximately 3500km2. A barrier reef surrounds the lagoon, interrupted by wide passes except on its eastern side where it is open for over 20 nautical miles (37km). The major part of the lagoon is exposed to trade winds and to the southeastern oceanic swell. The lagoon is relatively deep with a mean depth of 51 m. The depth increases from south to north.[2]

Chesterfield Reefs complex consists of the Bellona Reef complex to the south (South, Middle and Northwest Bellona Reef) and the Bampton Reef complex.

Captain Matthew Boyd of Bellona named the reefs for his ship. He had delivered convicts to New South Wales in 1793 and was on his way to China to pick up a cargo at Canton to take back to Britain for the British East India Company when he passed the reefs in FebruaryMarch 1793.

Lieutenant John Lamb, R.N., Commander of the ship Baring, spent three days in the neighborhood of Booby and Bellona Shoals and reefs. Lamb took soundings between nineteen and forty-five fathoms (114270ft), and frequently passed shoals, upon which the sea was breaking. Lamb defined the limits of the rocky ground as the parallels of 2040 and 2150 and the meridians of 15815 and 15930. He also saw a sandy islet, surrounded by a chain of rocks, at 2124 south and 15830 east. The ship Minerva measured the water's depth as eight fathoms (48ft), with the appearance of shallower water to the southwest; this last danger is in a line between the two shoals at about longitude 15920 east, as described by James Horsburgh.[3]

Observatory Cay (Caye de l'Observatoire) 2124S 15851E / 21.400S 158.850E / -21.400; 158.850 (Bellona Reefs - Observatory Cay), 800 m long and 2 m high, lies on the Middle Bellona Reefs at the southern end of the Chesterfield Reefs and 180nm east of Kenn Reef.

The Chesterfield Reefs is a loose collection of elongated reefs that enclose a deep, semi-sheltered, lagoon. The reefs on the west and northwest are known as the Chesterfield Reefs; those on the east and north being the Bampton Reefs. The Chesterfield Reefs form a structure measuring 120km in length (northeast to southwest) and 70km across (east to west).

There are numerous cays occurring amongst the reefs of both the Chesterfield and Bampton Reefs. These include: Loop Islet, Renard Cay, Skeleton Cay, Bennett Island, Passage Islet, Long Island, the Avon Isles, the Anchorage Islets and Bampton Island.

Long Island 1953S 15819E / 19.883S 158.317E / -19.883; 158.317 (Chesterfield Reefs - Long Island), 10nm NW of Loop Islet, is the largest of the Chesterfield Islands, and is 1400 to 1800 m long but no more than 100 m across and 9 m high. In May 1859 Henry Mangles Denham found Long Island was a heap of 'foraminifera' densely covered with stunted bushtrees with leaves as large as cabbage plants, spreading 12 feet (3.7 m) and reaching as high, upon trunks 9 inches (23cm) diameter... The trees around the margin of this island were leafless, as if from the seafowl."[citation needed] Although wooded in the 1850s, it was stripped during guano extraction in the 1870s and was said to be covered in grass with only two coconut trees and some ruins at the south end early in the 20th century. The vegetation was growing again by 1957 when the remaining ruins were confused with those of a temporary automatic meteorological station established in the same area by the Americans between 1944 and 1948. Terry Walker reported that by 1990 there was a ring of low Tournefortia trees growing around the margin, herbs, grass and shrubs in the interior, and still a few exotic species including coconuts.

South of Long Island and Loop Islet there are three small low islets up to 400 m across followed, after a narrow channel, by Passage or Bennett Island, which is 12 m high and was a whaling station in the first half of the 20th century. Several sand cays lie on the reef southeast of the islet.

The two Avon Isles 1932S 15815E / 19.533S 158.250E / -19.533; 158.250 (Avon Isles), some 188 m in diameter and 5 m high to the top of the dense vegetation, are situated 21 n.m. north of Long Island. They were seen by Mr. Sumner, Master of the ship Avon, on 18 September 1823, and are described by him as being three-quarters of a mile in circumference, twenty feet high, and the sea between them twenty fathoms deep. At four miles (7km) northeast by north from them the water was twelve fathoms (72 feet) deep, and at the same time they saw a reef ten or fifteen miles (2030km) to the southeast, with deep water between it and the islets. A boat landed on the south-westernmost islet, and found it inhabited only by birds, but clothed with shrubs and wild grapes. By observation, these islands were found to lie in latitude 19 degrees 40 minutes, and longitude 158 degrees 6 minutes. The Avon Isles are described by Denham in 1859 as densely covered with stunted trees and creeping plants and grass, and... crowded with the like species of birds."[citation needed]

Renard Island North Bampton Reef 1914S 15858E / 19.233S 158.967E / -19.233; 158.967 (Bampton Reefs - Renard Island), Approximately 6m (20ft) tall sand islet lies 45nmi (83km) northeast of the Avon Isles and is 273m (896ft) long, 180m (590ft) across and also 6m (20ft) high to the top of the bushes.

Southeast Bampton Reef 1908S 15840E / 19.133S 158.667E / -19.133; 158.667 (Southeast Bampton Reef) Sand Cay 5m (16ft) elevation

Loop Islet 1959S 15828E / 19.983S 158.467E / -19.983; 158.467 (Loop Islet), which lies 85nm farther north near the south end of the central islands of Chesterfield Reefs, is a small, flat, bushy islet 3 m high where a permanent automatic weather station was established by the Service Mtorologique de Nouma in October 1968. Terry Walker reported the presence of a grove of Casuarinas in 1990.

Anchorage Islets are a group of islets five nautical miles (9km) north of Loop Islet. The third from the north, about 400 m long and 12 m high, shelters the best anchorage.

Passage (Bonnet) Island reaches a vegetative height of 12 m

Bampton Island 1907S 15836E / 19.117S 158.600E / -19.117; 158.600 (Bampton Island), lies on Bampton Reefs 20nm NW of Renard Island. It is 180 m long, 110 m across and 5 m high. It had trees when discovered in 1793, but has seldom been visited since then except by castaways.

The reefs and islands west of the Chesterfield Islands, the closest being Mellish Reef with Herald's Beacon Islet at 1725S 15552E / 17.417S 155.867E / -17.417; 155.867 (Herald's Beacon Islet), at a distance of 180 nm northwest of Bampton Island, belong to the Coral Sea Islands Territory.

Booby Reef in the center of the eastern chain of reefs and islets comprising Chesterfield Reefs appears to have been discovered first by Lt. Henry Lidgbird Ball in HMS Supply on the way from Sydney to Batavia (modern day Jakarta) in 1790. The reefs to the south were found next by Mathew Boyd in the convict ship Bellona on his way from Sydney to Canton (modern day Guangzhou) in February or March 1793.[4] The following June, William Wright Bampton became embayed for five days at the north end of Chesterfield Reefs in the Indiaman Shah Hormuzeer, together with Mathew Bowes Alt in the whaler Chesterfield.[5] Bampton reported two islets with trees and a number of birds of different species around the ships, several of them the same kind as at Norfolk Island.[6]

The reefs continued to present a hazard to shipping plying between Australia and Canton or India (where cargo was collected on the way home to Europe). The southern reefs were surveyed by Captain Henry Mangles Denham in the Herald from 1858 to 1860.[7] He made the natural history notes discussed below. The northern reefs were charted by Lieutenant G.E.Richards in HMS Renard in 1878 and the French the following year. Denham's conclusions are engraved on British Admiralty Chart 349:

These Plans and a masthead Lookout will enable a Ship to round to under the lee of the Reefs where she may caulk topsides, set up rigging, rate Chronometers, [and] obtain turtle, fish and seafowl eggs. On some of the more salient reefs, beacons were erected by Capt. Denham, and for the sake of castaways, cocoanuts, shrubs, grasses & every description of seed likely to grow, were sown in the way to promote the superstructure; and it is most desirable that these Refuge spots should be held sacred for universal benefit and not ruthlessly destroyed by the Guanoseeker.[8]

The area is a wintering ground for numerous Humpback whales and smaller numbers of Sperm whales. During the 19th century the Chesterfield Islands were visited by increasing numbers of whalers during the off season in New Zealand. L. Thiercelin reported that in July 1863 the islets only had two or three plants, including a bush 34 m high, and were frequented by turtles weighing 60 to 100kg.[9] Many eggs were being taken regularly by several English, two French and one American whaler. On another occasion there were no less than eight American whalers.[10] A collection of birds said to have been made by Surgeon Jourde of the French whaler Gnral dHautpoul on the Brampton Shoals in July 1861 was subsequently brought by Gerard Krefft (1862) to the Australian Museum, but clearly not all the specimens came from there.

On 27 October 1862, the British Government granted an exclusive concession to exploit the guano on Lady Elliot Island, Wreck Reef, Swain Reefs, Raine Island, Bramble Cay, Brampton Shoal, and Pilgrim Island to the Anglo Australian Guano Company organized by the whaler Dr. William Crowther in Hobart, Tasmania. They were apparently most active on Bird Islet (Wreck Reef) and Lady Elliot and Raine Islands (Hutchinson, 1950),[citation needed] losing five ships at Bird Islet between 1861 and 1882 (Crowther 1939).[citation needed] It is not clear that they ever took much guano from the Chesterfield Islands unless it was obtained from Higginson, Desmazures et Cie, discussed below.

When in 1877 Joshua William North also found guano on the Chesterfield Reefs, Alcide Jean Desmazures persuaded Governor Orly of New Caledonia to send the warship La Seudre to annex them. There were estimated to be about 185,000 cu m of guano on Long Island and a few hundred tons elsewhere, and 40% to 62% phosphate (Chevron, 1880),[citation needed] which was extracted between 1879 and 1888 by Higginson, Desmazures et Cie of Nouma (Godard, nd),[citation needed] leaving Long Island stripped bare for a time (Anon., 1916).[citation needed]

Apparently the islands were then abandoned until Commander Arzur in the French warship Dumont dUrville surveyed the Chesterfield Reefs and erected a plaque in 1939. In September 1944, American forces installed a temporary automatic meteorological station at the south end of Long Island, which was abandoned again at the end of World War II. The first biological survey was made of Long Island by Cohic during four hours ashore on 26 September 1957.[11] It revealed, among other things, a variety of avian parasites including a widespread Ornithodoros tick belonging to a genus carrying arboviruses capable of causing illness in humans. This island and the Anchorage Islets were also visited briefly during a survey of New Caledonian coral reefs in 1960 and 1962.

An aerial magnetic survey was made of the Chesterfield area in 1966, and a seismic survey in 1972, which apparently have not been followed up yet. In November 1968 another automatic meteorological station was installed on Loop Islet where 10 plants were collected by A.E. Ferr.[citation needed] Since then the Centre de Nouma of the Office de la Recherche Scientifique et Technique Outre Mer has arranged for periodic surveys and others when this installation is serviced.

From 1982-1992 Terry Walker carried out methodical surveys of the Coral Sea islets with the intention of producing a seabird atlas. He visited the central islands of the Chesterfield Reefs in December 1990.[12]

An amateur radio DX-pedition (TX3X) was conducted on one of the islands in October 2015.

Unless otherwise noted, information in this section is from Coral Sea and Northern Great Barrier Reef Shipwrecks.[13]

Coordinates: 1921S 15840E / 19.350S 158.667E / -19.350; 158.667

See original here:

Chesterfield Islands - Wikipedia

Bitcoin – The Currency of the Internet r/Bitcoin – reddit

Posted on by

The marshmallow study is the longest running human study ever made. Toddlers were given marshmallows and told if they dont eat it in 10 minutes while they're by themselves with the marshmallow, they will be given 2 marshmallows. 90% of toddlers ate the marshmallow and failed. Later in life the 10% who didn't eat the marshmallow had better lives, longer marriages, and financial stability. While the other 90% had the opposite outcomes. Bitcoin is doing the same I see now. Those of us who can resist short term happiness from the money we put in now can let it grow for long term gains.

The study found the biggest difference in the kids was the 90% that ate the marshmallow looked at it constantly, causing them to eat it. The 10% who didn't eat it, distracted themselves by looking away from it. So psychologically the answer to their results was to forget about/ignore their short term happiness to be able to make it to the long term gain. So if you want the best odds at doing the same with btc, ignore it when it's down from your buying point, & ignore it when it's up to in general. Psychologically if you look at it while it's up or down, you'll be tempted to withdraw.

Don't take the short term happiness in sacrifice for your long term gains/financial freedom.

Original post:

Bitcoin - The Currency of the Internet r/Bitcoin - reddit

Bitcoin Wiki

Posted on by

Bitcoin

Bitcoin is a decentralized digital currency that enables instant payments to anyone, anywhere in the world. Bitcoin uses peer-to-peer technology to operate with no central authority: transaction management and money issuance are carried out collectively by the network.

The original Bitcoin software by Satoshi Nakamoto was released under the MIT license.Most client software, derived or "from scratch", also use open source licensing.

Bitcoin is the first successful implementation of a distributed crypto-currency, described in part in 1998 by Wei Dai on the cypherpunks mailing list. Building upon the notion that money is any object, or any sort of record, accepted as payment for goods and services and repayment of debts in a given country or socio-economic context, Bitcoin is designed around the idea of using cryptography to control the creation and transfer of money, rather than relying on central authorities.

Bitcoins have all the desirable properties of a money-like good. They are portable, durable, divisible, recognizable, fungible, scarce and difficult to counterfeit.

Bitcoin can also be a store of value, some have said it is a "swiss bank account in your pocket".

A. Bitcoin is a peer-to-peer currency. Peer-to-peer means that no central authority issues new money or tracks transactions. These tasks are managed collectively by the network.

Q. How does Bitcoin work?

A. Bitcoin uses public-key cryptography, peer-to-peer networking, and proof-of-work to process and verify payments. Bitcoins are sent (or signed over) from one address to another with each user potentially having many, many addresses. Each payment transaction is broadcast to the network and included in the blockchain so that the included bitcoins cannot be spent twice. After an hour or two, each transaction is locked in time by the massive amount of processing power that continues to extend the blockchain. Using these techniques, Bitcoin provides a fast and extremely reliable payment network that anyone can use.

Read the original:

Bitcoin Wiki

Bitcoin – Investopedia

Posted on by

What is Bitcoin

Bitcoin is a digital currency created in January 2009. It follows the ideas set out in a white paper by the mysterious Satoshi Nakamoto, whose true identity has yet to be verified. Bitcoin offers the promise of lower transaction fees than traditional online payment mechanisms and is operated by a decentralized authority, unlike government-issued currencies.

There are no physical bitcoins, only balances kept on a public ledger in the cloud, that along with all Bitcoin transactions is verified by a massive amount of computing power. Bitcoins are not issued or backed by any banks or governments, nor are individual bitcoins valuable as a commodity. Despite its not being legal tender, Bitcoin charts high on popularity, and has triggered the launch of other virtual currencies collectively referred to as Altcoins.

Bitcoin is a type ofcryptocurrency: Balances are kept using public and private "keys," which are long strings of numbers and letters linked through the mathematical encryption algorithm that was used to create them. The public key (comparable to a bank account number) serves as the address which is published to the world and to which others may send bitcoins. The private key (comparable to an ATM PIN) is meant to be a guarded secret, and only used to authorize Bitcoin transmissions.

Style notes: According to the official Bitcoin Foundation, the word "Bitcoin" is capitalized in the context of referring to the entity or concept, whereas "bitcoin" is written in the lower case when referring to a quantity of the currency (e.g. "I traded 20 bitcoin") or the units themselves. The plural form can be either "bitcoin" or "bitcoins."

Bitcoin is one of the first digital currencies to use peer-to-peer technology to facilitate instant payments. The independent individuals and companies who own the governing computing power and participate in the Bitcoin network, also known as "miners," are motivated by rewards (the release of new bitcoin) and transaction fees paid in bitcoin. These miners can be thought of as the decentralized authority enforcing the credibility of the Bitcoin network. New bitcoin is being released to the miners at a fixed, but periodically declining rate, such that the total supply of bitcoins approaches 21 million. One bitcoin is divisible to eight decimal places (100 millionth of one bitcoin), and this smallest unit is referred to as a Satoshi. If necessary, and if the participating miners accept the change, Bitcoin could eventually be made divisible to even more decimal places.

Bitcoin miningisthe process through which bitcoins are released to come into circulation. Basically, it involves solving a computationally difficult puzzle to discover a new block, which is added to the blockchain, and receiving a reward in the form of few bitcoins. The block reward was 50 new bitcoins in 2009; it decreases every four years. As more and more bitcoins are created, the difficulty of the mining process that is, the amount of computing power involved increases. The mining difficulty began at 1.0 with Bitcoin's debut back in 2009; at the end of the year, it was only 1.18.As of February 2019, the mining difficulty is over 6.06 billion. Once, an ordinary desktop computer sufficed for the mining process; now, to combat the difficulty level, miners must use faster hardware like Application-Specific Integrated Circuits (ASIC), more advanced processing units like Graphic Processing Units (GPUs), etc.

In 2017 alone, the price of Bitcoin rose from a little under $1,000 at the beginning of the year to close to $19,000, ending the year more than 1,400% higher.

Bitcoin's price is also quite dependent on the size of its mining network, since the larger the network is, the more difficult and thus more costly it is to produce new bitcoins. As a result, the price of bitcoin has to increase as its cost of production also rises. The Bitcoin mining network's aggregate power has more than tripled over the past twelve months.

Aug. 18, 2008: The domain name bitcoin.org isregistered. Today, at least, this domain is "WhoisGuardProtected," meaning the identity of the person who registered it is not public information.

Oct. 31, 2008: Someone using the name Satoshi Nakamotomakes anannouncement on The Cryptography Mailing list at metzdowd.com: "I've been working on a new electronic cash system that's fully peer-to-peer, with no trusted third party. The paper is available athttp://www.bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf."This link leads to the now-famous white paper published on bitcoin.org entitled "Bitcoin: A Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System." This paper would become the Magna Carta for how Bitcoin operates today.

Jan. 3, 2009: The first Bitcoin block is mined, Block 0. This is also known as the "genesis block" and contains the text: "The Times 03/Jan/2009 Chancellor on brink of second bailout for banks," perhaps as proof that the block was mined on or after that date, and perhaps also as relevant political commentary.

Jan. 8, 2009: The first version of theBitcoinsoftware isannouncedon The Cryptography Mailing list.

Jan. 9, 2009:Block 1is mined, andBitcoin mining commences in earnest.

No one knows. Not conclusively, at any rate. SatoshiNakamotois the name associated with the person or group of people who released the originalBitcoinwhitepaperin 2008 and worked on the originalBitcoinsoftware that was released in 2009. TheBitcoinprotocol requires users to enter a birthday upon signup, and we knowthat an individual named SatoshiNakamotoregistered and put down April 5 as a birth date. And that's about it.

Though it is tempting to believe the media's spin that Satoshi Nakamoto is a lone, quixotic genius who created Bitcoin out of thin air, such innovations do not happen in a vacuum. All major scientific discoveries, no matter how original-seeming, were built on previously existing research. There are precursors toBitcoin:Adam BacksHashcash, invented in 1997, and subsequently WeiDaisb-money, NickSzabosbit gold and Hal Finneys Reusable Proof of Work. The Bitcoin white paper itself cites Hashcashand b-money, as well as various other works spanning several research fields.

There are two primary motivations for keeping Bitcoin's inventor keeping his or her or their identity secret.One is privacy.AsBitcoinhas gained in popularity becoming something of a worldwide phenomenon SatoshiNakamoto would likely garner a lot of attention from the media and from governments.

The other reason is safety.Looking at 2009 alone, 32,489 blockswere mined; at the then-reward rate of 50BTC per block, the total payout in 2009 was 1,624,500BTC, which at todays prices is over $900 million. One may conclude that only Satoshi and perhaps a few other people were mining through 2009, and that they possess a majority of that $900 million worth ofBTC. Someone in possession of that muchBTCcould become a target of criminals, especially sincebitcoinsare less like stocks and more like cash, where the private keys needed to authorize spending could be printed out and literally kept under a mattress. While it's likely the inventor ofBitcoinwould take precautions to make any extortion-induced transfers traceable, remaining anonymous is a good way for Satoshi to limit exposure.

Numerous people have been suggested as possible SatoshiNakamotosby major media outlets.On Oct. 10, 2011, TheNew Yorkerpublished an article speculating thatNakamotomight be Irish cryptography student Michael Clear, or economic sociologistViliLehdonvirta. A day later,Fast Companysuggested thatNakamotocould be a group of three people Neal King, VladimirOksman and CharlesBry who together appear on a patent related to secure communications that was filed two months before bitcoin.org was registered. AVice articlepublished in May 2013 added more suspects to the list, including GavinAndresen, theBitcoinprojects lead developer; JedMcCaleb, co-founder of now-defunctBitcoinexchange Mt. Gox; and famed Japanese mathematicianShinichiMochizuki.

In December, 2013,Techcrunchpublished an interview with researcher Skye Grey who claimed textual analysis of published writings shows a link between Satoshi and bit-gold creator NickSzabo. And perhaps most famously, in March 2014,Newsweekran a cover article claiming that Satoshi is actually an individual named SatoshiNakamoto a 64-year-old Japanese-American engineer living in California. The list of suspects is long, and all the individuals deny being Satoshi.

It would seem even early collaborators on the project dont have verifiable proof of Satoshis identity. To reveal conclusively who SatoshiNakamoto is, a definitive link would need to be made between his/her activity withBitcoinand his/her identity.That could come in the form of linking the party behind the domain registration of bitcoin.org, email and forum accounts used by SatoshiNakamoto, or ownership of some portion of the earliest minedbitcoins.Even though thebitcoinsSatoshi likely possesses are traceable on theblockchain, it seems he/she has yet to cash them out in a way that reveals his/her identity. If Satoshi were to move his/herbitcoinsto an exchange today, this might attract attention, but it seems unlikely that a well-funded and successful exchange would betray a customer's privacy.

There are many Bitcoin supporters who believe that digital currency is the future.Those who endorse it are of the view that it facilitates a much faster, no-fee payment system for transactions across the globe. Although it is not itself any backed by any government or central bank,bitcoin can be exchanged for traditional currencies; in fact, its exchange rate against the dollar attracts potential investors and traders interested in currency plays. Indeed, one of the primary reasons for the growth of digital currencies like Bitcoin is that they can act as an alternative to national fiat money and traditional commodities like gold.

In March 2014, the IRS stated that all virtual currencies, including bitcoins, would be taxed as property rather than currency. Gains or losses from bitcoins held as capital will be realized as capital gains or losses, while bitcoins held as inventory will incur ordinary gains or losses.

Like any other asset, the principle of buy low and sell high applies to bitcoins.The most popular way of amassing the currency is through buying on a Bitcoin exchange, but there are many other ways to earn and own bitcoins. Here are a few options which Bitcoin enthusiasts can explore.

Bitcoins can be accepted as a means of payment for products sold or services provided. If you have a brick and mortar store, just display a sign saying Bitcoin Accepted Here and many of your customers may well take you up on it; the transactions can be handled with the requisite hardware terminal or wallet address through QR codes and touch screen apps. An online business can easily accept bitcoins by just adding this payment option to the others it offers, like credit cards, PayPal, etc. Online payments will require a Bitcoin merchant tool (an external processor like Coinbase or BitPay).

Those who are self-employed can get paid for a job in bitcoins. There are several websites/job boards which are dedicated to the digital currency:

Another interesting way (literally) to earn bitcoins is by lending them out, and being repaid in the currency. Lending can take three forms direct lending to someone you know; through a website which facilitates peer-to-peer transactions, pairing borrowers and lenders; or depositing bitcoins in a virtual bank that offers a certain interest rate for Bitcoin accounts. Some such sites are Bitbond, BitLendingClub and BTCjam. Obviously, you should do due diligence on any third-party site.

Its possible to play at casinos that cater to Bitcoin aficionados, with options like online lotteries, jackpots, spread betting and other games. Of course, the pros and cons and risks that apply to any sort of gambling and betting endeavors are in force here too.

The concept of a virtual currency is still novel and, compared to traditional investments, Bitcoin doesn't have much of a longterm track record or history of credibility to back it. With their increasing use, bitcoins are becoming less experimental every day, of course; still, after eight years, they (like all digital currencies) remain in a development phase, still evolving. "It is pretty much the highest-risk, highest-return investment that you can possibly make, says Barry Silbert, CEO of Digital Currency Group, which builds and invests in Bitcoin and blockchain companies.

Not for the risk-adverse, in other words. If you are considering investing in bitcoin, understand these unique investment risks:

Regulatory Risk: Bitcoins are a rival to government currency and may be used for black market transactions, money laundering, illegal activities or tax evasion. As a result, governments may seek to regulate, restrict or ban the use and sale of bitcoins, and some already have. Others are coming up with various rules. For example, in 2015, the New York State Department of Financial Services finalized regulations that would require companies dealing with the buy, sell, transfer or storage of bitcoins to record the identity of customers, have a compliance officer and maintain capital reserves. The transactions worth $10,000 or more will have to be recorded and reported.

Although more agencies will follow suit, issuing rules and guidelines, the lack of uniform regulations about bitcoins (and other virtual currency) raises questions over their longevity, liquidity and universality.

Security Risk: Bitcoin exchanges are entirely digital and, as with any virtual system, are at risk from hackers, malware and operational glitches. If a thief gains access to a Bitcoin owner's computer hard drive and steals his private encryption key, he could transfer the stolen Bitcoins to another account. (Users can prevent this only if bitcoins are stored on a computer which is not connected to the internet, or else by choosing to use a paper wallet printing out the Bitcoin private keys and addresses, and not keeping them on a computer at all.) Hackers can also target Bitcoin exchanges, gaining access to thousands of accounts and digital wallets where bitcoins are stored. One especially notorious hacking incident took place in 2014, when Mt. Gox, a Bitcoin exchange in Japan, was forced to close down after millions of dollars worth of bitcoins were stolen.

This is particularly problematic once you remember that all Bitcoin transactions are permanent and irreversible. It's like dealing with cash: Any transaction carried out with bitcoins can only be reversed if the person who has received them refunds them. There is no third party or a payment processor, as in the case of a debit or credit card hence, no source of protection or appeal if there is a problem.

Fraud Risk: While Bitcoin uses private key encryption to verify owners and register transactions, fraudsters and scammers may attempt to sell false bitcoins. For instance, in July 2013, the SEC brought legal action against an operator of a Bitcoin-related Ponzi scheme.

Market Risk: Like with any investment, Bitcoin values can fluctuate. Indeed, the value of the currency has seen wild swings in price over its short existence. Subject to high volume buying and selling on exchanges, it has a high sensitivity to news." According to the CFPB, the price of bitcoins fell by 61% in a single day in 2013, while the one-day price drop in 2014 has been as big as 80%.

If fewer people begin to accept Bitcoin as a currency, these digital units may lose value and could become worthless. There is already plenty of competition, and though Bitcoin has a huge lead over the other 100-odd digital currencies that have sprung up, thanks to its brand recognition andventure capital money, a technological break-through in the form of a better virtual coin is always a threat.

Tax Risk:As bitcoin is ineligible to be included in any tax-advantaged retirement accounts, there are no good, legal options to shield investments from taxation.

Read the original post:

Bitcoin - Investopedia