CO2 Robotic Laser Manufacturing Recapturing Strategy

More and more, CO2 lasers are being used in modern high-tech manufacturing. This is a good use of CO2 and as we try to get rid of CO2 in our atmosphere collecting it from the smokestacks perhaps of electrical energy generation, it becomes a cheap and valuable gas for running these lasers. Now then, CO2 lasers put out a decent amount of heat. We should collect that heat, heat should never be wasted. He should not be waste it from robotic factory welding machines or from lasers. Okay so let's talk for second shall we?

It might be entirely possible to collect a good deal of this energy which is deflected during that laser cutting process, or which finds its way through to the other side. What if we tried this strategy to recapture some of that energy; what if we had a "houseplant pot shaped device" on the other side of the material being cut, and what if we had several of these types of shaped objects surrounding the CO2 laser beam? Those recapturing apparatuses surrounding the laser beam would be set in a concave pattern.

As the energy was deflected, or made it through the material all of that heat and energy would make its way into openings in all of these devices. Inside of those devices we could put small spinning wheels, and then use that energy once again, rather than wasting it. We could use that energy to power up the laser itself, the robotic arm, and perhaps the assembly line mechanism. By recapturing and reusing we would indeed be one with the theory and methodology behind Six Sigma manufacturing strategies.

If each of those little devices had a curved lip on the inside, it would continually redirect the vortex flows within until all of the energy was dissipated. Until all of the heat had been discharged, and the more we use the CO2 laser, the more energy and heat we would accumulate, therefore the faster those wheels would spin on the inside around the inside of that curved opening. Therefore, allowing us to capture the highest percentage of energy used in the CO2 laser cutting and manufacturing process.

If we did the same thing for robotic welding machines at our modern automobile factories we would surely have enough heat energy spinning those small wheels to power up all the lights in the factory.

Wouldn't it be great to know that even if the power went off, the grid went down, or there was any sort of power failure that the factory could keep running because it kept reusing at least most of its energy? Remember in the manufacturing process it's all about efficiency, and that's why I came up with a strategy. Indeed I hope you will please consider all this and think on it.

Lance Winslow has launched a new provocative series of eBooks on Future Concepts. Lance Winslow is a retired Founder of a Nationwide Franchise Chain, and now runs the Online Think Tank; http://www.worldthinktank.net/

Social Engineering and Strategy

Social engineering enables those that effectively apply the same to micromanage certain aspects of an individual. This occurs on the level of that individual's psyche. The result is that the said subject becomes amiable to ideas and the performance of acts, which are suggested and implicitly imposed upon these persons. Although in their mind, it appears to them that they are pursuing goals of their own choosing and are entertaining ideas of their own conception. The basis of human behavior is thought. If the latter can be molded to serve the purpose of another without the knowledge of the person whose psyche is involved, that person will behave basing on the reconstructed consciousness. They would, in effect, be acting on under the influence of another.

This nature of social engineering means that this set of methods of manipulating individuals also serve as an efficient, effective and elegant strategy system. In the context of human competition and conflict strategy determines the outcome. The better the strategy the more it leads to the attainment of the goals of certain individuals with little or no hindrance from another. Goals of a party to a contest could be achieved even though the opponent of the said party. What is more amazing, with the use of the approaches involved in social engineering, the adversary can even be made to pursue goals that serve the good of his or her opponent and not their own.

The potent nature of social engineering lies in its insight into human nature itself. It factors into each method an understanding of how humans think, how they view the environment they are immersed in, how they interact with others and other nuances of attitude and behavior. Furthermore, since this manipulation is done on the level of an individual's consciousness, it rarely is notice by them. This makes it a subtle but powerful means of control. The authorities in strategy, particularly in conflict like Sun Tzu and Von Clausewitz, Caesar and Alexander the Great all employed social engineering in significant amounts of not in all their strategies. They effectively directed how their adversaries act and view the conflict. Rarely was it known to their adversaries that they were being implicitly influenced by the said tacticians.

In the realm of human thought, reason and action, everything is reduced to motivation, benefit, detriment and the pursuit of a particular goal. If a person could control these aspects he or she can control that person. A person who has the idea that their opponents are weak will be easily convinced to attack and create a measure of vulnerability. An adversary who pursues a goal can be persuaded to attain the same with little thought if in the achievement of the same he or she might be serving the purpose of another. The intricate reconstruction of the human consciousness is the edge of social engineering compared to other forms of manipulation and control. By altering the mindset and behavioral predisposition of certain persons these subjects can implicitly be made to act and think without them knowing of such.

View article source

Terror Verdict Tests Obama's Strategy on Trials - New York Times

Ahmed Ghailani will face between 20 years and life in prison as a result of his conviction on one charge related to the 1998 embassy bombings in Africa. But because a jury acquitted him on more than 280 other charges — including every count of murder — critics of the Obama administration’s strategy on detainees said the verdict proved that civilian courts could not be trusted to handle the prosecution of Al Qaeda terrorists.

“This is a tragic wake-up call to the Obama Administration to immediately abandon its ill-advised plan to try Guantanamo terrorists” in federal civilian courts, said Representative Peter King, Republican of New York. “We must treat them as wartime enemies and try them in military commissions at Guantanamo.”

Adding political force of such criticism, Mr. King is set to become the chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee in January, and he promised to use oversight hearings to pressure the administration over its handling of terrorism trials.

Several other soon-to-be-powerful Republican lawmakers — including Lamar Smith of Texas, in the incoming Judiciary Committee chairman — made similar statements denouncing the use of civilian courts to prosecute terrorism cases.

But the Obama administration rejected portrayals of the verdict as a disaster. In a statement, Matthew Miller, a Justice Department spokesman, said the administration was “pleased” that Mr. Ghailani would face a lengthy prison sentence because of his role in the embassy bombings.

Several officials were reluctant to speak openly about the case because Judge Kaplan has not yet handed down a sentence. But privately, several officials expressed frustration at the reasoning behind the criticism. Even if the sentence is just 20 years, it will be longer than most of the terms handed down by the military commission system to date, they said. And they noted that the reason some Guantánamo cases are hard to prosecute is that under the Bush administration, evidence was obtained by coercion, creating a problem for prosecutors regardless of the legal venue.

Mason Clutter, the counsel of the Rule of Law Program at the Constitution Project, a bipartisan nonprofit group that supports civilian trials for Guantánamo detainees, also noted that Mr. Ghailani will have far fewer arguments to make in appealing his conviction than he would have if he had been tried by a military commission.

“The system worked here,” she said. “I don’t think we judge success based on the number of convictions that were received. I think we judge success based on fair prosecutions consistent with the Constitution and the rule of law.”

Ms. Clutter also noted that most of the usual arguments that proponents of military tribunals make about the risk of civilian trials — like extreme security costs, grandstanding by the defendant, and the disclosure of classified information — did not happen in the Ghailani case.

Preet Bharara, the United States attorney for the Southern District of New York, said late Wednesday that his office would seek a life sentence for Mr. Ghailani.

The jury did not explain its verdict, which seemed contradictory: it convicted Mr. Ghailani of conspiring to blow up the buildings, but acquitted him of conspiring to murder the people inside the buildings. Some legal observers speculated that it might have been a brokered deal among the jury, after signs this week that one of the 12 members had been holding out for a different result than the other 11.

Moreover, many observers attributed any weakness to the prosecution’s case to the fact that the Judge Lewis Kaplan, who presided over the trial, refused to allow prosecutors to introduce testimony from an important witness apparently because investigators discovered the man’s existence after interrogators used abusive and coercive techniques on Mr. Ghailani.

Much of the criticism of the verdict was premised on the idea that such evidence would have been admissible in a commission trial. Mr. Smith, for example, pointed to the exclusion of that evidence as undercutting the idea that foreign terrorists “can be adequately tried in civilian courts.”

“The judge in this case, applying constitutional and legal standards to which all U.S. citizens are entitled, threw out important evidence,” he said. “The result is that the jury acquitted on all but one conspiracy count.”

View the original article here