Dhm
Regular
Us and the Brainchip staff.I've come to the belief that we the members of this BRN forum are the only surviving humans with intelligence and forethought left on this planet. Either that or I just know a lot of braindead people
BRN Discussion Ongoing
- Thread starter TechGirl
- Start date
Rise from the ashes
Regular
Fact Finder
Top 20
Just had a thought. Clearly it could identify the Varroa mite that would be easier than weeds.
I think as it’s just one object and they could provide many samples for training due to all the scientific study it would be dead easy.
My thought, bearing in mind it is a long time since I was interested in laser technology, is that you can tune lasers to act only on a particular colour.
One experiment I recall was exploding a red balloon inside a white balloon leaving the white balloon undamaged.
All we therefore need is to identify a necessary internal organ of the mite which has a colour not in common with the bee and ‘Death Ray Heaven Bee Hives’ is born.
My opinion only DYOR
FF
AKIDA BALLISTA
TasTroy77
Founding Member
@Fact Finder A wise Chef once told me that he never served Schnitzel at his establishment as patrons often thought that the crumbs were there to conceal something less than desirable that didn't conform with the eateries true intentions of serving fresh food and good old fashioned honesty
Rise from the ashes
Regular
Food4 thought
Regular
RiseYes such a great group of people and animalsA massive overload of great contributions to sift through don't think I've ever noticed a single post being moderated. Really pissed me off that on topic juicy dots directly related to brn got deleted from that festering sewage pipe of a chat site we use to frequent. Checking in on occasions it resembles a mental asylum with free wifi access.
And it is a great pleasure to be amongst like minded people who have the same goal to further the knowledge on our investment in BRN.
You summed it up perfectly, it’s amazing how much hatred and venom there is over there.
Rise from the ashes
Regular
I'm more interested in the detection of the vege-mite amongst the ever increasing pro-mite population.
I resisted for a bit but couldn't stop myself
Rise from the ashes
Regular
It's pretty sad that some people have not had a decent upbringing that's all I can put it down to. We are all brothers and sisters in this world that should help one another.
Great idea - it'ud be a variation on the doorbell, with a laser death ray!
wilzy123
Founding Member
Congratulations. You have succeeded in letting everyone know that...
- you're buttering the forum up ahead of the next 4C, by suggesting that a 4C with little to no revenue would be "bad" - when anyone with a few neurons knows it wont be
- you qualify to write for motley fool... I would suggest reaching out to the clown that looks fresh off the set of jersey shore. I hear that well researched points of view like yours could fetch upwards of $40+ per article.
- it will be very difficult for anyone to take anything that you say seriously from hereon
- you would like to shorten your stay here on this forum
Dhm
Regular
Ok. I want us to look at each of the symbols that were published with the advertising of the podcast. Surely those symbols weren't just plucked out of the ether. EACH ONE OF THOSE GRAPHICS WOULD HAVE BEEN CAREFULLY CONSIDERED BEFORE BEING PUBLISHED. With all that has subsequently played out with multiple partners over the last few months, dare we dream that MegaChips are delivering with major clients like Nintendo et al.
Time for my blood pressure pills.
Last edited:
Well, from the look of claim 11, they have not heard of a NN SoC. They are using software running on a CPU for the targeting system. The targeting system identifies the weeds.Hi @Diogenese are you game enough to "Shoot" these guys a message saying "Well I get that but does it really matter?"
WO2020172756A1 SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR FIELD TREATMENT AND MONITORING
PREC AI INC
[0111] As presented in FIG. 8, a system logical architecture 800 for the treatment system 200 may comprise a number of user interfaces, application program interfaces (APIs), databases, artificial intelligence modules, and/or control modules. The system logical architecture 800 may have one or more field condition user interfaces 802, 804 on the mission command center 932 systems for entering and/or importing field condition data into a pest treatment central database 810. A field treatment planning user interface 806, such as on a computer of the farmer, may permit a user to determine a field treatment plan for a particular field from the pest treatment central database 810. Once a field plan has been devised, a job scheduler 850 may be executed that assigns one or more jobs through a job assignment API 812.
[0112] A job assignment user interface 814 may access the job assignment API 812 in order to assign jobs to one or more missions and a mission assignment user interface 818 providing input to a mission layout per job module 816. The mission layout per job module 816 may receive field data from a field data API 820. A mission planning artificial intelligence module 822 may generate the one or more missions per job based on the data provided by the mission layout per job module 816. The mission data may be stored in the on-site mission rules database 824, which may be accessed by a mission status user interface 826 in order to display mission status data. The mission data may also be transferred to the pest treatment database 810 using a job results API 832.
1. A field treatment system comprising: at least one autonomous drone receiving at least one pesticide; a base station dispensing the at least one pesticide; and at least one holding tank supplying the base station with the at least one pesticide.
2. The field treatment system according to claim 1, wherein the at least one autonomous drone comprises a data collection system, a navigation system, a propulsion system, a targeting system, a treatment system, and a power source.
3. The field treatment system according to claim 2, wherein the data collection system providing data and comprises at least one of: at least one positioning sensor, at least one agricultural sensor, and at least one camera.
4. The field treatment system according to claim 3, wherein the at least one positioning sensor is selected from at least one of: an altimeter, an ultrasonic sensor, a radar, a lidar, an accelerometer, a global positioning sensor, and the at least one camera.
7. The field treatment system according to claim 3, wherein the targeting system receives the data from the data collection system, analyzes the data to identifies at least one target, provides at least one target instruction to the navigation system, determines when the at least one autonomous drone is within a range of the treatment system and provides at least one treatment instruction to the treatment system.
11. The field treatment system according to claim 2, wherein at least one of: the data collection system, the navigation system, and the targeting system are stored within a tangible computer-readable medium and is executed by a processor within the at least one autonomous drone.
Rise from the ashes
Regular
Fact Finder
Top 20
So true.@Fact Finder A wise Chef once told me that he never served Schnitzel at his establishment as patrons often thought that the crumbs were there to conceal something less than desirable that didn't conform with the eateries true intentions of serving fresh food and good old fashioned honesty
When I went into a pub in a country town while on circuit as a prosecutor and the crumbed cutlets were on special and I’d see them come out for a patron before me and they looked just so good.
Big juicy and golden I often was sucked in threw reason and history to the wind and said “I’ll have the cutlets with chips and rubber veg thanks.”
Then my cutlets arrived and they are a picture of deliciousness nestling next to lumpy yet sloppy mash and crinkle cut rubber carrots and peas fresh from the farm via a caterers tin.
Then the anticlimax as I cut and cut and cut searching for a tiny tasty morsel of lamb to have with the fat of the lamb and golden crumbs.
Food deception at its finest.
In the end I would take my arteries in my hands and calling for more salt I’d feast on the fat of the lamb, literally, before retiring to my room to face the indigestion that always followed me like The Four Horseman of the Apocalypse to ensure I would not forget the odious decision I had made yet again.
My opinion only DYOR
(But don’t have the cutlets on special as you would definitely be a fool perhaps even one that was mottled around the edges.)
FF
AKIDA BALLISTA
Last edited:
Rise from the ashes
Regular
Thanks for that I shared that info to several people over NyeMe also Risebut i just recently found out George Jetson was only born on the 31st July 2022,so hes only 5mths old today,so i guess we must still be a few years away from his jet style bubble car
https://www.wfla.com/news/is-it-geo...ans-say-fictional-character-was-born-in-2022/
happy new year buddy
Fact Finder
Top 20
At one point Nintendo was said to account for 70 plus percent of MegaChip Japans income.
My opinion only DYOR
FF
AKIDA BALLISTA
Rise from the ashes
Regular
That was from around 2009 but yes I recall a later article or financial report in more recent years report around 70 odd percent.
Tothemoon24
Top 20
TechGirl
Founding Member
A little bit of Australian history on our Department of Defence Barra Sonobuoy invention, hopefully we will be in future models as it uses hydrophones, acoustics, radio signals etc, I really enjoyed the article and it makes me proud to be Australian 
www.dst.defence.gov.au
NEWS
The Barra sonobuoy is one of Australia's most successful Defence joint development projects, and highlights Australia's history as a global leader in the development and manufacture of advanced technologies.
Sonobuoys were first developed and used at the end of World War II in response to the devastating destruction of allied merchant ships in the Atlantic caused by German U-boats.
The ability to locate submarines so they could be sunk, or prevented from attacking, became critical for the Allied war effort, and so the idea of the 'buoy sonar' was born. The idea was simple: a sonobuoy was dropped into the water by passing aircraft and, upon impact, an underwater acoustic sensor (hydrophone) and floating radio transmitter would deploy. Any underwater acoustic signals detected by the hydrophone, caused by a nearby U-boat for example, would then be relayed to the aircraft via the radio transmitter.
However, early sonobuoys that consisted of a single, omnidirectional hydrophone were limited in range and effectiveness. In 1964, Dr Alan Butement, the first Chief Scientist within the Department of Supply, proposed a much more sophisticated concept for a 'directional' sonobuoy, along with Henry d'Assumpcao, later Chief Defence Scientist. Both took out the original patent.
1979 Press Release - Extract from Killen, J (Minister of Defence) 1979, Export marketing contract for Australian anti-submarine weapon, press release, June 8.
Although Butement and d'Assumpcao conceived of the original idea, its realisation depended on a huge amount work by a vast number of engineers. The Weapons Systems Research Laboratory of the Weapons Research Establishment (which became part of what is now Defence Science and Technology Group) began work on the Barra project, initially known as the Nangana Project, in 1964. Their task was to develop a new sonobuoy system, consisting of multiple hydrophones arranged in a horizontal plane, that could be deployed from aircraft and helicopters to detect, locate and classify quiet submarines and surface ships. This new design provided an improvement on the previous technology through more accurate detection and localisation.
Schematic of the Barra sonobuoy
Like its predecessors, the Barra sonobuoy consisted of two parts: a surface float and a sub-surface component that separated on impact with the water after being deployed from an aircraft. The sub-surface component was the Sonobuoy Launch Canister, which was essentially a 1200mm long tube with a diameter of 120mm, which was ejected out of the maritime patrol aircraft using a small explosive source called a CAD (Command Activated Device).
It deployed a small drogue (parachute) to ensure the buoy entered the water correctly. Upon entering the water, a saltwater battery was activated, setting in motion the deployment of both the horizontal acoustic receiver array down to a pre-set depth, and the radio-frequency transmitter that floated on the surface. The acoustic receiver array (originally envisaged as a cruciform array) consisted of 5 telescopic, radial arms that deployed once the buoy was submerged, with 5 hydrophones on each arm that would pick up relevant data and send it via the surface float to a sonics processor in an aircraft.
Two or more sonobuoys working together would allow for the detection of multiple noise sources and their direction of movement.
This gave the Barra a huge advantage over existing sonobuoys -- by having so many hydrophones, the incoming signal was amplified by as much as 14dB, and the processing system could accurately determine the direction of the incoming signal, down to a couple of degrees.
While the concept was straight forward, the engineering task that followed was definitely not. A detector array of several metres in diameter had to be arranged inside a small canister along with sophisticated microelectronics, which could withstand being dropped from a great height, as well as being immersed in water at sometimes close to freezing temperatures.
In the initial development, an underwater test facility was established in South Australia, and the trials undertaken there led to an improved, more efficient sonobuoy model. In 1967, sea trials were completed in St Vincent's Gulf, South Australia and later off Jervis Bay, New South Wales in close collaboration with the Royal Australian Navy and the Royal Australian Air Force.
The development of the Barra sonobuoy system included both the sonobuoy itself, which was designed and manufactured by Australian scientists, as well as a sonics processor – the AQS901 airborne computer, which picked up radio signals transmitted from the sonobuoy and processed them – designed, developed, and manufactured in the United Kingdom in accordance with an agreement made in 1975.
In 1977, Amalgamated Wireless Australasia Limited (AWA Ltd) was awarded the initial contract to produce Barra sonobuoys, and the first production Barra was presented to the United Kingdom's High Commissioner for Australia in 1980, marking the beginning of deliveries of Barra sonobuoys to United Kingdom and Australian Air Forces and Navies.
Over time, more than 56,000 sonobuoys were manufactured, earning Australia over $200 million in exports. The Barra sonobuoy is one of many stories that highlights our long history of innovation in Defence science over the last 115 years.
This article is one of series of articles celebrating 115 years of Defence science and technology. Defence science in Australia can be traced back to 1907 when Cecil Napier Hake was appointed Chemical Adviser to the Department of Defence. Today more than 2000 Defence scientists, engineers, IT specialists and technicians form the Defence Science and Technology Group responsible for providing scientific advice and high-tech solutions for Australia's Defence and national security agencies.
The Barra Sonobuoy: the Australian invention that makes it harder for subs to hide
The Barra sonobuoy is one of Australia's most successful Defence joint development projects, and highlights Australia's history as a global leader in the development and manufacture of advanced technologies.
THE BARRA SONOBUOY: THE AUSTRALIAN INVENTION THAT MAKES IT HARDER FOR SUBS TO HIDE
5 December 2022NEWS
The Barra sonobuoy is one of Australia's most successful Defence joint development projects, and highlights Australia's history as a global leader in the development and manufacture of advanced technologies.
Sonobuoys were first developed and used at the end of World War II in response to the devastating destruction of allied merchant ships in the Atlantic caused by German U-boats.
The ability to locate submarines so they could be sunk, or prevented from attacking, became critical for the Allied war effort, and so the idea of the 'buoy sonar' was born. The idea was simple: a sonobuoy was dropped into the water by passing aircraft and, upon impact, an underwater acoustic sensor (hydrophone) and floating radio transmitter would deploy. Any underwater acoustic signals detected by the hydrophone, caused by a nearby U-boat for example, would then be relayed to the aircraft via the radio transmitter.
However, early sonobuoys that consisted of a single, omnidirectional hydrophone were limited in range and effectiveness. In 1964, Dr Alan Butement, the first Chief Scientist within the Department of Supply, proposed a much more sophisticated concept for a 'directional' sonobuoy, along with Henry d'Assumpcao, later Chief Defence Scientist. Both took out the original patent.
1979 Press Release - Extract from Killen, J (Minister of Defence) 1979, Export marketing contract for Australian anti-submarine weapon, press release, June 8.
Although Butement and d'Assumpcao conceived of the original idea, its realisation depended on a huge amount work by a vast number of engineers. The Weapons Systems Research Laboratory of the Weapons Research Establishment (which became part of what is now Defence Science and Technology Group) began work on the Barra project, initially known as the Nangana Project, in 1964. Their task was to develop a new sonobuoy system, consisting of multiple hydrophones arranged in a horizontal plane, that could be deployed from aircraft and helicopters to detect, locate and classify quiet submarines and surface ships. This new design provided an improvement on the previous technology through more accurate detection and localisation.
Schematic of the Barra sonobuoy
Like its predecessors, the Barra sonobuoy consisted of two parts: a surface float and a sub-surface component that separated on impact with the water after being deployed from an aircraft. The sub-surface component was the Sonobuoy Launch Canister, which was essentially a 1200mm long tube with a diameter of 120mm, which was ejected out of the maritime patrol aircraft using a small explosive source called a CAD (Command Activated Device).
It deployed a small drogue (parachute) to ensure the buoy entered the water correctly. Upon entering the water, a saltwater battery was activated, setting in motion the deployment of both the horizontal acoustic receiver array down to a pre-set depth, and the radio-frequency transmitter that floated on the surface. The acoustic receiver array (originally envisaged as a cruciform array) consisted of 5 telescopic, radial arms that deployed once the buoy was submerged, with 5 hydrophones on each arm that would pick up relevant data and send it via the surface float to a sonics processor in an aircraft.
Two or more sonobuoys working together would allow for the detection of multiple noise sources and their direction of movement.
This gave the Barra a huge advantage over existing sonobuoys -- by having so many hydrophones, the incoming signal was amplified by as much as 14dB, and the processing system could accurately determine the direction of the incoming signal, down to a couple of degrees.
While the concept was straight forward, the engineering task that followed was definitely not. A detector array of several metres in diameter had to be arranged inside a small canister along with sophisticated microelectronics, which could withstand being dropped from a great height, as well as being immersed in water at sometimes close to freezing temperatures.
In the initial development, an underwater test facility was established in South Australia, and the trials undertaken there led to an improved, more efficient sonobuoy model. In 1967, sea trials were completed in St Vincent's Gulf, South Australia and later off Jervis Bay, New South Wales in close collaboration with the Royal Australian Navy and the Royal Australian Air Force.
The development of the Barra sonobuoy system included both the sonobuoy itself, which was designed and manufactured by Australian scientists, as well as a sonics processor – the AQS901 airborne computer, which picked up radio signals transmitted from the sonobuoy and processed them – designed, developed, and manufactured in the United Kingdom in accordance with an agreement made in 1975.
In 1977, Amalgamated Wireless Australasia Limited (AWA Ltd) was awarded the initial contract to produce Barra sonobuoys, and the first production Barra was presented to the United Kingdom's High Commissioner for Australia in 1980, marking the beginning of deliveries of Barra sonobuoys to United Kingdom and Australian Air Forces and Navies.
Over time, more than 56,000 sonobuoys were manufactured, earning Australia over $200 million in exports. The Barra sonobuoy is one of many stories that highlights our long history of innovation in Defence science over the last 115 years.
This article is one of series of articles celebrating 115 years of Defence science and technology. Defence science in Australia can be traced back to 1907 when Cecil Napier Hake was appointed Chemical Adviser to the Department of Defence. Today more than 2000 Defence scientists, engineers, IT specialists and technicians form the Defence Science and Technology Group responsible for providing scientific advice and high-tech solutions for Australia's Defence and national security agencies.
Getupthere
Regular
Meet with BrainChip Inc. @ CES 2023 - BrainChip Inc
Meet with BrainChip Inc. to discuss how the technology can benefit your company or organization.
Similar threads
