Researchers push Moore’s Law with a 1-nanometer transistor gate

Ready for some hardcore science about transistor elements that are a fraction of the width of a human hair? Good, because that’s what this post is all about. "The semiconductor industry has long assumed that any gate below 5 nanometers wouldn’t work, so anything below that was not even considered," University of California at Berkeley researcher Sujai Desay says. In recent years, though, that assertion has looked shaky, and now it’s been thoroughly disproved thanks to the discoveries made by scientists at UC Berkeley and the magic of carbon nanotubes. Or, as they’re more commonly known, graphene.

Ali Javey, Jeff Bokor, Chenming Hu, Moon Kim and H.S. Philip Wong crafted a transistor with a 1-nanometer gate. In theory this could shrink the weight and size of our already-thin electronics even more. For context, current silicon transistors have 20-nanometer gates. However, it’s worth noting that graphene isn’t the only material in use here. The UCB researchers also used molybdenum disulfide (MoS2) to achieve this result.

A problem with using anything but silicon for these ultra-small transistors is that with anything under 5nm in size, it gets harder to control the flow of electrons through the material, and the transistors can’t be powered off. But since electrons are "heavier" when they’re pushed through MoS2, smaller gate lengths can be used. Hence shrinking down to 1nm.

Now, it’s important to note that while this is a huge discovery, it isn’t precisely the first time for achievement the way that UCB says it is. Back in 2008, researchers from the University of Manchester used graphene to create a transistor 1nm across containing only a few carbon rings. And in 2006, Korean scientists used FinFET to make a transistor with a 3nm channel length.

So maybe relax, because it looks the reports of Moore’s Law’s demise have been slightly exaggerated or at least delayed.

Via: Reddit

Source: University of California Berkeley, Science

from Engadget http://ift.tt/2dBcStP
via IFTTT

EpiPen-Maker Mylan Settles For $465 Million In Medicaid Dispute


The federal Medicaid program had accused Mylan of underpaying required rebates for the EpiPen, which is used to reverse serious allergic reactions.

Drew Angerer/Getty Images


hide caption

toggle caption

Drew Angerer/Getty Images

The federal Medicaid program had accused Mylan of underpaying required rebates for the EpiPen, which is used to reverse serious allergic reactions.

Drew Angerer/Getty Images

Drug maker Mylan N.V. announced Friday that it had reached a $465 million settlement with the U.S. Justice Department and other government agencies to resolve questions over rebates required by the Medicaid program.

The deal settles allegations by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services that Mylan had misclassified the EpiPen as a generic drug and had not paid the appropriate rebates that are required by law.

Andrew Slavitt, the acting head of CMS, detailed the allegations in a letter to Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) this week.

Slavitt told Wyden that Mylan had misclassified EpiPen as a “non-innovator” or generic drug, when it should have been classified as a brand-name product. Slavitt said the agency had informed Mylan multiple times of the misclassification.

Drugs companies pay rebates to the Medicaid program of 23.1 percent for brand-name drugs and 13 percent for generics. Mylan paid only the 13 percent for $1 billion worth of Epipens that Medicaid bought between 2011 and 2015. That cost state and federal taxpayers $163 million, he said.

Mylan was facing potentially large penalties. Companies are required to report a drug or device’s correct classification, or else they can be fined up to $100,000 per violation under the terms of the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program.

Mylan has come under increasing scrutiny by lawmakers on Capitol Hill, federal agencies and state attorneys general after the company raised the price for the EpiPen more than 500 percent since 2008. The device is an auto-injector used to reverse serious allergic reactions.

Mylan said the settlement “did not provide for any finding of wrongdoing.”

from NPR Topics: News http://ift.tt/2d9vaCR
via IFTTT

Model Sondors EV could come to life through StartEngine crowdfunding

Filed under:
,,,,


The Sondors Electric Car Company hopes to build on e-bike success to bring this battery-powered three-wheeler to market.

Continue reading Model Sondors EV could come to life through StartEngine crowdfunding

Model Sondors EV could come to life through StartEngine crowdfunding originally appeared on Autoblog on Fri, 07 Oct 2016 10:16:00 EDT. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Permalink | 
Email this | 
Comments

from Autoblog http://ift.tt/2dS4tjz
via IFTTT

Lockheed’s Hybrid Airship Is Part Blimp, Part Hovercraft, No Hot Air

The rebirth of the airship is the perennial Next Big Thing in aviation. Of course, any talk of reviving the genre that never quite rose to meet its proponents’ lofty expectations comes with the inevitable wisecracks about the Hindenburg.

Now, Lockheed Martin thinks it can make people stop laughing with its Hybrid Airship, a new sort of aircraft that combines the upsides of the airship with the abilities of a hovercraft.

OK, maybe they’ll laugh a little—it looks like it pissed off a swarm of bees—but the Hybrid Airship is nevertheless coasting into reality after decades of development within Lockheed’s secretive Skunk Works division in Palmdale, California.

The program is one of just two large airship efforts in the world close to fruition; the other is Hybrid Air Vehicles’ Airlander 10, aka The Flying Bum. A one-third scale version of Lockheed’s ship took off nearly eight years ago, and the venerable defense contractor is now three years from rolling out a production version.

When it does, the 300-foot-long, three-chamber, helium-filled airship will act like a hovercraft while maneuvering on the ground, without the need for a proper runway or even fully smoothed surfaces. Once airborne, it will haul 20 tons of cargo—vehicles, mining equipment, military gear, disaster-relief supplies—at speeds up to 70 mph, staying aloft a week at a time.

It promises to be more efficient, in terms of both fuel use and operating cost, than any land-, sea-, or air-based cargo system, allowing operators to reach remote areas without the infrastructure large planes and ships demand.

“We have had to overcome a lot of preconceived notions,” says Lockheed program manager Bob Boyd, who defends the oft-maligned aircraft. “Airships were a big part of the war effort, mostly in aerial defense and in finding and sinking submarines. But then they languished as advertising vehicles for Goodyear and MetLife.”

Granted, but that doesn’t make them economically viable in the 21st century. “For cargo, the airship needs to be positioned between faster—i.e., via conventional aircraft—and cheaper, as it is with ships,” says Richard Aboulafia, an aviation analyst with the Teal Group.

Conventional blimps can’t carry loads large enough to make them truly useful. And because cargo airships are usually one-way haulers, the economics don’t work out. “The track record of this concept is discouraging, at best,” Aboulafia says.

Lockheed Martin, which has been pumping air into this idea since 1990, thinks its design can deliver that leap in capacity. It called the thing a Hybrid Airship because it uses both buoyancy and aerodynamics to generate lift. The airship itself is shaped like a wing, what engineering types call a “lifting body.” That supplies 20 percent of the lift, with helium doing the rest.

The mixed setup also gives the ship’s operators more control, since you can’t turn off helium’s buoyancy. “By forcing a certain amount of lift to come from aerodynamics, that makes it heavier on the ground, which is important when you want to stop,” says Boyd.

Another problem: The anchoring masts and tie-downs that keep the things on the ground are prone to ripping airships to pieces when they kite around in heavy winds. That’s where the hovercraft bit comes in. Skunk Works engineers created three doughnut-shaped fabric cushions with internal fans that can suck the ship to the surface. The Air Cushion Landing System lets the ship float over land or water during taxiing and takeoff. “The ACLS, combined with the hull, is what really gives us the capability to reach remote locations,” Boyd says.

In flight, the Hybrid Airship will use steerable, diesel-powered fans for propulsion and control, along with elevators, rudders, and ailerons at higher speeds. It’ll stay below 10,000 feet, eliminating the need for pressurization, and can fly up to 1,600 miles without refueling.

Taking Flight

The airship won’t require airplane-like speeds for takeoff and cruising, Boyd says, because while lift is proportional to speed, it’s also proportional to the surface area of the vehicle—which the airship has in surplus. Hovering inches off the ground, the Hybrid Airship can get airborne in just 20 feet, compared to the 3,000 feet gobbled up by the standard cargo plane.

To make the hull strong enough for service, Lockheed ordered up Vectran, a Kevlar-like fabric arranged in three chambers with two internal curtains down the seam lines. It’s lightweight, inexpensive, and highly resistant to puncture. If the hull is breached anyway, the helium is enclosed at such low pressure that it will stay inside the airship. “External air pressure will push it in, and even if there is a leak it will be slow,” Boyd says.

Just to be safe, and to jettison tedious and costly manual inspection, Lockheed developed a useful and definitely creepy robot. “Spider” crawls over the hull searching for and repairing the tiniest of leaks. It two halves, one outside the hull, one inside, are linked magnetically. As they move around the ship, one side shines a light onto the fabric. When sensors on the other side pick up the light, they know they’ve found a hole, and patches it with adhesive.

Boyd expects the first production version of the Hybrid Airship to be ready by 2019, in a 20-ton configuration, with models carrying up to 50 tons to follow. As for customers, cargo newcomer StraightLine Aviation has already signed on to buy 12. Lockheed expects other buyers to come from the mining, oil, and wind power industries (you try moving one of those turbines around). The airships could also serve humanitarian missions, carrying relief supplies to areas with damaged infrastructure, or none at all.

There’s even room for 19 passengers, so you can live out your Indiana Jones fantasies. Just don’t throw anyone out the window.

Given Lockheed Martin’s long track record of making big things fly, the airship may finally, really, actually be back. Just give it a few more years.

Go Back to Top. Skip To: Start of Article.

from Wired Top Stories http://ift.tt/2e8zLXx
via IFTTT

The Difference Between Two-Factor and Two-Step Authentication

You know you should use two-factor authentication everywhere you can, but there’s also “two-step” authentication, which may come off like the same thing. They’re really not. Here’s the difference, and what you should know about both.

Old security heads will know the difference here just because of the names, but since they’re often used interchangeably by companies looking to obfuscate the difference, it’s worth highlight the separation between them. This thread at StackExchange sums up the difference well for anyone unfamiliar, or who doesn’t get the nuance. This answer from tylerl teases out the nitty details:

Two-factor authentication refers specifically and exclusively to authentication mechanisms where the two authentication elements fall under different categories with respect to “something you have”, “something you are”, and “something you know”.

A multi-step authentication scheme which requires two physical keys, or two passwords, or two forms of biometric identification is not two-factor, but the two steps may be valuable nonetheless.

A good example of this is the two-step authentication required by Gmail. After providing the password you’ve memorized, you’re required to also provide the one-time password displayed on your phone. While the phone may appear to be “something you have”, from a security perspective it’s still “something you know”. This is because the key to the authentication isn’t the device itself, but rather information stored on the device which could in theory be copied by an attacker. So, by copying both your memorized password and the OTP configuration, an attacker could successfully impersonate you without actually stealing anything physical.

The point to multi-factor authentication, and the reason for the strict distinction, is that the attacker must successfully pull off two different types of theft to impersonate you: he must acquire both your knowledge and your physical device, for example. In the case of multi-step (but not multi-factor), the attacker needs only to only pull off one type of theft, just multiple times. So for example he needs to steal two pieces of information, but no physical objects.

The type of multi-step authentication provided by Google or Facebook or Twitter is still strong enough to thwart most attackers, but from a purist point of view, it technically isn’t multi-factor authentication.

So what does this all mean for you? Well, nothing really—if a service offers two-step or two-factor, you should absolutely enable it, and it’s not like a service will give you a choice between the two. There are differences between types of two-factor, and you should absolutely choose the best one for you, but the bottom line is that being aware of the differences will help you understand exactly how secure your most important accounts really are.

Two-Step vs. Two-Factor Authentication – Is there a difference? | StackExchange

Photo by Brianetta.

from Lifehacker http://ift.tt/2dPpC34
via IFTTT

Pakistan Toughens Penalties For ‘Honor’ Killings


Four victims of “honor” crimes in Pakistan: Qandeel Baloch, (top left); Muqadas Tofeeq (top right); Samia Shahid (bottom left); and Tasleem Solangi.

AP


hide caption

toggle caption

AP

Four victims of “honor” crimes in Pakistan: Qandeel Baloch, (top left); Muqadas Tofeeq (top right); Samia Shahid (bottom left); and Tasleem Solangi.

AP

Pakistani lawmakers have passed a new law closing a loophole that has allowed perpetrators of so-called “honor” killings to go free.

“Hundreds of women are murdered every year in Pakistan by male relatives who accuse them of violating family honor. A woman can be killed for just socializing with a man,” NPR’s Philip Reeves tells our Newscast unit from Islamabad. “The culprits usually escaped punishment because the law allowed the victim’s family to forgive them.”

But that has now changed, as Philip explains:

“Pakistan’s parliament has now voted to scrap that law and to introduce a mandatory 25-year prison sentence. The new legislation means a killer sentenced to death can still be spared if the family intervenes – but he must still do the jail time. There was resistance from Islamist hardliners, but the law passed unanimously.”

These killings are “an age-old tradition that has nothing to do with the official legal system,” as Philip has reported.

“Pakistan’s legislature has exercised tremendous leadership in law reform today,” Equality Now said in a statement, “and we are confident that Pakistani women and girls will have a brighter future as a result.”

Some supporters of tougher penalties called the new legislation “a step in the right direction, although they said it should have gone further to eliminate forgiveness,” The Associated Press reported.

“Remove these clauses which allow the option of forgiveness, otherwise these killings will keep happening,” opposition legislator Sherry Rehman said in a speech to parliament, the wire service said.

The joint session of parliament was broadcast live on television, Reuters reported. “Laws are supposed to guide better behaviour, not allow destructive behaviour to continue with impunity,” said Sughra Imam, the person who originally introduced the bill, according to the wire service.

The recent murder of social media star Qandeel Baloch by her brother prompted an international outcry and put pressure on legislators to pass this law. As we reported, her brother appeared in front of television cameras and said he “had no regrets about drugging and strangling his sister, who he accused of dishonoring the family,” as Philip said at the time. Philip reported that Baloch’s brother said he “was upset by her sexually provocative and very popular videos and selfies.”

The Associated Press reports that “more than 1,000 women were killed last year in so-called honor killings in Pakistan.”

During Thursday’s parliament session, Reuters added that lawmakers also passed an anti-rape law, “which makes it mandatory that a perpetrator gets 25 years in jail.”

from NPR Topics: News http://ift.tt/2cXrS25
via IFTTT