|
"Andrey" wrote in message ... I think this Fractenna guy is ... ? ... or something. He managed to argue here with everyone who asked him questions. Now, does he really represent Fractal Antenna Systems? http://www.fractalantenna.com/ All the patents mentioned on this Website have single author: Nathan Cohen. If that's him and he makes all this noise on behalf of his company (pretty unrealistic assumption anyway) ... this is not a good way to market innovations, be it fractal antennas or anything. Guess what Andrey... that company was founded by Nathan Cohen. And Fractenna has been signing his posts as Chip, N1IR. An ARRL call sign search turns up COHEN, NATHAN L, N1IR (Extra) (address withheld) So I guess you're right. He has a vested interest in arguing for fractal antennas, yes? John |
"Fractenna" wrote in message ... Sheesh, how stubborn/bull-headed are you??? If my customers had to go thru this much to get info, I would have closed down years ago. I presume your customers have the advantage in that you identify yourself to them, Andrew. I have no idea who you are. As I said, drop me a line. I've already gone the extra mile. Best wishes, Chip N1IR And when did you fully identify YOURSELF, Chip? Were we supposed to look on your Fractal Antenna Systems Web site? From that site: "Fractal Antenna Systems, Inc. was founded in 1995 by Nathan Cohen, now a recently retired Boston University telecommunications professor and radio astronomer." And from the ARRL call sign server: COHEN, NATHAN L, N1IR (Extra) |
Wow! Together we strong!
"John Smith" wrote in message ink.net... "Andrey" wrote in message ... I think this Fractenna guy is ... ? ... or something. He managed to argue here with everyone who asked him questions. Now, does he really represent Fractal Antenna Systems? http://www.fractalantenna.com/ All the patents mentioned on this Website have single author: Nathan Cohen. If that's him and he makes all this noise on behalf of his company (pretty unrealistic assumption anyway) ... this is not a good way to market innovations, be it fractal antennas or anything. Guess what Andrey... that company was founded by Nathan Cohen. And Fractenna has been signing his posts as Chip, N1IR. An ARRL call sign search turns up COHEN, NATHAN L, N1IR (Extra) (address withheld) So I guess you're right. He has a vested interest in arguing for fractal antennas, yes? John |
The dingbat wants your ID so that he can send you a laughable (but annoying)
threatening legaleze mumbo-jumbo e-mail. It is much more relaxing to taunt the lunacy from a slightly more annonymous position. The dingbat has one valid point. There are nearly infinitely more 'fractal' shapes than simple shapes. This means, as he says, that the solution space is vastly increased by using fractal-shaped antennas to provide some weird combination of parameters. What he won't acknowledge is that there are *infinitely again* more non-fractal squiggly shapes than pure fractal shapes (turtles upon turtles all the way down). Therefore, his patents are apparently worthless because, even if there were some applications that happened to 'allow' a fractal antenna solution, anyone could take the fractal antenna solution and randomize it a bit (loop until better) to make it slightly nonfractal (and better at the same time!) and off you go. It must be annoying to have spent the entire bundle on this and only now realize that it is absolutely trivial to walk around the patents. That would be if, big if, anyone cared to. I hereby place all slightly non-fractal squiggly antennas into the public domain. |
|
So I guess you're right. He has a vested interest in arguing for fractal
antennas, yes? John Hi "John", I have a vested interest in the accuracy of my comments to Andrey, which he solicited. What's YOUR interest, :"John"? No one is selling fractal antennas on this NG, John. My motivations were to take the commercial stuff off-line (hardly a hidden agenda) and to counter hi targeted statements with some relevant fact and query on his supposed sources. his was apparently to introduce commercial interference. I imagine that some person on this NG with his head in the sand doesn't know who I am at this point--but I doubt it. I am amused, however, to have you think that I am so unwilling to 'fess up to my background. See, for example: www.qrz.com Do a look-up on N1IR. That's pretty transparent. Are you expecting me to feel put-out in some way by these histrionics?:-) Anyway, don't do this purely for my enjoyment:-) 73, Chip N1IR |
On Thu, 21 Oct 2004 21:16:21 GMT, "John Smith"
wrote: "Fractal Antenna Systems, Inc. was founded in 1995 by Nathan Cohen, now a recently retired Boston University telecommunications professor and radio astronomer." Hi John, Your information is incomplete. The records at that time described it as a small extension campus largely devoted to Home Economics studies. There could be some confusion about just who you have researched however. Some years ago we had at least half a dozen "personalities" all writing from this account or claiming to be different individuals (or the same individual, it was hard to tell). One common modus operandi was in (their/his/her) attempting to build a data base by cultivating personal and business information in this group, then sending harassing correspondence. If there is any doubt about who/what/when/why the archives are choked with this Soap Opera. Simply Google search the newsgroups with terms: "suit," "our lawyers," "your lawyers," "cease," "copyright infringement," and the ever famous "protected by patents pending." Correlate these terms to recognizable authors and all should come into resolution. :-) Boy, I've met some goofballs during my days with the Voter's Drive. Makes this stuff seem like a tired retread - wait! It IS a tired retread. 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC |
It IS a tired
retread. 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC Please ID the "techno-fraud" which you expose in your fractal antenna website--that's your word. And what patents do you claim your amateur web page has manage to render useless? Hmmm:-)? And what exactly is this early 1800's prior art you allude to that renders fractal antennas as public domain? Perhaps you have a knowledge base which extends before Hertz, and even Maxwell:-)? I am sure I am not the only one who would share the fascination of details to your claims. You are not a man short of words; use a few words to flesh it out, kindly. 73, Chip N1IR |
Subject: Fractal Antennas
From: "This is a 'screenname'" Date: 10/21/2004 9:45 PM Eastern Daylight Time Message-id: [F]rom: "Le plume de ma taunt" "Fractenna" The poster's screenname says it all... I presume that you meant 'e-mail address' vice 'screen name' (assuming that you aimed at the obvious target, and missed). The screen name ("Le plume de ma taunt") is actually hilarious - I hope that the humour wasn't wasted on you. 'taunt' vice 'tante' - get it? Ah, forget it. Now, go away, or I shall taunt you a third time... Sisna...I'm glad I met 'ya. Good luck to YOU Mr. Bogus:-) 73, Chip N1IR |
"Fractenna"
Sisna...I'm glad I met 'ya. Good luck to YOU Mr. Bogus:-) And *I* have alerted AOL to YOUR antics Sir! Bwahahahaha... Ya big twit. |
And *I* have alerted AOL to YOUR antics Sir!
Bwahahahaha... Ya big twit. No problem. I've been down this path before; it doesn't work because there's nothing to be alerted to. It does help though, in documenting. 73, Chip N1IR |
"Fractenna"
I've been down this path before; it doesn't work because there's nothing to be alerted to. Yeah, I know. Cuts both ways. But unlike you - I realize when I'm shooting blanks ("Sisna" - puhfreakingleese...). Ya Big Twit. It does help though, in documenting. The N1IR files must be overflowing (smirk). Will 'The Stacks' be buried with you when you die, or just recycled (thereby driving down the price of used paper by 40% for six months)? |
"Richard Clark" wrote in message ... On Thu, 21 Oct 2004 21:16:21 GMT, "John Smith" wrote: "Fractal Antenna Systems, Inc. was founded in 1995 by Nathan Cohen, now a recently retired Boston University telecommunications professor and radio astronomer." Hi John, Your information is incomplete. Hi, Richard - It isn't my information. It came off the Fractal Antenna Systems Web site. Nevertheless, it doesn't matter any more. I've killfiled him because I believe he has nothing of value to contribute to this group and is essentially trolling. This a game to him. John |
On Fri, 22 Oct 2004 03:40:53 GMT, "John Smith"
wrote: It isn't my information. It came off the Fractal Antenna Systems Web site. Hi John, Possibly a mistake of association then. Historically, correspondence from this account has offered a multiplicity of supposed authors hence authenticity is dubious at best. 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC |
Will 'The Stacks' be buried
with you when you die, That won't be any time soon. I hiked about 300 miles this year and I look about 20 years younger than my age. I take no medication. So, good luck. 73, Chip N1IR |
Hi John,
Possibly a mistake of association then. Historically, correspondence from this account has offered a multiplicity of supposed authors hence authenticity is dubious at best. 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC Hi Richard, Please ID the "techno-fraud" which you expose in your fractal antenna website--that's your word. And what patents do you claim your amateur web page has managed to render useless? You said this too.Hmmm:-)? And what exactly is this early 1800's prior art you allude to that renders fractal antennas as public domain? Perhaps you have a knowledge base which extends before Hertz, and even Maxwell:-)? I am sure I am not the only one who would share the fascination of details to your claims. You are not a man short of words; use a few words to flesh it out, kindly. 73, Chip N1IR |
"Fractenna"
I take no medication. Ah - then there is the problem. |
"Richard Clark" wrote in message
... On Fri, 22 Oct 2004 03:40:53 GMT, "John Smith" wrote: It isn't my information. It came off the Fractal Antenna Systems Web site. Hi John, Possibly a mistake of association then. Historically, correspondence from this account has offered a multiplicity of supposed authors hence authenticity is dubious at best. 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC Your stilted language is difficult for me to understand, Richard. To what account are you referring? Do you mean the association of Cohen to Fractal Antennas to N1IR? It is a coincidence that a person who uses the screen name fractenna and signs his posts as N1IR happens to have the same name as the person who founded Fractal Antenna Systems, lives in the same area, and vehemently supports fractal antennas? John |
On Fri, 22 Oct 2004 18:24:45 GMT, "John Smith"
wrote: ? Hi John, Historically, there have been MANY authors, all making claims to be different persons OR there has been ONE author claiming to be different persons FROM ONE account that is not a professional address. ALL supposed authors claim to be working for a commercial business selling fractal antennas. However, this is strictly speculation as absolutely no evidence of this commercial pursuit is apparent in ANY correspondence. Stilted or otherwise, the confusion resides at one common point originating these messages. In just the past week I've seen several messages posted by two sides of a dialogue BOTH claiming to be the same correspondent from different addresses. Signatures at the bottom of a post are a wholly insecure means of asserting identity. Further, individuals attempting to draw you into commercial correspondence through non-commercial addresses (accounts) are the leading form of Phishing. I hope this last term is not lost on you. 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC |
"Richard Clark" wrote in message ... On Fri, 22 Oct 2004 18:24:45 GMT, "John Smith" wrote: ? Hi John, Historically, there have been MANY authors, all making claims to be different persons OR there has been ONE author claiming to be different persons FROM ONE account that is not a professional address. ALL supposed authors claim to be working for a commercial business selling fractal antennas. However, this is strictly speculation as absolutely no evidence of this commercial pursuit is apparent in ANY correspondence. Stilted or otherwise, the confusion resides at one common point originating these messages. In just the past week I've seen several messages posted by two sides of a dialogue BOTH claiming to be the same correspondent from different addresses. Signatures at the bottom of a post are a wholly insecure means of asserting identity. Further, individuals attempting to draw you into commercial correspondence through non-commercial addresses (accounts) are the leading form of Phishing. I hope this last term is not lost on you. It is not. Thanks. John 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC |
On Sat, 23 Oct 2004 04:56:36 GMT, "John Smith"
wrote: Phishing. I hope this last term is not lost on you. It is not. Thanks. Hi John, This term relates to the practice of "look alike" email, correspondence and web pages that purport to be legitimate businesses. One such example http://web.ask.com/redir?bpg=http%3a...E92455EF9C46A6 16C9A2BDF01BE7%26io%3d%26sv%3dza5cb0deb%26o%3d0%26 ask%3dphishing%2bebay%26uip%3d1813385b%26en%3dbm%2 6eo%3d-100%26pt%3d%26ac%3d7%26qs%3d0%26pg%3d1%26u%3dhttp% 3a%2f%2fmyjeeves.ask.com%2faction%2fsnip&Complete= 1 (obtained by simply googling the terms "phishing ebay" and taking the first hit that leads you to fraudwatchinternation.com). There are literally DOZENs of fraud alerts for emails originating from AOL (notorious for its simple access by simply opening an account from one of any of 100 million CDROMS in the mail). Anyway, the fraud proceeds by using lookalike names to the legitimate commercial entity. Now, this lookalike is only slightly off from the legitimate name such that you might be willing to follow the directions from correspondence purporting to be from ebay.org or ebaypurchasing.com or ebayaccounts.net or any of a number of variants such as these. Another form of "spoofing" (giving the appearance of legitimacy where the intent is to defraud) is to offer links to legitimate commercial entities (often seen on the web page in the traditional blue color) while the underlying html script points to another address. In other words you click on what appears to be ebay.com and you end up at 127.000.000.001 which is really the address of a con artist. You cut a deal thinking you have been working with ebay, and you have opened your account with Ossama. This is all called "Phishing." The allusion is like it sounds, they are fishing for your financial information to raid your bank and credit. Myself, I cannot think of going blind into any kind of correspondence that starts out like this (a recent example from today): Here is Lucy Mcgraw. I write to you because we are accepting your mortgage application. Our office confirms you can get a $220.000 loÀn for a $252.00 per month payment. Approval process will take 1 minute, so please fill out the form on our website: http://hunter-crescent.net-cash.net Thank you. Best Regards Lucy Mcgraw First Account Manager You should note that there are many red flags waving here. The odd salutation; the misspelled word loan; the absurd low rate against the principle, the promise of a quick application; and certainly a curious signature that in NO WAY resembles the non-professional email account name of that originated the correspondence. This lure screams Sucker Alert from end to end and is classic phishing. Click on the address and you can well expect to divulge something to THEIR advantage in 1 minute! Phishing. I trust this term is no longer lost on you. 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC |
On Sat, 23 Oct 2004 04:56:36 GMT, "John Smith"
wrote: Phishing. I hope this last term is not lost on you. It is not. Thanks. Hi John, Sorry, it occured to me through my reading double negatives that I appear to have taken you for being a neophyte. On reflection, I can appreciate the warnings were overkill. 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC |
Dagnab it, Richard, double negatives or not, I appreciate the tutorial.
Certain neurological events have reduced further my already modest ability and quickness in grasping, eg, phishing, sans elmering such as you provided. Otoh, it (the reduction) isn't all bad. I've recovered a portion of the longlost ability of looking at things with the eyes of a child, which eyes can overlook at least some of the egregious compartmentalization rife in adult discourse. If nothing else, I get a kick out of your rhetorical flourishes, usually, once they sink in ;o) Best regards's, David Windisch, N3HE "Impeach Kirchhoff and Ohm." "Richard Clark" wrote in message ... On Sat, 23 Oct 2004 04:56:36 GMT, "John Smith" wrote: Phishing. I hope this last term is not lost on you. It is not. Thanks. Hi John, Sorry, it occured to me through my reading double negatives that I appear to have taken you for being a neophyte. On reflection, I can appreciate the warnings were overkill. 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC |
Hi John,
Historically, there have been MANY authors, all making claims to be different persons OR there has been ONE author claiming to be different persons FROM ONE account that is not a professional address. ALL supposed authors claim to be working for a commercial business selling fractal antennas. However, this is strictly speculation as absolutely no evidence of this commercial pursuit is apparent in ANY correspondence. Stilted or otherwise, the confusion resides at one common point originating these messages. In just the past week I've seen several messages posted by two sides of a dialogue BOTH claiming to be the same correspondent from different addresses. Signatures at the bottom of a post are a wholly insecure means of asserting identity. Further, individuals attempting to draw you into commercial correspondence through non-commercial addresses (accounts) are the leading form of Phishing. I hope this last term is not lost on you. 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC Hi Richard, This READS like language, but doesn't really say anything, IMO. Please ID the "techno-fraud" which you expose in your fractal antenna website--that's your word. And what patents do you claim your amateur web page has managed to render useless? You said this too.Hmmm:-)? And what exactly is this early 1800's prior art you allude to that renders fractal antennas as public domain? Perhaps you have a knowledge base which extends before Hertz, and even Maxwell:-)? I am sure I am not the only one who would share the fascination of details to your claims. You are not a man short of words; use a few concise words to flesh it out, kindly. 73, Chip N1IR |
European company is under the same conditions (and it turns out that they
have been following these exchanges). That's nice. For sixty million, apparently, I imagine they may send you antennas for free:-) Unfortunately you can't count investor money as sales revenue... Are they profitable yet? I know a company that is:-) 73, Chip N1IR |
STUFF IT, DIP****!
"Fractenna" wrote in message ... You are not a man short of words; use a few concise words to flesh it out, kindly. 73, Chip N1IR |
"Richard Clark" wrote in message
... On Sat, 23 Oct 2004 04:56:36 GMT, "John Smith" wrote: Phishing. I hope this last term is not lost on you. It is not. Thanks. Hi John, Sorry, it occured to me through my reading double negatives that I appear to have taken you for being a neophyte. On reflection, I can appreciate the warnings were overkill. 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC No apologies necessary. I don't mind being taken for a neophyte, just please don't take me for an expert. Thanks for the interesting insight. John |
European company is under the same conditions (and it turns out that they
have been following these exchanges). That's nice. For sixty million, apparently, I imagine they may send you antennas for free:-) Unfortunately you can't count investor money as sales revenue... Are they profitable yet? Don't know, don't care now. As I don't get a commission on their sales, I've gone on to another project. I do know that they have promised samples to them by Nov. 15th for the RFID tags. Off to LA and another project now. BTW, never did get that "commercial" application info..... A |
Off to LA and another project now. BTW, never did get that "commercial"
application info..... Never got the form from you....can't proceed without info. 73, Chip N1IR |
Never got the form from you....can't proceed without info.
73, Chip N1IR Chip.....your comment was: Subject: Fractal Antennas From: (Fractenna) Date: 10/20/2004 2:53 AM Eastern Standard Time Message-id: Who sells them? "Commercial" indicates that such antennas are in production and being offered for sale Yes. Drop me an e-mail and I'll be happy to provide details. 73, Chip N1IR I emailed you, you have my email and you mentioned nothing about a form....Chip, all I asked for was "who sells fractal antennas commercially?" Is there a site which offers for sale an antenna which is based on fractal technology? Still would like to look at one, freq. not important. A web site URL would be nice. This is for my own interest, not to snipe at you. I'm an engineer (albeit microP), and enjoy keeping up with technology...read the info on your website, it is interesting, but still would like to see a third party site. Regards; A |
I emailed you, you have my email and you mentioned nothing about a
form....Chip, all I asked for was "who sells fractal antennas commercially?" Is there a site which offers for sale an antenna which is based on fractal technology? Still would like to look at one, freq. not important. A web site URL would be nice. This is for my own interest, not to snipe at you. I'm an engineer (albeit microP), and enjoy keeping up with technology...read the info on your website, it is interesting, but still would like to see a third party site. Regards; A For many years, we kept a good deal of practical info on fractal antennas on that web site. However, after Summer 2001, as a prudent but voluntary precaution, we have consistently vetted inquiries and prevented unbridled dissemination. That this also apparently confuses the competition is an added bonus. Unfortunately, hams--as hams-- no longer have access to that info. If you saw my e-mail, you would be less puzzled. 73, Chip N1IR |
wrote:
For many years, we kept a good deal of practical info on fractal antennas on that web site. However, after Summer 2001, as a prudent but voluntary precaution, we have consistently vetted inquiries and prevented unbridled dissemination. That this also apparently confuses the competition is an added bonus. Unfortunately, hams--as hams-- no longer have access to that info. If you saw my e-mail, you would be less puzzled. OK...I read the above...I also received the email....to put what you're saying into simple terms is that there are no commercial (non-proprietary) fractal antennas available on the commercial market. Thus, no "commercially available" fractal antennas. QED. A |
Thus, no "commercially available"
fractal antennas. QED. Andrew, this is amusing but rather silly. Public domain does not go with "commercial" unless you are a Linux guy:-) There are plenty of commercial fractal antennas available. Which one? Depends on the app. You know how to pursue them. I told you how to proceed. I will not use this NG to sell you anything, my friend. Have a pleasant weekend; we've exhausted our discussion on this forum. 73, Chip N1IR |
"John Smith" wrote in message
Hi, Richard - It isn't my information. It came off the Fractal Antenna Systems Web site. Sounds about right...:/ Nevertheless, it doesn't matter any more. I've killfiled him because I believe he has nothing of value to contribute to this group and is essentially trolling. This a game to him. Pass go, and collect $200. MK |
"Fractenna" wrote in message ... Why? You posted the "commercial" claim in a public forum, please reply to same. I simply would like to know....if such antennas are commercially available, then please provide a URL or sales site with the information on the antennas. As an engineer, I am always interested in new/different technology, thus the desire to look at a commercial unit application. Or are you getting Shakespearian on me? A Since I don't know who you are, it would be helpful to be professional and take it off line. Best wishes, Chip N1IR No Chip; a professional is expected to defend his claims publicly. You may now proceed to display your professionalism. Ed wb6wsn |
No Chip; a professional is expected to defend his claims publicly. You may
now proceed to display your professionalism. Ed I do it at least 5 days a week Ed. Had a big example on Friday; guess you missed it. I'm tired from the Red Sox win, but buoyed by the reverse of the Banmbino's curse! Thanks for thinking of me though. 73, Chip N1IR |
There are plenty of commercial fractal antennas available. Which one? Depends
on the app. Which gets back to the original question. WHO? Your site seems to be the only one, and all seems to be "proprietary" (by your own admission). So, "limited proprietary designs" would be a better term to use than "commercially available," which implies a broad (i.e. commercial) market. Silly to claim "commercial" when no one is offering them except in proprietary designs. 'Nuff said. A |
|
Was that you behind the plate calling a ball thrown 8" inside a
"Strike"? Heheh! I wish I was there. Man, it was wicked cold last night! Frozen pitchers galore! 73, Chip N1IR |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:49 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com