Author Topic: The uBeam FAQ (Read 649719 times)

EEVblog · « **Reply #1875 on:** April 23, 2020, 01:15:26 pm »

I guess this never happened...

drussell · « **Reply #1876 on:** April 23, 2020, 02:18:06 pm »

^^ "been stealthy AF" is a good thing to be for a clueless/fraudster who formerly tried to be in the limelight...

jrs45 · « **Reply #1877 on:** April 24, 2020, 03:15:17 pm »

Her new company is http://www.elemindtech.com/

https://www.linkedin.com/company/elemind/

Some kind of biofeedback device for enhancing sleep. They measure EEG signals, synthesize some kind of audio that's supposed to manipulate brain waves, and play it to the user.

Some stuff on their twitter: https://twitter.com/elemindinc?lang=en

Detailed overview, not really that stealthy!

I have no idea if any of it really works, but given her track record, we can certainly guess...

Cyberdragon · « **Reply #1878 on:** April 24, 2020, 10:28:07 pm »

That sounds suspiciously like https://www.eevblog.com/forum/dodgy-technology/hapbee-choose-how-you-feel/

My how snake oil scammers think alike...

sdpkom · « **Reply #1879 on:** June 29, 2020, 12:45:47 pm »

Still alive and lying ....
https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn:li:activity:6681942404926320640/

Now, they reduce your carbon footprint.

The best way uBeam can help reduce carbon footprint is by shutting down.

Daixiwen · « **Reply #1880 on:** June 30, 2020, 06:34:06 am »

Reducing carbon footprint with an energy transmission system that is 0.1% efficient at best is an interesting concept

drussell · « **Reply #1881 on:** June 30, 2020, 03:13:30 pm »

Quote from: Daixiwen on June 30, 2020, 06:34:06 am

Reducing carbon footprint with an energy transmission system that is 0.1% efficient at best is an interesting concept

Indeed. If that isn't a

I don't know what is!

Cyberdragon · « **Reply #1882 on:** June 30, 2020, 03:51:39 pm »

Quote from: drussell on June 30, 2020, 03:13:30 pm

Quote from: Daixiwen on June 30, 2020, 06:34:06 am
Reducing carbon footprint with an energy transmission system that is 0.1% efficient at best is an interesting concept

Indeed. If that isn't a I don't know what is!

No, it's a

Nominal Animal · « **Reply #1883 on:** June 30, 2020, 07:15:36 pm »

Nah, you guys misunderstand.

The device reduces the customers carbon footprint by capturing a large amount of financial resources the customer might otherwise use – and therefore really does reduce the customers carbon footprint.

In the same sense, a guilliotine would be a much more efficient carbon footprint reducer, though.

AlanS · « **Reply #1884 on:** June 30, 2020, 11:28:20 pm »

Quote from: Nominal Animal on June 30, 2020, 07:15:36 pm

Nah, you guys misunderstand.

The device reduces the customers carbon footprint by capturing a large amount of financial resources the customer might otherwise use – and therefore really does reduce the customers carbon footprint.

In the same sense, a guilliotine would be a much more efficient carbon footprint reducer, though.

And because it saves on haircuts, fewer barber shops/salons need to be open.

sdpkom · « **Reply #1885 on:** August 10, 2020, 07:29:51 am »

https://www.nytimes.com/reuters/2020/08/05/business/05reuters-health-sight-diagnostics-fundraising.html?smid=li-share&utm_campaign=OurCrowd%20Weekly%20Newsletter&utm_medium=email&_hsmi=92894991&_hsenc=p2ANqtz-9kpfcFk5NsMf-xlzqzJQivOvr1HXj9UbSX2E-K7Wp64buxctGK-HPyOshlVY7mJH-s4yL3hVJatQz2o5cgkrNQPOuEj3UixXawqcl388jfSqp3qeA&utm_content=92894991&utm_source=hs_email

OurCrowd - a VC on a quest to find the next Theranos

Marco · « **Reply #1886 on:** August 15, 2020, 12:33:28 am »

Capillary blood for blood counts doesn't seem revolutionary and they aren't the only ones in the market.

EEVblog · « **Reply #1887 on:** August 15, 2020, 12:36:04 am »

Quote from: Marco on August 15, 2020, 12:33:28 am

Capillary blood for blood counts doesn't seem revolutionary and they aren't the only ones in the market.

Doesn't sound that revolutionary to me.
Took me some time to figure that's all they were actually doing. All the flashy marketing makes it out to be something that can do a ton of stuff.

l0rd_hex · « **Reply #1888 on:** December 10, 2020, 05:13:35 pm »

Howdy all!

I need some help... I've been updating Meredith's Wikipedia page to include some mention of the failure of Ubeam and how she's been compared to Elizabeth Holmes (by her own, one time PR person). I've included sources for my claims and I believe they're fair an accurate. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meredith_Perry

Unfortunately, someone keeps removing the content as "hate speech and fraudulent claims" and "hateful misinformation", check out the page's history for context.

Can I ask anyone who is interested to take a few minutes and update her page with some of the facts uncovered in this thread and the "Lies, Damn Lies, and Startup PR" blog (sorry I forgot the gents name)? Keep in mind that what you add should be well sourced and fairly written.

It really bugs me that her or someone close to her is removing the stuff from her page that shows she's not exactly a super-genius... it makes me think others will be taken by her if they don't see the whole truth on her Wiki page.

Thanks!

MrMobodies · « **Reply #1889 on:** December 10, 2020, 06:44:33 pm »

Well that someone looks like they came out of nowhere with a random name and contributed only those removals.

Wikipedia Filter Log of Hindgodot:

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:AbuseLog&wpSearchUser=Hindgodot

Quote

05:28, 9 December 2020: Hindgodot (talk | contribs) triggered filter 61, performing the action "edit" on Meredith Perry. Actions taken: Tag; Filter description: New user removing references (details | examine | diff)

04:43, 4 December 2020: Hindgodot (talk | contribs) triggered filter 61, performing the action "edit" on Meredith Perry. Actions taken: Tag; Filter description: New user removing references (details | examine | diff)

Your statement:

Quote

Due to the failure of Ubeam to release an actual consumer product after numerous announcements and delays, some journalists have compared Meredith Perry to fraudster Elizabeth Holmes and her failed startup Theranos[13].

https://eu.usatoday.com/story/tech/news/2017/06/01/ubeams-meredith-perry-shows-her-stealth-wireless-charging-technology-really-works/102336880/

Quote

MARCO DELLA CAVA | USA TODAY
uBeam's Meredith Perry shows her stealth wireless charging technology really works
01/06/2017

Her company uBeam, flush with $26 million provided by Silicon Valley players eager to crack this thorny modern-day tech problem, had been called a fraud by a former engineer (https://liesandstartuppr.blogspot.com/). Media reports compared Perry to Elizabeth Holmes, whose high-flying blood analysis company Theranos has suffered an ignominious fall.

With the citation above to backup your statement it looks correct to me ~~but I don't see any link to it under "References" to all the other citations on that page.~~

Sorry:

Citation 13:
https://epicmagazine.com/silicon-is-just-sand/

That is not looking good how someone could just go on there under any name and remove supported statements and facts under "hateful speech" where it has nothing to do with it being hateful.

EEVblog · « **Reply #1890 on:** December 10, 2020, 10:26:25 pm »

Quote from: l0rd_hex on December 10, 2020, 05:13:35 pm

Howdy all!

I need some help... I've been updating Meredith's Wikipedia page to include some mention of the failure of Ubeam and how she's been compared to Elizabeth Holmes (by her own, one time PR person). I've included sources for my claims and I believe they're fair an accurate. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meredith_Perry

Unfortunately, someone keeps removing the content as "hate speech and fraudulent claims" and "hateful misinformation", check out the page's history for context.

Can I ask anyone who is interested to take a few minutes and update her page with some of the facts uncovered in this thread and the "Lies, Damn Lies, and Startup PR" blog (sorry I forgot the gents name)? Keep in mind that what you add should be well sourced and fairly written.

It really bugs me that her or someone close to her is removing the stuff from her page that shows she's not exactly a super-genius... it makes me think others will be taken by her if they don't see the whole truth on her Wiki page.

Sounds like someone is being alerted every time there is a change.
The good'ol "hate speech" catch-all, works wonders these days. This is one for the wikipedia preists isn't it?

madires · « **Reply #1891 on:** December 11, 2020, 10:24:09 am »

Quote from: l0rd_hex on December 10, 2020, 05:13:35 pm

It really bugs me that her or someone close to her is removing the stuff from her page that shows she's not exactly a super-genius...

Have you tried to report that abuse?

jrs45 · « **Reply #1892 on:** December 16, 2020, 05:45:54 pm »

Does anyone think this is not Perry herself hiding negative things from her wikipedia page? The user that keeps removing stuff basically wrote the whole article back in June, and has made no other contributions.

coppice · « **Reply #1893 on:** December 16, 2020, 05:55:52 pm »

Quote from: madires on December 11, 2020, 10:24:09 am

Quote from: l0rd_hex on December 10, 2020, 05:13:35 pm
It really bugs me that her or someone close to her is removing the stuff from her page that shows she's not exactly a super-genius...
Have you tried to report that abuse?

To whom? Wikipedia is a war zone that drove out most of the highly knowledgeable contributors years ago. There's no point in reporting abuse to them. They'll think it means things are going well.

EEVblog · « **Reply #1894 on:** December 16, 2020, 11:48:08 pm »

Every time I see the uBeam thread pop up again I think "have they finally gone under?"

wilfred · « **Reply #1895 on:** December 17, 2020, 12:54:21 am »

Quote from: l0rd_hex on December 10, 2020, 05:13:35 pm

Howdy all!

I need some help... I've been updating Meredith's Wikipedia page to include some mention of the failure of Ubeam and how she's been compared to Elizabeth Holmes (by her own, one time PR person). I've included sources for my claims and I believe they're fair an accurate. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meredith_Perry

Unfortunately, someone keeps removing the content as "hate speech and fraudulent claims" and "hateful misinformation", check out the page's history for context.

Can I ask anyone who is interested to take a few minutes and update her page with some of the facts uncovered in this thread and the "Lies, Damn Lies, and Startup PR" blog (sorry I forgot the gents name)? Keep in mind that what you add should be well sourced and fairly written.

It really bugs me that her or someone close to her is removing the stuff from her page that shows she's not exactly a super-genius... it makes me think others will be taken by her if they don't see the whole truth on her Wiki page.

Thanks!

Well your footer here on the EEVBlog says "I haven't paid taxes in six years, and I'm not getting busted by a damn sandwich." - Benjamin Franklin

Did Benjamin Franklin really say that? Give me a source to confirm it isn't a figment of your imagination and I'll cut you some slack that you're not just another Wikipedia vandal. Asking others on the internet to also make changes to support your views is not a good look for someone who wants to make credible claims to be making a better informed world.

At the moment I have no idea you are not someone with an axe to grind.

coppercone2 · « **Reply #1896 on:** December 17, 2020, 05:17:03 am »

its probably hired PR

could even be elizebeth holmes people that don't want the name mentioned, the trial is ongoing.

Nominal Animal · « **Reply #1897 on:** December 17, 2020, 05:25:38 am »

Wikipedia user David Eppstein (claiming to be a computer science professor at UC Irvine) has now locked the Meredith Perry article to the "non-hateful" version. Idiot.

Quote from: wilfred on December 17, 2020, 12:54:21 am

Quote from: l0rd_hex on December 10, 2020, 05:13:35 pm
I need some help... I've been updating Meredith's Wikipedia page to include some mention of the failure of Ubeam and how she's been compared to Elizabeth Holmes (by her own, one time PR person). I've included sources for my claims and I believe they're fair an accurate. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meredith_Perry
At the moment I have no idea you are not someone with an axe to grind.

Oh, you are one of those people who believe "hate facts" should be suppressed, are you? That because someone is portrayed as being for the benefit of humanity, their utter fraudulence should not be discussed and should definitely not be publicly described? Go to hell.

Facts are facts, and no matter what l0rd_hex's personal opinion, his edits were backed by references to external sources per Wikipedia rules.
Now those are suppressed from that Wikipedia page, exactly because of people like you. I hope you have the capability and sense to feel ashamed of yourself and your opinions. And if you are or know David Eppstein, tell him he is an asshat for locking that page to the arse-licking version, too.

wilfred · « **Reply #1898 on:** December 17, 2020, 08:47:24 am »

Quote from: Nominal Animal on December 17, 2020, 05:25:38 am

Oh, you are one of those people who believe "hate facts" should be suppressed, are you? That because someone is portrayed as being for the benefit of humanity, their utter fraudulence should not be discussed and should definitely not be publicly described? Go to hell.

Facts are facts, and no matter what l0rd_hex's personal opinion, his edits were backed by references to external sources per Wikipedia rules.
Now those are suppressed from that Wikipedia page, exactly because of people like you. I hope you have the capability and sense to feel ashamed of yourself and your opinions. And if you are or know David Eppstein, tell him he is an asshat for locking that page to the arse-licking version, too.

No. I'm one of those people who want to be able to verify things. People could easily claim the US election was fraudulent based on a single persons opinions. You need to be able to check claims to ensure you're properly informed. I think Wikipedia articles should have stronger references than just a single persons blogpost or tweets. There are too many easily suggestible people in the world to allow Wikipedia to be derailed with weak attribution.

It is also my opinion that you weaken your argument with ad hominem attacks. And it is weak enough regardless.

Why don't you go and refresh your awareness of rule number 2. https://www.eevblog.com/forum/chat/forum-rules-please-read/

Nominal Animal · « **Reply #1899 on:** December 17, 2020, 10:58:08 am »

Most of the crappy things in this world are not because of evil masterminds, but because of those who enable exploiters and liars, and out of politeness avoid pointing them out.

I will call out anyone I catch in a lie, who exploits others for their own gain, who refuses to acknowledge an error, and anyone who lets things slide because they feel better when nasty things are out of mind, out of sight. I have seen the damage that does, and I refuse to let it slide.

People like Meredith Perry are the ones who manage to divert resources in their millions to obviously inane projects like the uBeam, or solar roads. They are exploiters, who not only divert resources from better uses, but also reduces the general opinion of science and engineering. Because of Meredith Perry and her ilk, everyone who actually creates new projects and viable products, have to fight harder.

In Finland, this kind of lackadaisical attitude towards results has lead to only approximately one large IT project in three to actually complete. It has become acceptable for almost two thirds of publicly funded projects to fail without producing any results, without repercussions to their leaders and purchasers, exactly because people do not want to be confrontational, and think that by being "reasonable", they are behaving in a more moral manner. What they are actually doing, is leaving enough room for these exploiters and fakers to live large.

I hate that. I will call out anyone that directly or indirectly, even unknowingly, supports that. I will explain exactly why and how, and I will use offensive language.
You demanded "better sources" for Meredith Perry's wikipedia article. Fact is, she has already shown she is a fraudster, and your attitude leaves other people, especially politicians and investors, to be defrauded and exploited by her. That is why I use such harsh language with those I perceive as being enablers of exploiters: it is one of the rare things I absolutely hate. I do not do it lightly.

If this gets me banned, so be it: I value truth and responsibility way more than I value anyones emotions. If emotions get elevated above truth, I'll walk out myself.


EEVblog Main Site	EEVblog on Youtube	EEVblog on Twitter	EEVblog on Facebook	EEVblog on Odysee

Author Topic: The uBeam FAQ (Read 649719 times)

Share me