Bill Gates funds creation of graphene condoms

http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/171417-bill-gates-funds-creation-of-thin-light-impenetrable-graphene-condoms

by robabbott • 13 years ago

153 127 13 years ago

extremetech.com

mumbi• 13 years ago

that'll make some money.

robabbott6• 13 years ago

Every propellerhead on the planet will buy some just because.

enneff• 13 years ago

Weird comment. I, like most people, will likely buy hundreds with which to fuck people.

VladRussian2• 13 years ago

just by association with inpenetrable, armor-piercing bullets, etc...

http://media.uow.edu.au/news/UOW118285.html

"UOW researchers have used graphene to develop a new composite material which can produce the toughest fibres to date- even tougher than spider silk and Kevlar!"

robabbott6• 13 years ago

there's an advertisement in there somewhere...

wozniacki• 13 years ago

I have always wanted to know.

What does Bill Gates want for the world?

He's in India helping Polio efforts [1] and helping distribute mosquito nets in Africa. [2]

What does his philanthropic soul want, in the end and in the larger scheme of things?

Has he ever expressed this or laid out?

There wasn't much in his AMA on Reddit a while ago. [3]

[1] http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB1000142405270230330950...

[2] http://www.kplu.org/post/bill-gates-vs-mosquitoes-whos-winni...

[3] http://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/18bhme/im_bill_gates_c...

melling• 13 years ago

http://www.gatesfoundation.org/What-We-Do

cabbeer• 13 years ago

The Bill Gates Foundation is positioning itself in line with organizations such as the World Health Organization. Or at least that's how I see it.

cdcox• 13 years ago

There was an interesting profile in Forbes about how he saw improving access to birth control, eliminating childhood and early adult mortality, and improving education both here and abroad as ways of leading to decreased populations and increased wealth and happiness.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/matthewherper/2011/11/02/the-sec...

jff• 13 years ago

Seems like he wants to eradicate diseases, which is a pretty great plan. Polio, malaria, and now presumably AIDS and other STDs.

coffeemug2• 13 years ago

He made his mission pretty clear. He believes every human life has equal value. He wants to make basic services and liberties the developed world takes for granted available to every human being on planet Earth. He's applying his wealth and expertise to high impact projects that can make that a reality.

anigbrowl• 13 years ago

Try stuff from him & Warren Buffet on Charlie Rose. All interviews are available on the website.

pervycreeper• 13 years ago

I remember he made a comment (can't remember where) that he chooses projects which are likely to have the greatest impact per dollar, or something to that effect. You'll have to find the source yourself, though.

beachstartup• 13 years ago

i'm sure gates, with his ambition, wants to be all of the below, and more:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rockefeller_Foundation http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carnegie_Corporation_of_New_Yor... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_D._and_Catherine_T._MacArt... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_and_Flora_Hewlett_Found... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_and_Lucile_Packard_Founda...

c3o• 13 years ago

"Here’s My Plan to Improve Our World — And How You Can Help" from 10 days ago: http://www.wired.com/business/2013/11/bill-gates-wired-essay...

"We take a double-pronged approach: (1) Narrow the gap so that advances for the rich world reach the poor world faster, and (2) turn more of the world’s IQ toward devising solutions to problems that only people in the poor world face."

iterationx• 13 years ago

Why do rich white men develop condoms for Africa? So that there will be fewer black people. He's just like his father, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EZ6mjx4J7dM

kazagistar2• 13 years ago

He gives where he think it can do the most good the most efficiently. Specifically, his major goals seem to be global disease reduction and elimination.

baby• 13 years ago

I'm very glad to live in this era. I can imagine a few years from now young people will be talking about how back then they used very thick condoms that suppressed all pleasure and people still fucked using them.

jw_• 13 years ago

Hopefully the packaging is slightly different than what is pictured. :)

foobarian• 13 years ago

Or not. The depicted condom would provide quite effective contraception for more reasons than just the material strength.

kazagistar2• 13 years ago

The whole point of the article is that encouraging condom use is better then discouraging it.

miga5• 13 years ago

Depending who unpacks it. I suppose that richest man in the world can be turn-on for many women...

ISL• 13 years ago

A material as strong as graphene may have curious abrasive properties.

cjfont• 13 years ago

I doubt the final product will be pure graphene, I'm sure it'll be thinly coated with something else (Teflon?)

jimmaswell• 13 years ago

Isn't it not recommended to put Teflon inside of yourself or am I misremembering something?

robabbott6• 13 years ago

I had read in another source that it would be a mixture of graphene and latex. Surely it will have some kind of lubricant.

colanderman• 13 years ago

Doesn't graphite (a close relative of graphene) have lubricative properties?

vacri• 13 years ago

A locksmith tried to fix our sticking front door lock with a bit of graphite spray, which I hadn't seen before.

wmeredith• 13 years ago

Yep. We had graphite gel and spray for our pinewood derby axles in Boy Scouts.

miga5• 13 years ago

Most condoms today are enhanced with advanced lubricants.

avn2109• 13 years ago

Tribologist here, about to publish a study of reciprocating friction and wear in graphene-loaded plastic composites. We see two orders of magnitude wear reductions at 30,000 cycles for 10% graphene by mass (dry reciprocating conditions) and suppression of the abrasive wear mode. Also friction coefficient goes down by 10%, but other studies have reported much bigger friction coefficient improvements.

sigzero• 13 years ago

But...don't you want penetration? wah wah wah

bruceb• 13 years ago

Maybe fund a small chip in your boxers that emits the loud cry of a baby when you take them off.

XorNot2• 13 years ago

This is a good idea which won't solve the underlying problems with poor condom usage in places which really need it (Africa).

That's being powered by deliberate misinformation campaigns and cultural leftovers, not the specific properties of condoms (though improving them is always a good idea).

coffeemug2• 13 years ago

When it comes to human life, things aren't binary. A 1% increase in condom usage can have massive impact on the health and safety of millions of people. It's another straw we can add to the camel's back.

nl3• 13 years ago

In some cases "underlying" problems (eg misinformation campaigns and cultural leftovers) are really just used as excuses by men who don't like how condoms feel. Fix that, and many will be happy to ignore those thing.

As an aside: don't forget the largest major anti-condom propagandists is not African at all (ie, the Catholic church).

XorNot2• 13 years ago

Actually I was thinking strongly about who they were, I just didn't want to name names in this forum.

But the sector they operate most flagrantly and disastrously is still Africa.

wisty• 13 years ago

Or women, who don't like how condoms feel. AFAIK, women are a lot more discriminating about whether or not sex feels any good.

Of course, the worst countries are probably the ones with lots of unregulated prostitution, so in those cases it's probably the men to blame.

LaGrange3• 13 years ago

Actually, you can't really fix the 'feel' problem, because the 'feeling' is mostly imaginary. The problem with condoms is part education, part laziness and part men actually wanting women to have more kids.

pauljburke• 13 years ago

As an aside: don't forget the largest major anti-condom propagandists is not African at all (ie, the Catholic church).

That would be the curch that also goes on about abstinence before marriage and monogamy afterwards? Never understood why the church gets beaten up for that (not a fan of the stance on condom use but this implies people "religously" follow one of their rules while blatantly ignoring others).

rplnt2• 13 years ago

People don't feel the need to turn to God(s) when they are doing fine. That's why the Catholic Church goes out of its way to make people miserable and afraid. They have been doing that in Europe for centuries, now Africa is the better target.

sharkweek• 13 years ago

Melinda Gates herself said condoms, in their current state, don't really solve a lot of contraceptive issues in Africa in an article she wrote for Foreign Policy. But any advancement in the technology that encourages greater adoption is a net positive.

Certainly worth a read:

http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2012/11/26/why_birth_c...

obtino• 13 years ago

It's not the material that's the problem in many places, but the cost. There are reports of people using post-exposure prophylaxis drugs over condoms because they're cheaper!

More info: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-24942903

miga5• 13 years ago

Only in places that allow use of cheap generic post-exposure drugs produced in India. Unfortunately the very same drugs in Europe are hell expensive. They should be probably subsidized by the country like Germany which is famous for its sex industry.

dnautics• 13 years ago

so, just to be clear, is this still vaporware, a prototype condom has not been made yet?

robabbott6• 13 years ago

The grant has just been made. I think it will be a couple of years before this becomes real.

minopret• 13 years ago

No, it's aerogel condoms that are vaporware. Ho ho.

ChuckMcM• 13 years ago

I must admit I didn't see that one coming. It suggests a fascinating application, which is to wear a graphene condom, on top of a rubber condom, on top of a graphene condom. Thus creating a condom 'super capacitor' [1] that you would charge up by rubbing it, which could then power a piezo electric vibrator. I'm so waiting to see who patents that!

[1] http://www.extremetech.com/computing/163071-graphene-superca...

robabbott6• 13 years ago

Or, alternatively, recharge your smartphone during sex.

miga5• 13 years ago

I like the vibration effect better. Or at least my girlfriend would :-).

SilkRoadie• 13 years ago

Not sure how much of a charge you would generate in 2 minutes.

Couldn't this be used in trousers? The friction generated between the legs could wirelessly charge whatever is in your pocket?

fat0wl• 13 years ago

i ALWAYS knew he was a pimp.

boothead• 13 years ago

I "came" here to see this as top comment:

  I must admit I didn't see that one coming

Perfect :-)

miga5• 13 years ago

Let's hope they will also be 100x stronger than current ones, so they never break.

kijin• 13 years ago

Just wait until somebody staples them to a sex-ed pamphlets and hands them out on a college campus.

darins33• 13 years ago

I swear. He better call it Steel Gates

bonemachine• 13 years ago

Gives the expression "Billware" a whole new meaning!

jstalin• 13 years ago

Micro... hard?

randartie• 13 years ago

The donation was 100 grand to 11 different teams. That's about 1 engineer per company for 1 year (if that?), is that really enough to do this? There's first the invention of this thing, then there's manufacturing process, etc.

illumen• 13 years ago

Plus PR, and global debate. The mass debate has to be worth 10x that much to the cause.

jlgreco2• 13 years ago

Fun graphene fact: As the article mentions, graphene was first isolated at the University of Manchester using sticky tape. For this discovery, Andre Geim and Konstantin Novoselov were awarded the Nobel Prize in Physics... making Andre Geim the first person to be awarded both the Nobel Prize and the Ig Nobel Prize. He was previously awarded the Ig Nobel Prize for magnetically levitating a live frog.

tokenizer2• 13 years ago

So which accomplishment do you find more rewarding? While I see graphene becoming an extremely popular 21st century material, levitating a frog is the first step to levitating anything larger.

redacted• 13 years ago

The frog was levitated using diamagnetic levitation which is pretty much useless for anything in the real-world (hence the ig Nobel, not Nobel).

The magnetic field used was stronger than the confinement field in ITER - so stronger magnets than you need for nuclear fusion.

We can already levitate much larger things, such as trains.

akiselev• 13 years ago

The possibilities of graphene are vast and many and exciting but this is kind of scary. For all intents and purposes, graphene is nanotechnology and in certain forms can act like asbestos and has a lot of other unknown behaviors in the body [1]. Unfortunately the field of nanotoxicology hasn't really organized itself and caught up to the widespread use of nanocoating and other material science in industry[2]. I hope they find ways to make it extremely inert in the human body but there's much work to be done.

[1] http://www.nature.com/nnano/journal/v3/n7/full/nnano.2008.11... (CNTs are rolled up graphene and are formed in many graphene production methods as a byproduct)

[2] Nature has a whole series on this: http://www.nature.com/nnano/focus/nanotoxicology/index.html

weland• 13 years ago

It's ok, most of us, men, would stick our penises into anything.

emil0r• 13 years ago

Speak for yourself.

phpnode• 13 years ago

really?

http://www.landforce.co.uk/layout-images/home-wood-chipper.j...

moocowduckquack4• 13 years ago

Graphene flakes and carbon nanotubes are already relatively common in the environment as they are naturally occurring. You get carbon nanotubes in ordinary soot, for instance.

adrianN• 13 years ago

Yes, and ordinary soot is not something you want to have regular contact with.

reyan• 13 years ago

Soot is the first known environmental carcinogen (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chimney_sweeps'_carcinoma).

Dn_Ab• 13 years ago

To counterbalance, it is important to know that the structure of fullerenes strongly affects their chemical properties and hence toxicity. It does not immediately follow that just because CNTs are rolled up graphene that graphene will be just as toxic.

C60 for example not only shows no indication of toxicity but also appears to have health benefits. My general understanding is while relatively little is known about graphene, what is known suggests it is much safer than CNTs [1]. As well, CNTs are most dangerous when inhaled. CNTs can do damage once inside a cell but breaching membrane is a special enough cirscumstance to make it relatively easily solvable compared to how to mass produce the fullerenes in the first place. The asbestos like quality also seems to be length dependent [2] and most risky to workers - which is a more controllable environment. While it is important to know how harmful these substances may be to us and our environment and I am a tad wary of CNTs, one must keep in mind that the setting of these experiments tend to be exceptional. The fear mongering on this seems like it will end up like GMO, vaccines and fission; yet another inappropriately maligned technology of great potential.

[1] The results show that GO [digraphene oxide] has a moderate toxicity to organisms since it can induce minor (about 20%) cell growth inhibition and slight hatching delay of zebrafish embryos at a dosage of 50 mg/L, but did not result in significant increase of apoptosis in embryo, while MWNTs exhibit acute toxicity leading to a strong inhibition of cell proliferation and serious morphological defects in developing embryos even at relatively low concentration of 25 mg/L

[2] The apparent similarity between multi-walled carbon nanotubes (MWNTs) and asbestos fibers has generated serious concerns about their safety profile. The asbestos-like pathogenicity observed for long, pristine nanotubes (NTlong, see scheme) can be completely alleviated if their effective length is decreased as a result of chemical functionalization, such as with tri(ethylene glycol) (TEG).

http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs11426-012-4620-z

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/anie.201207664/ab...

iagooar• 13 years ago

Can we consider using "impenetrable condoms" as an intended pun?

chickenboot• 13 years ago

I preferred the Guardian[1] piece on this, for it's lack of real content (who's heard of graphene?) and very entertaining comments.

[1] http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/nov/21/graphen...

henpa• 13 years ago

At the end of the article: "Now read: Do humans dream of android prostitutes?"

Is that Google's answer to Microsoft's condoms? ;-)

gexla• 13 years ago

So, back in the day we would have said "bring your rubbers." I suppose once this condom hits the market we will say something like "make sure to bring the lead for your pencil." Actually, do people ever refer to the graphite in pencils as lead anymore? We did when I was a kid.

The condom is something in bad need of a radical overhaul and it would have a huge effect. At least, if this could deal with the sensation component of the problem, then it would get more people to use them.

Still problems would be distribution (religious blocking and availability for the poor are issues here), education (family planning so people know the full financial effects of having lots of kids) and "killing the moment" when you stop to put the thing on.

At 100K per competing group, it seems like the foundation could be getting lots of "bang" for its buck here.

shirro• 13 years ago

I can imagine the tech support calls. "Have you tied taking it off and on again?"

JulianMorrison• 13 years ago

Finally, science has the answer to "man of steel, woman of kleenex"[1].

[1]http://www.rawbw.com/~svw/superman.html

TIJ• 13 years ago

Considering that most people don't wear condoms because they they think its coming in their way its a good idea to fund something that will encourage people to use condoms in developing nations such as africa and asia. Gates doing good job KUDOS. Now i only expect him to interviene into ms's anti-google missions and put a hold on that shitty business. Those are some cheap publicity stunts from ms while google is busy making cool products and amaze people[http://thenextweb.com/google/2013/11/21/google-building-chro...].

Ellipsis753• 13 years ago

Am I the only one that finds "impenetrable" a funny selling point? It makes perfect sense but still sounds funny. I'm surprised they didn't go for "unbreakable".

Gravityloss• 13 years ago

I posted the same idea 244 days ago but was downvoted.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5432569

Bill Gates funds creation of graphene condoms

Related Stories