> "When skepticism based purely on vague assumptions leads to premature conclusions, it becomes blind cynicism."

That looks more to me like perfectly valid critique based on simple assumptions arising from an understanding of physics and engineering, hardly "blind cynicism". I'd instead say that this TC article itself is an example instead of "blind faith" by taking uBeam's claims at face value.

I'm still waiting for uBeam to even attempt to address the nonlinear effects of their proposed ultrasound frequency and power in air. Ditto for actually addressing safety concerns head on rather than casual dismissal.

I won't be surprised if they can power a cell phone in a controlled environment. I'll be mildly surprised if they can power one in a real-world environment, say sitting on a coffee shop table. I'll be amazed if they can deliver more than a couple watts, to accomplish (as appears on their website)

    A world in which every electronic device - hearing aids,
    tablets, sensors, light bulbs, computers, flat screen TVs - 
    could be powered simultaneously with one simple device.