Slashdot Mirror

Remember the old days, when OMNI magazine was about science? Then it started turning into a persistent hawker of crackpottery. Even the fiction lost its edge and got lugubriously spooky.

And the Sci-Fi channel. About sci-fi, before it became All Vampires, All the Time. It's pulled back a bit, maybe.

To me, this story, along with this one. are the tip of the Slashdot woo-woo iceberg.

But hey. Anything for click-through, huh?

I don't suppose you're much of a baby person. I should say, though, that link is not for the weak of stomach.

You touch on how art draws the viewer into the fantasy of the future. One has to note that this image sells. The populatiry of art is related to its volume, IMO. Take the popularity of Parrish in the 20's, for example.

So, I look upon the fantasy of art in an era as the "wanting" a population holds to some degree. Taking it a step further, they see these things as entirely possible, but not available "just yet". This is the same game played by (say) automakers when displaying their concept cars or just about every Omni magazine. It's a little lottery ticket for the masses of "what could be".

Overall, these things are fun, but rarely are they serious enough to chase. One may end up living the life of Moller

mug

How do people do it? Until we can answer that question, you certainly can't rule out that computers can achieve the same.

Is a computer program ever going to invent mathematics without previous knowledge of it just because it finds it to be a useful utility for solving problems?

Yes. Herb Simon (a nobel prize/turing award winning professor) always gave the example of BACON, a program that discovered Kepler's 3rd Law of Planetary Motion. Not bad. He always believed computers can and will think, and I agree with him.

In any case, how would you test this theory?

Easy!

http://www.omnimag.com/archives/continuum/venus.ht ml

He foresees human occupied cities, suspended in Venusian clouds. "It's room temperature up there," he points out. "All we'll need is a suit to fend off acid clouds, oxygen tanks, and something cold to drink."

Let me grab my goggles and a slurpie, and I'll be right over!

before slashdot there was omni

I was involved with the people who first put forth the concept of nonlethals. I worked with them between 1993 and 1998. I think that this is a good development overall because it helps to enforce what Janet Morris (nonlethal doctrine proposer) and Marine Sgt. Robert Walsh [ret.] described as the force continuum.

The force continuum is the application of different techniques to deterr an attacker or to stop a mob. At the lowest end you have visual and auditory cues, such as "no trespassing". At the high end you have to face lethal force, such as an M-16 or a rocket launcher. Nonlethal doctrine establishes this force continuum so that you have a greater number of options to apply between those two extremes. The idea is that in a confrontation, you will first warn. If that fails, use a deterrent. If that fails, use a stronger deterrent, and so on.

The V-MADS system talked about in the article is one more option for deterring an attacker, and it should not be taken in its own context. Nonlethal weapons and doctrine were created in response to geopolitical changes that metamorphosed the US armed forces from a military to a global quasi-police force. Political, diplomatic, legal and humanitarian pressures make it undesirable or impractical to blast an enemy to the Stone Age or to indiscriminately attack (and kill) a horde armed with sticks, stones, and Molotovs because our forces have better lethal alternatives. The force continuum gives you a wide range of options between diplomacy and military obliteration.

For more information on nonlethals, including a whole section on gadgets (R&D and production) available as of 1997, check out The Nonlethal Weapons Catalog. For gadgets only, check out The Gentle Soldier's Shopping Cart.

Cheers!

I was involved with the people who first put forth the concept of nonlethals. I worked with them between 1993 and 1998. I think that this is a good development overall because it helps to enforce what Janet Morris (nonlethal doctrine proposer) and Marine Sgt. Robert Walsh [ret.] described as the force continuum.

The force continuum is the application of different techniques to deterr an attacker or to stop a mob. At the lowest end you have visual and auditory cues, such as "no trespassing". At the high end you have to face lethal force, such as an M-16 or a rocket launcher. Nonlethal doctrine establishes this force continuum so that you have a greater number of options to apply between those two extremes. The idea is that in a confrontation, you will first warn. If that fails, use a deterrent. If that fails, use a stronger deterrent, and so on.

The V-MADS system talked about in the article is one more option for deterring an attacker, and it should not be taken in its own context. Nonlethal weapons and doctrine were created in response to geopolitical changes that metamorphosed the US armed forces from a military to a global quasi-police force. Political, diplomatic, legal and humanitarian pressures make it undesirable or impractical to blast an enemy to the Stone Age or to indiscriminately attack (and kill) a horde armed with sticks, stones, and Molotovs because our forces have better lethal alternatives. The force continuum gives you a wide range of options between diplomacy and military obliteration.

For more information on nonlethals, including a whole section on gadgets (R&D and production) available as of 1997, check out The Nonlethal Weapons Catalog. For gadgets only, check out The Gentle Soldier's Shopping Cart.

Cheers!