Slashdot Mirror
The 'Pervasive Computing' Community
Roland Piquepaille writes "Most of us are using computers, but also PDAs and cell phones. And this trend is accelerating in our increasingly networked wireless world. We might use hundreds of computing devices by the end of this decade. Still, we are slaves to our machines. With every new device, we have to learn new commands, languages or interfaces. The Cambridge-MIT Institute (CMI), a strategic alliance between the University of Cambridge in the UK and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in the U.S., has enough of it and wants to give back control to the users. So it launched its 'Pervasive Computing' initiative with the intention to tackle this challenge. In particular, the group wants to develop new technologies to make easier for us to interact with all these computers. This overview contains more details and references about this initiative."
Yes, I prefer my girlfriend that way also.
You are being MICROattacked, from various angles, in a SOFT manner.
It's almost as easy in the Trek universe as starting up an alien ship's engines, or navigating it through an asteroid belt. One thing you gotta say about those aliens: They followed the CMI 'Pervasive Computing' initiative slavishly, and we can be so thankful they did or Spock (or Data, or O'Brien/Dax, or Seven, or T'Pol) would have looked like incompetent idiots.
from the article, they state this of computers: "It needs to be sentient, loyal, small and low maintenance."
I propose adding the following rules:
0. It may not injure humanity or, through inaction, allow humanity to come to harm.
1. It may not injure a human being, or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm except where such orders would conflict with the Zeroth Law.
2. It must obey the orders given it by human beings, except where such orders would conflict with the Zeroth or First Laws.
3. It must protect its own existence, except where such protection would conflict with the Zeroth, First or Second Laws.
except for "small" and maybe "low maintenance" their goals seem to anthropomorphize computers.
More music, fewer hits
Still, we are slaves to our machines...
No, we are slaves to the programers who program the software that runs on our machines.
You're my slave?
Cool.
What, specifically, does that entail? Can I order you to fetch me some peeled grapes?
In the future, we will be able to optimize simple things like irrigation by allowing the stakeholders in the process to act as agents in a complex system. These agents will be able to optimize their system(s) by adapting their own (rule based) behavior to the behavior of other agents in the system. Ubiquitous communication is the first step in that direction. Robotic lawnmowers are the second.
In fact, I have been lamenting the wasted bandwidth I could be squeezing out of my sprinkler control wires during the daytime, when they are not used for irrigation. I could probably get 10Mbps to my sprinkler control valves if I installed the right hardware. My lawn mower, however, is another story; it is one of the old fashioned kind that can't even tell if the grass is too long in the first place. The only measurable bandwidth it has is about 22 inches.
Well, I've wasted enough of your time. I just wish I could have squeezed 'emergent behavior' into paragraph two.
Language students: Don't try to learn English here. This ain't it.
"With every new device, we have to learn new commands, languages or interfaces."
I agree. I was really annoyed that I had to learn a new interface to drive a car. Why can't it be just like walking? Then there was the TV set. The first time I tried to use one I lit a match thinking it would work like a fireplace, but nooo, they had to make it different with a huge lighter that supposedly emits invisible light rays. These days I can use a computer and I can't figure out why they don't make them all just like my desktop machine. Like my celphone, why doesn't it just have a normal keyboard and mouse, instead of those weird "Talk" and number keys?