Slashdot Mirror


Why the 'Star Trek Computer' Will Be Open Source and Apache Licensed

psykocrime writes "The crazy kids at Fogbeam Labs have a new blog post positing that there is a trend towards advanced projects in NLP, Information Retrieval, Big Data and the Semantic Web moving to the Apache Software Foundation. Considering that Apache UIMA is a key component of IBM Watson, is it wrong to believe that the organization behind Hadoop, OpenNLP, Jena, Stanbol, Mahout and Lucene will ultimately be the home of a real 'Star Trek Computer'? Quoting: 'When we talk about how the Star Trek computer had “access to all the data in the known Universe”, what we really mean is that it had access to something like the Semantic Web and the Linked Data cloud. Jena provides a programmatic environment for RDF, RDFS and OWL, SPARQL and includes a rule-based inference engine. ... In addition to supporting the natural language interface with the system, OpenNLP is a powerful library for extracting meaning (semantics) from unstructured data - specifically textual data in an unstructured (or semi structured) format. An example of unstructured data would be the blog post, an article in the New York Times, or a Wikipedia article. OpenNLP combined with Jena and other technologies, allows “The computer” to “read” the Web, extracting meaningful data and saving valid assertions for later use.'" Speaking of the Star Trek computer, I'm continually disappointed that neither Siri nor Google Now can talk to me in Majel Barrett's voice.

129 comments

  1. In The Words Of William Shatner by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    In the words of William Shatner: Get a fucking life.

    1. Re:In The Words Of William Shatner by ArcadeMan · · Score: 4, Funny

      I believe that should be "Get. A fucking. Life, eh?"

    2. Re:In The Words Of William Shatner by Z00L00K · · Score: 1

      In the words of Max Headroom:

      "W-W-What about H-H-Humble little m-m-m-me?"

      --
      If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker would destroy civilization.
    3. Re:In The Words Of William Shatner by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're not William Shatner!

  2. *cough* by Hsien-Ko · · Score: 0

    LCARS24*cough*

    1. Re:*cough* by Marxist+Hacker+42 · · Score: 5, Funny

      LCARS any version will never be open sourced because Paramount/CBS will never release their rights to the design.

      Now the original 23rd century design, which was all voice interface and blinky lights, would be neat, but pretty damn hard to implement until we can get a computer to "recognize speech" instead of "wreck a nice beach".

      --
      SJW: a person who perceives an injustice, and while correcting it, commits a greater injustice.
    2. Re:*cough* by tnk1 · · Score: 5, Funny

      That was only a problem because you were trying to talk to a Klingon interface. Klingon computers interpret everything as targeting orders.

    3. Re:*cough* by cogeek · · Score: 2

      Paramount doesn't hold the rights. Gene Roddenberry made the LCARS interface open source long ago, for anyone to use in free projects.

    4. Re:*cough* by wbr1 · · Score: 3, Informative
      Sorry to burst your bubble. From Wikipedia:

      CBS Studios Inc. claims to hold the copyright on LCARS. Google was sent a DMCA letter to remove the Android app called tricorder [8] since its use of the LCARS interface was un-licenced. The application was later re-uploaded under a different title, but it was removed again.

      --
      Silence is a state of mime.
    5. Re:*cough* by spire3661 · · Score: 0

      Claims to hold the rights, not proven. This has yet to be tested in court.

      --
      Good-bye
    6. Re:*cough* by bobbied · · Score: 1

      Now the original 23rd century design, which was all voice interface and blinky lights, would be neat, but pretty damn hard to implement until we can get a computer to "recognize speech" instead of "wreck a nice beach".

      Oh but we *have* that already... Never mind the error rate.... Ever called an IVR based phone tree? Yea, they can recognize speech *just* fine. Personally I go for the DTMF interface, it's usually faster.

      Speech recondition that is speaker independent generally has to be vocabulary constrained. It's usually easy to tell the difference between "Yes" and "No" but if the speaker says anything else, it's going to go off the rails pretty quick. The more things you are listening for, the less confidence you are going to have between all the options.... That's why these systems are always prompting you to say certain words and phrases. If you want large vocabularies, you will need to either train the system to be speaker dependent, train the speakers to be consistent or be able to live with incorrect detections.

      "He's too far Jim!".. or was that "He's Foo Bar Jim!"? I guess that one doesn't matter..

      --
      "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
    7. Re:*cough* by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      If you have ~$200k to perform this test, and were willing to do it, I would love you for it.

      Justice is *not* cheap. :(

    8. Re:*cough* by DigiShaman · · Score: 2

      LCARS was the coolest looking shitty UI anyways. Honestly. It only looked awesome because there was limitations on how detailed you could get a picture broadcasted in 480i. That and pastel colors on black made them stand out. When you get right down to it, TV is artful entertainment first and foremost. I seriously doubt LCARS was based on any recommendations by those in UI design. But then again, this was before the .COM rise in 1997.

      --
      Life is not for the lazy.
    9. Re:*cough* by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Yeah, the LCARS UI wouldn't really 'work', but the touch interface depicted was 20 years ahead of it's time, which is generally good enough for a sci-fi show.

      Meanwhile the Star Trek movies still had big red buttons and low-res 1980s computer displays.

    10. Re:*cough* by Marxist+Hacker+42 · · Score: 1

      It is now "SciScanner" and the interface vaguely resembles LCARS, but isn't. It also has had much of its original functionality removed, unfortunately.

      --
      SJW: a person who perceives an injustice, and while correcting it, commits a greater injustice.
  3. Tool to condense forum posts into a wiki? by WillAdams · · Score: 2

    I've spent more time than I care to remember moving content from:

    http://www.shapeoko.com/forum

    to

    http://www.shapeoko.com/wiki

    Why can't it be automated?

    --
    Sphinx of black quartz, judge my vow.
    1. Re:Tool to condense forum posts into a wiki? by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      Of course it can, and it doesn't need a supercomputer. A competent programmer could do it with a 386.

    2. Re:Tool to condense forum posts into a wiki? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      An incompetent programmer would need at least a Pentium-III

    3. Re:Tool to condense forum posts into a wiki? by Marxist+Hacker+42 · · Score: 1

      A truly competent programmer could do this in CP/M.

      --
      SJW: a person who perceives an injustice, and while correcting it, commits a greater injustice.
    4. Re:Tool to condense forum posts into a wiki? by ArcadeMan · · Score: 2

      A truly competent programmer could do this with butterflies.

    5. Re:Tool to condense forum posts into a wiki? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      And Visual Basic.....

    6. Re:Tool to condense forum posts into a wiki? by tnk1 · · Score: 1

      A competent programmer has already done this with a quantum computer.

    7. Re:Tool to condense forum posts into a wiki? by sensei+moreh · · Score: 2

      My first computer ran CP/M. Fell free to play on my lawn

      --
      Geology - it's not rocket science; it's rock science
    8. Re:Tool to condense forum posts into a wiki? by m.ducharme · · Score: 1

      Isn't there an EMACS command to do this?

      --
      Rule of Slashdot #0: You and people like you are not representative of the larger population. - A.C.
    9. Re:Tool to condense forum posts into a wiki? by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 0

      A truly competent programmer could do this with butterflies.

      Isn't there an EMACS command to do this?

      Wrapping this up, for those who haven't see it: Real Programmers

      [ C-x M-c M-butterfly ]

      --
      It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
    10. Re:Tool to condense forum posts into a wiki? by DutchUncle · · Score: 1

      My first computer ran CP/M.

      Newbie. IBM 1130.

    11. Re:Tool to condense forum posts into a wiki? by NemoinSpace · · Score: 1

      i spent several years of my life learning cp/m convinced that each product bill produced would never amount to anything. I was mostly right.
      swap to disk. that was magic.
      I finally learned you can ALWAYS count on IBM to make the wrong choice. As did I. If it wasn't for Linux, I'd probably still be programming in REXX.

    12. Re:Tool to condense forum posts into a wiki? by bratwiz · · Score: 1

      A competent programmer could do this with an abacus or a slide-rule.

    13. Re:Tool to condense forum posts into a wiki? by VortexCortex · · Score: 2

      Do it yourself. It can be automated with a few scripts, would probably take me the lesser part of an hour. If you actually learned how to use computers, i.e., program, instead of just using pre-made functionality, then your life would be a lot easier. Blame your elementary school. Mine taught me BASIC on an Apple IIe when I was 8.

      Hell, once I moved a whole forum once using JavaScript and a bit of Perl. Hit a page, then hit the "Quote" buttons on all posts to get at the BBCode, snag the textarea's text and strip off the quote tags, POST to a Perl script including the poster's username to insert the data in the SQL database. Trigger an "Administrative Edit" on the post and save via PHP to get the smilies re-encoded... Tens of Thousands of times over the course of a week. The client didn't think about exporting before using a hosted phpBB forum, and the host wouldn't give up a database dump, so I made one. Probably could stream line that one-off process a bit more, but it was a one-off. Just some piddling crap strung together that anyone who knows how to use a computer should be able to do.

      If you never learn to code, you will never be able to fully use computers.

    14. Re:Tool to condense forum posts into a wiki? by VortexCortex · · Score: 1

      Bead Shuffling Abacus user here. Also had a Math-Co-Processing slide rule.

    15. Re:Tool to condense forum posts into a wiki? by WillAdams · · Score: 1

      I write scripts in TeX and AppleScript for my day job, thank you.

      I don't see an available tool or technique that'll take 80 search results for ``driveshaft'': http://www.shapeoko.com/forum/search.php?keywords=driveshaft

      and condense, reformat,discard redundant / off-topic mentions and create a structured page like: http://www.shapeoko.com/wiki/index.php/Drive_Shaft

      There's also 138 matches for ``drive shaft'': http://www.shapeoko.com/forum/search.php?keywords=drive+shaft (and I'm sure someone mis-spelled it as well).

      Yes, I could script auto-adding or concatenating 218 pages, but that's not any more useful than any of the responses to my initial post.

      --
      Sphinx of black quartz, judge my vow.
    16. Re:Tool to condense forum posts into a wiki? by Bill_the_Engineer · · Score: 1

      If it wasn't for Linux, I'd probably still be programming in REXX.

      There is NetRexx and Open Object Rexx.

      --
      These comments are my own and do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of my employer or colleagues...
    17. Re:Tool to condense forum posts into a wiki? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dude, it doesn't matter what your job title is, if you cannot see how to script such a simple task then you are not a programmer. Though the TeX and AppleScript was a hint as well.

      Also, does this look remotely like Stack Overflow? WTF?

    18. Re:Tool to condense forum posts into a wiki? by Paul+Carver · · Score: 1

      If you're looking for artificial intelligence to distill knowledge from forum posts and write wiki pages in the manner of a human author then certainly that doesn't exist yet. But if you're just looking for tools to extract knowledge from forums and other "social media" you're probably not looking in the right price range. The tools exist but are specialized and expensive. Look at Clarabridge, Attensity, SAS, Teradata, Lucid Imagination, Polyvista, as well as services from IBM, Oracle, SAS, SAP, HP, an Dell. The phrase "text analytics" might be helpful in guiding your research.

    19. Re:Tool to condense forum posts into a wiki? by WillAdams · · Score: 1

      My point is, this isn't a simple task.

      Concatenation, or building a list of links would be trivial.

      Taking untagged and unformatted information and providing it with:

        - semantic tagging
        - structure
        - hierarchy

      Is not something which happens w/ free-form data w/ publicly available tools resulting in a usable result.

      Closest thing to it I've found is Simson Garfinkel's address book sBook:

      http://simson.net/ref/sbook5/

      and it can barely handle addresses, e-mails and URLs.

      If I've missed a tool, I'd be delighted to be shown where it is.

      William

      --
      Sphinx of black quartz, judge my vow.
    20. Re:Tool to condense forum posts into a wiki? by WillAdams · · Score: 1

      Thanks. It's of course, the former that I want.

      I guess it'd be summed up by the XKCD comic:

      http://xkcd.com/810/

      --
      Sphinx of black quartz, judge my vow.
    21. Re:Tool to condense forum posts into a wiki? by WillAdams · · Score: 1

      The stackexchange point was a good one, so I asked the question there:

      http://stackoverflow.com/questions/16719747/opensource-tool-which-accepts-freeform-posts-from-a-forum-and-structures-tags-a

      Feel free to answer it.

      --
      Sphinx of black quartz, judge my vow.
    22. Re:Tool to condense forum posts into a wiki? by oreiasecaman · · Score: 1

      A competent programmer has (or hasn't) already done this with a quantum computer.

      FTFY

      --
      This is a UDP joke, I don't care if you get it or not...
    23. Re:Tool to condense forum posts into a wiki? by TheLoneGundam · · Score: 1

      Rexx is still one of the best procedural-style scripting languages... I use it in Unix (well, Unix Systems Services, the Posix-compliant interface component of z/OS)

    24. Re:Tool to condense forum posts into a wiki? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > I write scripts in TeX and AppleScript for my day job, thank you.

      You really enjoy typing, don't you?

  4. +1 for Apache by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I'd rather have this software developed in the open at Apache than closed in directories called "Secret business I.P." at Google or worse, Facebook. It's good to see its potential, and would also act as a warning what can be concluded from bits and pieces of personal, private details people tend to give away.

  5. So Java then by LukeWebber · · Score: 1

    I'm OK with it as long as it's not in freakin' PHP or JavaScript.

    1. Re:So Java then by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Javascript is actually a very powerful language. Just because idiots don't know how to use it properly (and many frameworks encourage this behaviour) doesn't mean the language itself is bad.

    2. Re:So Java then by Cajun+Hell · · Score: 1

      Just because idiots don't know how to use it properly .. doesn't mean the language itself is bad.

      Yes, it does. I was walking down the street one day, and a guy named Larry Wall stepped on my foot. He refused to apologize.

      I vowed vengeance, and told him I was going to mis-learn his language. "No. No, no!" he protested, but it was too late, as my temper does not cool easily. I followed through on my threat: I spent about 10 minutes trying to learn perl, but I only got as far as learning how to write a few things, and never bothered to proceed to the part of the lessons where one reads Perl.

      This caused Perl to become a bad language.

      Guido, if you ever step on my foot, apologize. Or else.

      --
      "Believe me!" -- Donald Trump
  6. No, that is not what we mean. by Culture20 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    'When we talk about how the Star Trek computer had âoeaccess to all the data in the known Universeâ, what we really mean is that it had access to something like the Semantic Web and the Linked Data cloud.

    The Enterprise computer was not hampered by being in another galaxy, nor was Voyager's computer hampered by being in the Delta Quadrant. They had local copies of all the data at all times.

    1. Re:No, that is not what we mean. by Ambvai · · Score: 1

      Were there any storylines where that actually came into play? It would've been an interesting bit of foresight to implement that.

    2. Re:No, that is not what we mean. by Marxist+Hacker+42 · · Score: 1

      It is called caching, and is already possible. My phone has all the KNOWN DATA that I want, in less than 16GB (well, almost- it is time for a new SD card)

      --
      SJW: a person who perceives an injustice, and while correcting it, commits a greater injustice.
    3. Re:No, that is not what we mean. by sconeu · · Score: 1, Funny

      The Trek computes being open sourced certainly explains how everybody from the Ferengi to the Kazon could take control (also known as the "Invader Friendly Operating System").

      --
      General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
    4. Re:No, that is not what we mean. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Depending on how you view it, the "Genesis Project" in Wrath of Khan and Search for Spock.

    5. Re:No, that is not what we mean. by RoknrolZombie · · Score: 1

      As well as a magical process by which new data was miraculously transferred across billions of miles of space in just shy of an instant. Star fleet just added this info and we're 2,000,000 light years away? No problem...it'll be available by tomorrow.

    6. Re:No, that is not what we mean. by Culture20 · · Score: 2

      Except in this case, the Enterprise computer cached the entire available knowledge of the Federation whenever it got the chance. It was like a souped-up archive.org with regard to data.

    7. Re:No, that is not what we mean. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Erm... see: Subspace Communication. It's faster-than-light ...

    8. Re:No, that is not what we mean. by Culture20 · · Score: 1

      Every episode of Voyager. There was a significant time delay even with subspace communications.
      Also, in TNG: http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/11001001_(episode)
      http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/USS_Enterprise_(NCC-1701-D)_library_computer
      And in TNG, they traveled to far reaching places on occasion, with no failure in new data queries.
      And there was Data, who had the complete neural imprints and electronic records of every colonist of Omicron Theta embedded in his positronic "brain".

    9. Re:No, that is not what we mean. by Culture20 · · Score: 2

      Also, there wasn't really any foresight. TNG was started before the Internet was in the mainstream consciousness (especially Hollywood consciousness), and Encarta CDs were the "current" computer version of an encyclopedia, so scaling that up in Sci-Fi would turn into "a computer database that has everything pre-loaded".

    10. Re:No, that is not what we mean. by westlake · · Score: 2

      The Enterprise computer was not hampered by being in another galaxy... They had local copies of all the data at all times

      The Enterprise computer knew what it needed to know to serve the plot. No information lost, corrupted or concealed. No conflicts in interpretation. The perfect machine for a culture turned self-righteous and complacent, without doubts or uncertainties.

    11. Re:No, that is not what we mean. by ewibble · · Score: 1

      Its clear that Voyager they could not communicate with earth (:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hunters_%28Star_Trek:_Voyager%29) is an episode where they found communications array and where finally able get letters from home. So previously they couldn't transfer a letter from home however they the computer could access the all the knowledge in the universe.

      Anyway this is fiction so it doesn't have to make sense.

    12. Re:No, that is not what we mean. by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1

      My phone has the entire text contents of the Wikipedia installed on it. It's about a 10GB download and the Android app is free. It takes up part of the 32GB external sd card. I'm sure glad I didn't buy a Google branded phone (Google hates SD slots.)

    13. Re:No, that is not what we mean. by fast+turtle · · Score: 1

      nah: that's Windows - it leaks atmosphere all the time.

      reminds me about a short story I read in which enterprise D was under attack by the borg when they're saved by the Windows Activation Ship. Seems the borg were using an pirated copy and the lawyers shut em down.

      --
      Mod me up/Mod me down: I wont frown as I've no crown
    14. Re:No, that is not what we mean. by Somebody+Is+Using+My · · Score: 3, Informative

      For those interested: The Borg vs. Microsoft Windows

    15. Re:No, that is not what we mean. by WillAdams · · Score: 2

      There was actually explict mention of this in one of the books --- whenever 2 Federation ships meet their computers synch w/ each other --- can't recall it being a plot point though.

      --
      Sphinx of black quartz, judge my vow.
    16. Re:No, that is not what we mean. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In the show Voyager they are so far out that communication with Earth (or anyone from 'home') is impossible (except for at a few points where they stumble upon some odd means of managing it).

      And yet, they are able to delve into the genealogical history of the Captain, to find that they ancestor that inspired her to become a captain didn't actually do the things that Captain Janeway was told she did. (http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/Millennium_Gate, Star Trek: Voyager Season 5 Episode 23 11:59)

    17. Re:No, that is not what we mean. by BetaDays · · Score: 1

      Yep the space ships computers hold vasts amount of data and they get regular updates. Example In the Next Generation there was an episode dealing with a group of people called the "Binars" who downloaded their entire populations memory into the ships computer. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0708668/

      --
      Paul: Father... father, the sleeper has awakened! - Dune
    18. Re:No, that is not what we mean. by Marxist+Hacker+42 · · Score: 1

      I agree with all of that except the last part. My wife's G1 and my G2 both had microSD slots. OTOH, when I upgraded, she went with a Mytouch, and I went with a Samsung- both of which have microSD slots.

      On the Samsung, you can even change the SD card without removing the battery- which was somthing that *really* bothered me about the G2 (the G1 was even strange- had to open the keyboard to access the SD slot).

      --
      SJW: a person who perceives an injustice, and while correcting it, commits a greater injustice.
  7. The crazy kids again eh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Writing a marketing post about yourself in the third person: inherently deceptive.

  8. soulskill: learn to use the mouise, dude! by swschrad · · Score: 1

    you pick it up, face the back, and say, "Computer..."

    --
    if this is supposed to be a new economy, how come they still want my old fashioned money?
  9. And this means???? by bobbied · · Score: 1

    From somebody who spent a few hours working a show with Gene Roddenberry before his ashes got the cosmic brush off... Having run film clips and sound for his famed "lecture" on Star Trek's past and how that changed our future, I thought he was nuts (1987).

    Science Fiction has foreseen future events, but it is NOT an accurate representation of what is going to happen. So how on earth (or in space for that matter) can we tell what software will be used in the future for some yet to be designed hardware? Add to this that we are not even sure when or even if such a theoretical machine will ever exist and how can we figure any kind of useful debate will come from this?

    Oh yea, this is star trek.. Home to the group that thinks some group of two bit "B" list actors are somehow for tellers of the future

    --
    "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
    1. Re:And this means???? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yikes. Someone sure has a stick up their butt.

    2. Re:And this means???? by VortexCortex · · Score: 3, Insightful

      From somebody who spent a few hours working a show with Gene Roddenberry before his ashes got the cosmic brush off... Having run film clips and sound for his famed "lecture" on Star Trek's past and how that changed our future, I thought he was nuts (1987).

      Science Fiction has foreseen future events, but it is NOT an accurate representation of what is going to happen. So how on earth (or in space for that matter) can we tell what software will be used in the future for some yet to be designed hardware? Add to this that we are not even sure when or even if such a theoretical machine will ever exist and how can we figure any kind of useful debate will come from this?

      Oh yea, this is star trek.. Home to the group that thinks some group of two bit "B" list actors are somehow for tellers of the future

      Your argument from authority is unappealing. The components of a computing system similar to a fictitious one have been identified. The likelihood of their software licensing approach is being projected based upon current component licensing and development plans. We do not think the "B" list actors knew what the "techno-babble" they were spouting meant.

      However, when we create devices that are similar to the fictitious devices, we can and will make comparisons. The Hypo-spay exists. Tablet Computers exist. Food replication systems are in development. 3D TV exists. We launched a rocket similar to Jules Verne's to the moon. Eventually the rockets we send to Mars and/or the Moon will land vertically Delta-V style, like Verne's rocket did (so they can take off again). Cars can apply brakes when proximity alarms go off -- Cars can even drive themselves now, like in Sleeper; They can parallel park too! Applications for Mars Colonization are being accepted...

      Stop for a moment and think about current technologies. Now extrapolate a bit. Extrapolate a bit further. Write a story about it. Marvel as some of your ideas weren't actually bat-shit insane after all. Some are more accurate than others. I think you need to re-evaluate your life. The future they did not "predict", happened the way they said it would despite your claim to the contrary...

  10. Oh, Great! by Bodhammer · · Score: 1

    What tools are the Borg supposed to use then?


    (Oh wait - Googleplex, nevermind...)

    --
    "I say we take off, nuke the site from orbit. It's the only way to be sure."
    1. Re:Oh, Great! by mcl630 · · Score: 0

      Don't you mean Microsoft?

      Bill Gates Borg

    2. Re:Oh, Great! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      We can only hope. That way, when their Exchange license expires, they'll be unable to send messages or organize meetings.

    3. Re:Oh, Great! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What a contemporary joke you have made. Hey, did you know that emacs is so fat, the distribution takes over eight megabytes? Now tell me something funny about OS/2.

  11. Voice Search and Medical Tricorder by ScottCooperDotNet · · Score: 1

    Google's 'Star Trek computer' voice search is cool, but Siri is already here. Scanadu's Scout, "the first Medical Tricorder" could be another Trek-inspired innovation that will make the world a better place.

    1. Re:Voice Search and Medical Tricorder by bobbied · · Score: 1

      but Siri is already here.

      But it's going to be a *really* long delay involved in getting the data back to Apple's servers when you are a light year away from earth when you try and connect with Siri... (grin) I'm thinking that's going to make Siri system pretty much useless before you get halfway to Mars..

      --
      "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
    2. Re: Voice Search and Medical Tricorder by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      siri is big iron powered, yes.

      however, if you note on many TNG (and even voyager) episodes, starfleet vessels have a big honking big iron computer core, and a lot of dumb terminals all over the place.

      things like PADDs and tricorders have some minimal processing power (even being abused to half-assedly fill in for vital ship functions when slaved together ad-hoc in both a TNG episode, and in a voyager episode, when the big iron either fails catastrophically or is stolen), but for the most part make heavy use of the interna subspace com system array of the starship to leverage the ship's big iron.

      in terms of extended cannon, the starfleet data network makes use of local "akamai like" cache servers on dedicated installations (see TOS "memory core alpha", and pals.) as well as local cached copies on board the starship itself for normal data queries. this helps compartmentalize data queries, and keep subspace data transfers to a minimum. this is why the ship's computer doesnt fall on its face when blown to the other side of the galaxy, where top speed bidirectional communication has a 140 year latency. (70 each way, IIRC for voyager.) (or longer, such as the TNG episode where they get sent to sparklie glittery fairyland where thoughts somehow have impact on reality.)

      siri works now on considerably less iron than these fictional starships carry around in thier bellies, so expecting siri queries to go over the starfleet comnet is ridiculous. (the big iron in the starship's main function is to calculate motion vectors for superluminal travel, which is a very tall order. siri like voice recognition would be a whimsically easy task in comparison, even when resolving thousands of simultaneous queries.)

      and congratulations: you just made a casual watcher of the series look like a diehard trekie. (gawd i feel so dirty..)

    3. Re:Voice Search and Medical Tricorder by lennier · · Score: 1

      Scanadu's Scout, "the first Medical Tricorder" could be another Trek-inspired innovation that will make the world a better place.

      They have a tricorder? Well that's it. The gloves are off. Listen up everybody - we're going to a quadcorder.

      --
      You are not a brain: http://books.google.com/books?id=2oV61CeDx-YC
    4. Re: Voice Search and Medical Tricorder by l0n3s0m3phr34k · · Score: 1

      Big iron is right...if I remember through the haze of ages long ago, my tech manual said the cores in Enterprise-D are huge, and there's three of them. Three decks high, so..10x3, or whatever the deck heights exactly are. So, I imagine like 20-30 of the old school Cray mainframes stacked on top of each other. What would be interesting is to figure how much processing power we could stuff into a similar form factor right now. How far could we push a compact data center into a 30ftx6ft tube? Power not being a problem, allowing ventilation shafts for heat control and human access.

  12. Semantic Web by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Oh noes. A Semantic Web fanboi.

    Cluestick - the future won't involve the Semantic Web.

    Like all the Star Trek Enterprises, it will never fly except in your fantasies.

    1. Re:Semantic Web by VanessaE · · Score: 1

      Like all the Star Trek Enterprises, it will never fly except in your fantasies.

      Sure, if we don't bother to *build* them. Let's face it, we have the technology right now to build an Enterprise, even if it can't do much yet. Will it have warp drive, transporters, and food replicators? No. But we CAN build one if we really wanted to, with at least some formerly-ST-only tech, and actually make it move, however slowly.

      Even money isn't that big of a problem. It's all a matter of wanting it badly enough to overcome the greed that keeps it from happening.

  13. Wasn't it Majel Barrett's voice in the I/O demo? by Phil+Urich · · Score: 1

    I swear that when they demonstrated voice search with Google Now on desktops during Google I/O last week, the computer read out the resulting query in Majel Barrett's voice.

    --
    I remember sigs. Oh, a simpler time!
  14. Wasn't it Majel Barrett's voice in the I/O demo? by Phil+Urich · · Score: 0

    I swear the demonstration of Google Now voice search at Google I/O last week had Majel Barrett's voice reading back the search query.

    --
    I remember sigs. Oh, a simpler time!
  15. M5 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    we all know how M5 turned out....

    1. Re:M5 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Um, they started filming a fun TV show there?

  16. And in an ironic twist... by Tarlus · · Score: 2

    And in a ironic twist, the algorithms used to manifest a cup of Earl Grey tea will be closed and patented.

    --
    /* No Comment */
    1. Re:And in an ironic twist... by bobbied · · Score: 1

      Yea, but by the time they have a machine built to make the cup of tea, the patent will have expired...

      How will the patent trolls go after all the bittorrent client's that download that one or will the existence of a hot cup of Earl Grey be enough to get you sued?

      --
      "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
    2. Re: And in an ironic twist... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The real issue is the political anre regulatory stalemate about weather or not molecular pattern replicators should be a household item or not, due to the fact that you can create phasers cheaply and discretely with one.

      How can the future be peaceful and safe, if just anyone could walk up to a pattern replicator and say "I'll take 3 tricobalt devices, a type 12 compression phaser rifle, and a rack of subspace interphasic antipersonel mines please.", without even the slightest of overhead!
      (/snark about all the hoopla over plastic guns)

    3. Re: And in an ironic twist... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sure, you can create a phaser discretely. The real question is, do you have the engineering skills to build it?

    4. Re: And in an ironic twist... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      this is the startek future we are talking about here1 the one where you can get a heuristically computer generated world with realistic physics simulations and realistic physical representations of objects, just from a few adjectives and a delcarative statement in the holodeck!

      Do you honestly think that you couldnt get access to sensor logs of such devices, and tell the computer to heuristically extrapolate the construction based on that known data?

      all you would need are a few friends with tricorders, some snazz with encrypted data channels, and a local replicator program you want synthesized.

      "computer, local pattern codename "LulZer rifle" please."

      the whole point of discrete and ubiquitus omni-fabrication is that you dont NEED to have full working engineering knowledge, just the manufacturing pattern template. being digital data, i would expect such patterns to be quite abundant and widely circulated.

      Add in cases where a simple sensor scan can be heuristically analyzed for structural elements and compositional data, and a tricorder becomes a very powerful tool indeed.

    5. Re: And in an ironic twist... by l0n3s0m3phr34k · · Score: 2

      The replicators on startrek often couldn't replicate highly "advanced chemicals", such as trilithium and other random made up plot devices. At one point they where described as only holding certain patterns, and could go and find new ones on demand. In federation space they usually had to be regulated and inspected to try and stop whoever from making nasty things. I don't really recall it being used on a wide-scale, federation starships notwithstanding. I'm assuming the computing power and energy requirements of Enterprise-D's replicators wasn't found outside said starships. A consumer grade could probably not make correct quantum states to make startrek-style energy sources. Good enough to just do molecular-level replication, pushing atoms into a matrix at the speed of light so it just "appears". I can see us making this too, with meta material nano lenses, lasers passing through a medium grabbing the needed atoms out. It would probably have to be re-calibrated often, and the better the computer running it the better the device would be.

    6. Re:And in an ironic twist... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How will the patent trolls go after all the bittorrent client's

      Where in the hell did all these semiliterate high school dropouts come from, why are they posting on a nerd forum, and why are they not embarrassed by their lack of education and literacy? bobbied, at least get your god damned GED. There's no possible way that someone who has never read a book unless his teacher forced him to can say anything meaningful in a forum like this. Go back to 4chan or fox or sports illustrated or whatever other retarded site you used to post at. You're completely useless here. Now shoo!

      Fucking morons, they're all around me IRL and for the last couple of years they've been at slashdot too. Is there nowhere I can go to be away from idiots?

  17. Takedown notice != legitimate copyright claim by Phil+Urich · · Score: 4, Informative

    The original post about the takedown request can be found at http://web.archive.org/web/20111130013603/http://code.google.com/p/moonblink/wiki/Tricorder. It says in part,

    It's apparently the graphical design that's at issue, not the name. According to Wikipedia, "Gene Roddenberry's contract included a clause allowing any company able to create functioning technology to use the name". Now that GR is dead, I guess CBS believes they own swoopy curves.

    Since I don't have legal weasels of my own, or the time to deal with this, that's it for Tricorder.

    It's far from clear that CBS has any copyright on LCARS, it's more that any entity like CBS with enough money to throw at the legal system can get away with claiming such, and random people just have to go along with it thanks to the way our legal system works.

    --
    I remember sigs. Oh, a simpler time!
    1. Re:Takedown notice != legitimate copyright claim by wickedskaman · · Score: 3, Interesting

      This makes me wonder if Kickstarting legal funds could be viable for David to have a war chest against Goliath in these kinds of IP controversies.

      --
      Sand's overrated... it's just tiny little rocks.
    2. Re:Takedown notice != legitimate copyright claim by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You've never heard of the "donate to so-and-so's legal fund" requests? Same thing without gifts for the people donating.

  18. Re:soulskill: learn to use the mouise, dude! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Mouise? Do you mean mousse?

  19. devouring an internet full of unstructured data by Alsee · · Score: 2

    the natural language interface with the system, OpenNLP is a powerful library for extracting meaning (semantics) from unstructured data... An example of unstructured data would be the blog post, an article in the New York Times, or a Wikipedia article.

    Warning: Other examples of "unstructured data" include 4chan and Conservapedia.

    -

    --
    - - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
    1. Re:devouring an internet full of unstructured data by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Didn't IBM have a bit of trouble when they fed Watson a copy of the Urban Dictionary?

  20. Apache BattleOffice by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I recall the Apache OpenOffice guys were indeed considering adding Klingon.

  21. gonna have to talk to Jordi about this by Main+Gauche · · Score: 1

    Did the transporter just drop me into the middle of some poetry jam?

  22. Google by posthxc1982 · · Score: 0

    'When we talk about how the Star Trek computer had “access to all the data in the known Universe” it's called Google.

    --
    After coming into contact with a religious man I always feel I must wash my hands. Friedrich Nietzsche
  23. Google vs. ST:TNG computer by dcsmith · · Score: 1
    Apparently the ST:TNG computer couldn't even handle Boolean queries, much less queries with semantic awareness...

    TROI: Computer, search for the term Darmok in all linguistic databases for this sector.
    COMPUTER: Searching. Darmok is the name of a seventh dynasty emperor on Kanda Four. A mytho-historical hunter on Shantil Three. A colony on Malindi Seven. A frozen dessert on Tazna Five. A
    TROI: Stop search. Computer, how many entries are there for Darmok?
    COMPUTER: Forty seven.
    .
    .
    .
    DATA: Computer, search for the term Tanagra. All databases.
    COMPUTER: Searching. Tanagra. The ruling family on Gallos Two. A ceremonial drink on Lerishi Four. An island-continent on Shantil Three
    TROI: Stop. Shantil Three. Computer, cross-reference the last entry with the previous search index.
    COMPUTER: Darmok is the name of a mytho-historical hunter on Shantil Three.
    TROI: I think we've got something.

    --
    This has been a test. If this had been an actual Sig, you would have been amused.
    1. Re: Google vs. ST:TNG computer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      that just shows that the crew is incompetent, not that the computer cant do a boolean tuple search.

      in fact, it does exactly that when they query "search all databases(exclude all NOT "this sector(CurrentSector)")"+"darmok"+"tanagra".

      but this was before the internet, where john q public and his buddies Joe shmoe and Bob anyman became aware of logically structured search queries. the writers had to hold the audience's hands, even though that makes the bridge officers look ragingly retarded for trying to sort through a jumbled mountain of google results for a simple one word query.

    2. Re: Google vs. ST:TNG computer by mark-t · · Score: 1

      Uh... no. STTNG was definitely *NOT* before the Internet.

      It was, however, before Eternal September.

    3. Re:Google vs. ST:TNG computer by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1

      the ST:TNG computer couldn't even handle Boolean queries

      That, or Troi was too dumb to effectively operate the computer. I've got an opinion on which of those is more likely...

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
    4. Re: Google vs. ST:TNG computer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Ok, fine.

      before the "modern" internet, as defined by the currently prevailing mesh of hypertext protocol interinked page heuristics, aggregated public search engines, and inexpensive anytime access for anyone, basically anywhere.

      the "internet", as a nonprofit, college data exchange internetwork was certainly well in existence before TNG, and was probably in existence toward the end of the TOS. (if not, very close. arpanet is quite old indeed, and the coldwar was a major impetus for its creation, and decentralized design for fault tolerance reasons.)

      I was referring specifically as "the internet" as a cultural pheomenon, which coincides with the arrival of the Eternal September. Not as the existence of a TCP/IP v4 global internetwork for information exchange.

      (you know, what al gore was instrumental in causing. ;) )

    5. Re:Google vs. ST:TNG computer by VortexCortex · · Score: 1

      Whatever dude, Troi was just nearly computer illiterate. Geordi ran boolean searches and "cross references" all the time. Hell, it even created a sentient hologram once just to give Data a challenging case of who-dun-it, Moriarty figured out he was in a star-ship and wanted to stop playing the game and be told WTF was going on and have his own life... Yeah, a system with that degree of complexity can't run a boolean search. Look, we've already got enough compute power the world over that if you ran a distributed AI program on all the hardware and connected it to the Internet it would have more than the complexity of a human brain (when you factor in RAM and GHz vs that of a human). A system as big and complex as the Enterprise with all that processing power -- IMO, it's a wonder that every star ship wasn't sentient in that series -- A failure of Roddenberry's understanding of cybernetics, if you ask me.

    6. Re: Google vs. ST:TNG computer by ccandreva · · Score: 1

      Just ask Wil Wheaton if the internet existed when TNG was on the air. Poor guy had to put up with all manner of abuse in alt.wesley.crusher.die.die.die . We may only have had usenet, gopher, ftp, and archie, but we got by.
      And Wil - if you are reading this, I never posted in a.w.c.d.d.d , but did laugh at stuff read out. Sorry about that.

    7. Re:Google vs. ST:TNG computer by dcsmith · · Score: 1

      the ST:TNG computer couldn't even handle Boolean queries

      That, or Troi was too dumb to effectively operate the computer. I've got an opinion on which of those is more likely...

      Data was on hand, too, so we can't dump all the blame on her... ;-)

      --
      This has been a test. If this had been an actual Sig, you would have been amused.
  24. Would you settle for the voice of Rommie? by DutchUncle · · Score: 2

    Or perhaps you remember the Dumarest stories, each of which had a Cyber with "the trained voice which contained no irritant factors" . . .

    Seriously, there must be enough audio of Majel Barrett to synthesize a decent copy. Sounds like an open source Kickstarter to me.

    1. Re:Would you settle for the voice of Rommie? by MrTree · · Score: 1

      CereProc did it for Roger Ebert, and other companies such as Nuance and Ivona also offer this service.
      I estimate you're about $10k + licencing costs from CBS away from making this a reality.

      http://www.cereproc.com/en/services/voicecreation
      http://www.nuance.com/for-business/by-solution/custom-voices/index.htm
      http://www.ivona.com/en/custom-voice/

  25. Majel Forever! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Ok, I'm only going to say this once. If it's going to be the future according to Star Trek. Then all computers have to sound like Majel!!!!! It's been that way for almost 50 years, it's set in stone. I've thought about this for years, even before she passed away. We need to digitize EVERYTHING SHE EVER SAID and make a standard open source dig chip that all computers, phones, tv's, microwaves, cars...everything has to sound like her. She's the voice of the computer!
    Siri can go @#!% it.

    1. Re:Majel Forever! by VanessaE · · Score: 2

      I'm not usually one to "+1" something, let alone an AC, but this guy is right, really. If a computer in the context of this article doesn't speak with Majel Barrett's voice, it just won't sound right. That said, we don't need any kind of chip to do it - there is software out there that runs on commodity hardware that can sound like pretty much anyone, given adequate samples of that person's voice as a pattern to model against.

      The real question is, what would Majel's estate, family, etc. have to say about it, if anything? Assuming there is still some such entity in existence, would they have the legal right to prevent the use of her voice? What about Paramount and/or CBS? Could they legally stop it?

    2. Re:Majel Forever! by ccandreva · · Score: 1

      If Paramount/CBS were smart, they would fund the creation of the Marjel Barret voice, to be used in all future Star Trek projects, and set it free. From what I've heard in interviews, I thinks he would approve.

  26. Way too early, and assuming way to much by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    No.

    It's patently absurd to say we "know" what technology a Star Trek class computer will be built upon. Even assuming that some successful FOSS model will be the design space of the system is... overreaching at best, and blissful ignorance of the problem at worst.

    The Star Trek computers were not merely able to understand free-form speech, access vast databases, and resolve linguistic irregularities, assumptions, and unbounded problem areas. In some cases the crew asked the computer whether the computer was even able to solve certain problems, and the computer figured out for itself whether it could or not. This is a primitive form of self-awareness.

    I suggest that the Star Trek computers were displaying signs of full-fledged intellingence, even in TOS. By the time of TNG the computer was able to project Minuet as a fully realized personality. By the time of Voyager the computer supported an independent personality, in control of it's own power switch, in the form of the ship's doctor.

    No amount of wishful thinking, handwaving, and quoting of buzzwords like NLP, Big Data, Semantic Web, and Apache, and the like, can bridge the yawning gulf between what those systems and technologies bring, versus what the Star Trek computers were doing. True artificial intelligence is still decades to centuries down the road.

  27. TFA comes from too much Star Trek movie hype by cstacy · · Score: 2

    WARNING: Fatal exposure in 69 minutes!

  28. A know it all computer should be called ORAC by Zubinix · · Score: 1

    I like my all knowing computers to constantly remind humans of their insignificance and gross inferiority. No computer personified this more than ORAC from the 1980's British Sci-Fi "Blake's 7".

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NoHkaFDTiD8

    and remember "modesty would be dishonesty" for such an intelligence!

    1. Re:A know it all computer should be called ORAC by RockDoctor · · Score: 1
      Ah, good old ORAC!

      I'm guessing that the whole subject of discussion is some sort of spin off from yet another Star Trek movie. There's one out at the moment, isn't there? (I pay as little attention to advertising as possible, in the few seconds between the start of the adverts and my finger hitting the fast-forward button.)

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
  29. And not a single f was given by tgv · · Score: 1

    To my joy, I notice that no-one actually tries to support or refute the claims from the OP. And that's a good thing. It is talk from someone who considers himself visionary because he says something very 2.0 based upon acronyms and projects he doesn't understand. The kind of tech in OpenNLP has been around for 20 years now, and adding a few components that can brokerage and leverage and whateverage unstructured data is not going to improve it.

  30. Re:Apache? no. by sonamchauhan · · Score: 1

    Some developers like liberal copyright licenses too.

  31. Re:Apache? no. by jedidiah · · Score: 1

    > Some developers like liberal copyright licenses too.

    Sure. The greedy ones that have a toddler's mindset.

    --
    A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
  32. Except by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Except that Majel Barrett's voice will still be under copyright.

  33. Officially Licensed Earl Grey by Dareth · · Score: 1

    Ha, I know the proper place to get "Tea Earl Grey Hot(TM)".

    --

    I only look human.
    My mother is a halfling and my dad is an ogre, so that makes me an Ogreling
  34. The Last Question by tmjva · · Score: 2

    So the Star Trek computer will had access to "All the data in the known Universe" ?

    Will someone ever ask: "How can the net amount of entropy of the universe be massively decreased?"

    Or will the question first be posed in 2061?

    --
    Tracy Johnson
    Old fashioned text games hosted below:
    http://empire.openmpe.com/
    BT
  35. I have a question concerning the Semantic Web by default+luser · · Score: 1

    I figure this is as good a place to ask as any, since the buzzword keeps being paraded around every chance people get.

    What is the difference between the Semantic Web and the existing Meta Element system in HTML? As far as I can see from descriptions, the Symantec Web just wants to attach metadata to every single object on the web. This improves on the Meta Element (per-page descriptions only), but it's hardly a sea-change.

    Also, how are you going to entice authors to write all that metadata? The only reason they bothered was to improve their search rankings back in the 90s. Now that search engines ignore the Meta Elements, their use is discouraged, and you're back to finding a way to get lazy developers to document things.

    --

    Man is the animal that laughs.
    And occasionally whores for Karma.

  36. Re:Apache? no. by sonamchauhan · · Score: 1

    Or the ones that contribute code under those licenses. like me.

  37. You still need a Scotty and dilithium crystals by nmalloch · · Score: 1

    Open-sourced next generation intelligent solutions still need the expertise and big data that are out of reach for many. Take a look at this blog post -- Why The “Star Trek Computer” Needs Open DataAnd Scotty, Too -- http://blog.primal.com/2013/05/why-the-star-trek-computer-needs-open-data-and-scotty-too/. Knowledge models and the data that drives a personalized experience can be generated on demand, today.