Great disappointment. I was really hoping Apple would jump start the NFC revolution with the iPhone 5. What's the problem in not having an industry standard?! They would have CREATED one!
Instead of trying to emulate the human brain, which at the moment is unattainable, we should concentrate on efficiency paradigms of smaller neural ensembles. Once we achieve efficiency we can scale. Why haven't we learned anything from the CPU industry? They didn't start from 19nm manufacture. Why should we?
We shouldn't hurry. AI comparable to a human person can be achieved, but it is still a long way until we reach it.
Please don't accuse my of trolling, but I somehow agree with parent here.
Moreover, apart from the fun of it, and I admit there's a lot to be made, is there an inherent reason to always condemn Microsoft and absolve Google and the rest? Both/all of them are for profit corporations and of course I don't buy the do-not-evil shit. At least, not 100%. My guess is that both companies tried their best to maximize the efficiency of their results with all means possible. No foul game here.
Enough already with all Microsoft-bashing at every possible moment. 2011 is not the 90s, I don't even think we should have a Bill-Gates-as-a-Borg story icon anymore. It's not relevant anymore. What about Apple and its walled garden? What about Google and its privacy woes? I didn't see Jobs and Page as Borgs images accompanying their stories...
PS. I use both engines (80% Google and 20% Bing). Love them both, both have their strengths and weaknesses. I don't think there's business ethics involved here, just trimming algorithms.
Hope it comes up "for those without the time and money to pop on a plane and trade elbows with crowds of students looking to catch a glimpse of what some of the best schools have on offer"...
Aren't these percentages too close to be meaningful? Of course it depends on the sample, but I think unless we get an all-winning AI it's interesting but nothing really special.
Personally, I would love to see Apple collaborate with Art Lebenev to bring an up-to-date Optimus Maximus keyboard at €200-300. First see if optical feedback technology sells at the right price and only then try it with flat surfaces and tactile feedback as well.
Right now, it's too much of a jump. Anyway, it's just a patent. I doubt we're gonna see anything before 2013-14.
Angry Birds, an iPhone game (later ported to other platforms)...
Hm, correct me if I'm wrong, but I think Angry Birds was a game first for Nokia MeeGo/Symbian. After its success there it was ported to the iPhone and other platforms.
Apple might be doing the same thing with your information. And since Apple spans from music to apps to books now, it's really dangerous. Always without your consent, to promote their own products.
I don't know with which publishers you had to do in the past, but the serious publishing houses I'm subscribed to don't sell my information without my consent. You know, the little box that says "consent giving this info to 3rd-party advertisements". If I press no, my info remains to me.
Wait a minute! You have the same alternatives as well.
You can just not use the publisher who betrays your confidence. Or is it somehow some right or necessity to own and use a certain subscription?
I'm telling you, I prefer not to put all my eggs under a basket. We all see what happens when Apple flexes it muscles to move the industry where IT wants (see Flash issue, 3rd-party runtimes, etc), not where everybody would be free to go.
You don't seem to get it: If I pay Apple for a service or a product, I understand that I need to give them my credit card and other personal information. This is a transaction for which I have full control. If I don't want to purchase from Apple, I do not give them my credit card nor any other information.
Well, you don't seem to get it either: I can say the exact same about the publishing industry. If you don't trust a publisher you simply refrain from subscribing to his products and services. Buy your copies from the newsstand.
The thing about Apple is that they now want to have everything. As if they have developed some Microsoft-complex from the near-death experience they had in the 90s by their archenemy. And day by day, the acquire everything: the customers' data (for Apple's interests of course), the 30% cut of the profits, the final say about what goes in the stores and what the customer can legally buy (music, apps, now books), everything.
It's the new big brother they so loathed in 1984. As much as I like the ubiquity of the AppleID entry system to a world of digital content, I hate that I don't have serious alternatives because nobody will take onto Apple.
I hope the publishers make a good stand. After all, alternative ereaders exist and they're actually pretty good for the job.
Line-by-line quoting is childish and annoying so here's my concentrated answer.
You implied that they don't need that information, but it seems that it is ok for you that Apple already has it. Otherwise you should have said something about it as well. And in Apple's case, it's becoming pretty serious since today and in the near future you will do almost everything with an AppleID.
Apple perhaps doesn't need to sell to third parties (like Facebook) because it uses the information itself for its own marketing and advertising. It's a vertical company.
Competition is good. When one party has already won spectacularly you don't have any more serious competition. When I say the music industry bowed I mean that we won't be seeing an alternative (and perhaps better) model of buying songs anytime soon.
As for the publishing industry, expect an iTunes-track system for paying books with all major publishers pretty soon. Especially if the iPad becomes the prime ereader and Amazon fails miserably. I hope they don't.
I backed up almost everything, my assertions had known facts from past history inside. You should have filled the blanks yourself.
No. You imply that Apple "protects us" from the "bad" magazine marketeers. It's not so. Apple simply wants to keep all the personal data for itself and as a leverage for every deal they make.
They've already bowed the music industry, now it's the turn of the publishing one. What's next?!
I only hope these policies are not Apple's undoing because it would be a real shame. Steve Jobs is a genius, but he makes so many enemies in the industry. In the end everybody will make alliances just not to have to deal with Apple's policies.
I think Moore's law is becoming increasingly pointless...It talks about speed...
Actually I think it talks about transistor density, not CPU frequency (speed). And transistor density keeps going up, year after year. In 2007 we had the CPU that beat Kasparov in 1997 and weighted 1.5 tons. This info is in the article, btw.
Even if the rest of the things explained in the article happen many years away, the last couple of paragraphs explain the trend:
Neuromorphic chips won't just power niche AI applications. The architectural lessons we learn here will revolutionize all future CPUs. The fact is, conventional computers will just not get significantly more powerful unless they move to a more parallel and locality-driven architecture. While neuromorphic chips will first supplement today's CPUs, soon their sheer power will overwhelm that of today's computer architectures.
The semiconductor industry's relentless push to focus on smaller and smaller transistors will soon mean transistors have higher failure rates. This year, the state of the art is 22-nanometer feature sizes. By 2018, that number will have shrunk to 12 nm, at which point atomic processes will interfere with transistor function; in other words, they will become increasingly unreliable. Companies like Intel, Hynix, and of course HP are putting a lot of resources into finding ways to rely on these unreliable future devices. Neuromorphic computation will allow that to happen on both memristors and transistors.
It won't be long until all multicore chips integrate a dense, low-power memory with their CMOS cores. It's just common sense.
Our prediction? Neuromorphic chips will eventually come in as many flavors as there are brain designs in nature: fruit fly, earthworm, rat, and human. All our chips will have brains.
Hopefully, this is the solution to 2018's problem of reaching atomic levels of miniaturization. We have a breaktrought to continue with Moore's law beyond current technology.
Going default will be a short-lived remedy. The country will go back to 1990 in terms of market appeal and productivity. And yes, if the big tech companies leave, the hope of reacquiring a high-tech knowledge industry will go away as well.
Arguably, this is the coolest gadget around since the 2007 iPhone. Its potential to revolutionize the UI field are enormous. Just as we were finally arriving to touch screens, there you go... no screens at all!:)
(of course, I'm joking... the same efficiency and functionality is years in the future)
When did nerds stop saying "wow, technically impressive" and start saying "ooh, shiny?" I always thought it was the artsy types that went for Apple, not nerds. When did nerds start caring what they looked like or what normal people thought about us or how pretty our computers were? I mean, a cool looking handmade computer case is one thing, but fashion?
I guess the same time when dudes like Zuckerberg managed to make something technically savvy and at the same time advance their social status (connect!) and also become billionaires in the process. Want more?!
And the thing is: Stroustrup himself said that (1) if you write C-styled code in C++ you shall probably lose most of C++'s unique facilities and (2) no language is perfect, just use the right tool for the right job. He didn't try to force you to use C++, he just wanted to write a better C, with more features and type safety.
Regarding our relationship with C++, the committee is content to let C++ be the "big'' and ambitious language. While some features of C++ may well be embraced, it is not the committee's intention that C become C++.
People like C because it's small and simple. It's totally another philosophy from C++ which deals with many programming concepts under the same hood.
Slashdot Mirror
Great disappointment. I was really hoping Apple would jump start the NFC revolution with the iPhone 5. What's the problem in not having an industry standard?! They would have CREATED one!
The author talks about the honeybee. Let's emulate first the honeybee. Create a robot that can achieve what the social insect "bee" can achieve.
Lobules Lobes Whole Brain
Instead of trying to emulate the human brain, which at the moment is unattainable, we should concentrate on efficiency paradigms of smaller neural ensembles. Once we achieve efficiency we can scale. Why haven't we learned anything from the CPU industry? They didn't start from 19nm manufacture. Why should we?
We shouldn't hurry. AI comparable to a human person can be achieved, but it is still a long way until we reach it.
Indeed! Apple is not a fruit anymore, it's a RELIGION! :p
Please don't accuse my of trolling, but I somehow agree with parent here.
Moreover, apart from the fun of it, and I admit there's a lot to be made, is there an inherent reason to always condemn Microsoft and absolve Google and the rest? Both/all of them are for profit corporations and of course I don't buy the do-not-evil shit. At least, not 100%. My guess is that both companies tried their best to maximize the efficiency of their results with all means possible. No foul game here.
Enough already with all Microsoft-bashing at every possible moment. 2011 is not the 90s, I don't even think we should have a Bill-Gates-as-a-Borg story icon anymore. It's not relevant anymore. What about Apple and its walled garden? What about Google and its privacy woes? I didn't see Jobs and Page as Borgs images accompanying their stories...
PS. I use both engines (80% Google and 20% Bing). Love them both, both have their strengths and weaknesses. I don't think there's business ethics involved here, just trimming algorithms.
Haha. Just what I thought. He's from Texas too! :p
Hope it comes up "for those without the time and money to pop on a plane and trade elbows with crowds of students looking to catch a glimpse of what some of the best schools have on offer"...
Aren't these percentages too close to be meaningful? Of course it depends on the sample, but I think unless we get an all-winning AI it's interesting but nothing really special.
Personally, I would love to see Apple collaborate with Art Lebenev to bring an up-to-date Optimus Maximus keyboard at €200-300. First see if optical feedback technology sells at the right price and only then try it with flat surfaces and tactile feedback as well.
Right now, it's too much of a jump. Anyway, it's just a patent. I doubt we're gonna see anything before 2013-14.
Angry Birds, an iPhone game (later ported to other platforms)...
Hm, correct me if I'm wrong, but I think Angry Birds was a game first for Nokia MeeGo/Symbian. After its success there it was ported to the iPhone and other platforms.
Apple might be doing the same thing with your information. And since Apple spans from music to apps to books now, it's really dangerous. Always without your consent, to promote their own products.
I don't know with which publishers you had to do in the past, but the serious publishing houses I'm subscribed to don't sell my information without my consent. You know, the little box that says "consent giving this info to 3rd-party advertisements". If I press no, my info remains to me.
Wait a minute! You have the same alternatives as well.
You can just not use the publisher who betrays your confidence. Or is it somehow some right or necessity to own and use a certain subscription?
I'm telling you, I prefer not to put all my eggs under a basket. We all see what happens when Apple flexes it muscles to move the industry where IT wants (see Flash issue, 3rd-party runtimes, etc), not where everybody would be free to go.
Well, you don't seem to get it either: I can say the exact same about the publishing industry. If you don't trust a publisher you simply refrain from subscribing to his products and services. Buy your copies from the newsstand.
The thing about Apple is that they now want to have everything. As if they have developed some Microsoft-complex from the near-death experience they had in the 90s by their archenemy. And day by day, the acquire everything: the customers' data (for Apple's interests of course), the 30% cut of the profits, the final say about what goes in the stores and what the customer can legally buy (music, apps, now books), everything.
It's the new big brother they so loathed in 1984. As much as I like the ubiquity of the AppleID entry system to a world of digital content, I hate that I don't have serious alternatives because nobody will take onto Apple.
I hope the publishers make a good stand. After all, alternative ereaders exist and they're actually pretty good for the job.
Line-by-line quoting is childish and annoying so here's my concentrated answer.
You implied that they don't need that information, but it seems that it is ok for you that Apple already has it. Otherwise you should have said something about it as well. And in Apple's case, it's becoming pretty serious since today and in the near future you will do almost everything with an AppleID.
Apple perhaps doesn't need to sell to third parties (like Facebook) because it uses the information itself for its own marketing and advertising. It's a vertical company.
Competition is good. When one party has already won spectacularly you don't have any more serious competition. When I say the music industry bowed I mean that we won't be seeing an alternative (and perhaps better) model of buying songs anytime soon.
As for the publishing industry, expect an iTunes-track system for paying books with all major publishers pretty soon. Especially if the iPad becomes the prime ereader and Amazon fails miserably. I hope they don't.
I backed up almost everything, my assertions had known facts from past history inside. You should have filled the blanks yourself.
No. You imply that Apple "protects us" from the "bad" magazine marketeers. It's not so. Apple simply wants to keep all the personal data for itself and as a leverage for every deal they make.
They've already bowed the music industry, now it's the turn of the publishing one. What's next?!
But this is no news, I guess.
I only hope these policies are not Apple's undoing because it would be a real shame. Steve Jobs is a genius, but he makes so many enemies in the industry. In the end everybody will make alliances just not to have to deal with Apple's policies.
I think Moore's law is becoming increasingly pointless...It talks about speed...
Actually I think it talks about transistor density, not CPU frequency (speed). And transistor density keeps going up, year after year. In 2007 we had the CPU that beat Kasparov in 1997 and weighted 1.5 tons. This info is in the article, btw.
Even if the rest of the things explained in the article happen many years away, the last couple of paragraphs explain the trend:
Neuromorphic chips won't just power niche AI applications. The architectural lessons we learn here will revolutionize all future CPUs. The fact is, conventional computers will just not get significantly more powerful unless they move to a more parallel and locality-driven architecture. While neuromorphic chips will first supplement today's CPUs, soon their sheer power will overwhelm that of today's computer architectures.
The semiconductor industry's relentless push to focus on smaller and smaller transistors will soon mean transistors have higher failure rates. This year, the state of the art is 22-nanometer feature sizes. By 2018, that number will have shrunk to 12 nm, at which point atomic processes will interfere with transistor function; in other words, they will become increasingly unreliable. Companies like Intel, Hynix, and of course HP are putting a lot of resources into finding ways to rely on these unreliable future devices. Neuromorphic computation will allow that to happen on both memristors and transistors.
It won't be long until all multicore chips integrate a dense, low-power memory with their CMOS cores. It's just common sense.
Our prediction? Neuromorphic chips will eventually come in as many flavors as there are brain designs in nature: fruit fly, earthworm, rat, and human. All our chips will have brains.
Hopefully, this is the solution to 2018's problem of reaching atomic levels of miniaturization. We have a breaktrought to continue with Moore's law beyond current technology.
Going default will be a short-lived remedy. The country will go back to 1990 in terms of market appeal and productivity. And yes, if the big tech companies leave, the hope of reacquiring a high-tech knowledge industry will go away as well.
I prefer C++. It's a better C.
Arguably, this is the coolest gadget around since the 2007 iPhone. Its potential to revolutionize the UI field are enormous. Just as we were finally arriving to touch screens, there you go... no screens at all! :)
(of course, I'm joking... the same efficiency and functionality is years in the future)
Amen to that!
That's why I use C++ even if half the world of developers whine about its complexity. It's true, but the libraries and toolkits (like Qt) are there!
When did nerds stop saying "wow, technically impressive" and start saying "ooh, shiny?" I always thought it was the artsy types that went for Apple, not nerds. When did nerds start caring what they looked like or what normal people thought about us or how pretty our computers were? I mean, a cool looking handmade computer case is one thing, but fashion?
I guess the same time when dudes like Zuckerberg managed to make something technically savvy and at the same time advance their social status (connect!) and also become billionaires in the process. Want more?!
Great post, parent.
And the thing is: Stroustrup himself said that (1) if you write C-styled code in C++ you shall probably lose most of C++'s unique facilities and (2) no language is perfect, just use the right tool for the right job. He didn't try to force you to use C++, he just wanted to write a better C, with more features and type safety.
He managed it, and even the C ISO committee admits in its future C1X Charter that:
People like C because it's small and simple. It's totally another philosophy from C++ which deals with many programming concepts under the same hood.
My thoughts exactly. Objective-C++ is what I'm looking at right now.
Using the powerful C++ and those flexible notions of Objective-C for Apple development.