"When a distinguished but elderly scientist states that something is possible, he is almost certainly right. When he states that something is impossible, he is very probably wrong." -- Arthur Clarke;-)
Not saying you're elderly (leaving "distinguished" aside for the nonce)... but suggest that there is not enough information for immediate acceptance or dismissal of the claim. That they have gotten this far -- I'll pay attention for a while, anyway.
"Of the approximately 5 million terabytes of information out in the world, only about 170 terabytes have been indexed, he (Schmidt) said earlier during his speech."
So... how many terrabytes of info will be produced in the next 300 years, and does anyone really think that Google (and anyone, or everyone) could keep up?
Especially, once all 20 billion people who live in the Solar System are video-documenting every moment of their existence...
AOL didn't even get you ON the Internet until they got scared by a couple of years of explosive dial-up growth. And it did so poorly, even then... I think it was 1997.
The growth of the Internet terrified AOL. It forced them to go to "unlimited" dial-up. They were lucky to keep up long enough to stay at the top for a few short years.
I think I'm perplexed. A lengthy thread on slashdot about robots interacting with humans without a single mention of Asimov, the Three Laws, Susan Calvin, "positronics,"...
What the hell?
Anyway, many of the robot stories were really great thought experiments in the kinds of programming dilemmas that would (or will) come up when robots are sufficiently complex that they can be used in situations that require value judgments. We aren't close to that now (simulations notwithstanding.)
In Asimov's world there was a long buildup to mainframes that essentially ran the world... that then designed computers, robots and technology (can't remember what the Asimovian hyperdrive was called) that were beyond the understanding of most humans, other than as "users."
Sort of like now, on a vastly bigger and more complex scale.;-)
I don't think Tiger Woods would have any more luck than *I* would have had against Microsoft... with 20-20 hindsight, I should have made it a class action suit.
have no one to blame but themselves.
They should have OWNED online classified. A lot of people told them so, and even told them how to do it, back in 1994-1996. But classified advertising was a huge cash cow, and newspaper/media companies thought that they could continue to produce 25-30 percent margins forever by not changing other than by consolidation.
Many of them thought there was more money in becoming virtual ISPs, since that was free money. (We'll do the marketing, you provide the network, we get half.)
It was one of the more stunning missed opportunities of the era, IMO.
It's 12:10 a.m. on Monday, and I really, really, really hate you.
Posting an addictive game to/.... there's a very special place in hell withyour login already entered.
I don't know I anyone personally who has ever bought a ringtone.
The first time I ever read that ringtones were a billion-dollar business, I was sure it was a joke or a typo.
So... I'm guessing... well, it could be that a few really rich stupid people, ummm... bought a few hundred million ring tones apiece, and we're fooled into thinking that it's a big market?
Why...
does everyone assume that we need incumbent cell phone companies and proprietary networks and phones for wireless voice?
I'm enjoying using a wifi handheld for voice in lots of places, free...
WiMAX, or something like it, changes the game, when combined with VOIP. 'sallreadyhappening.
I dumped my pda for a cell phone with pda features... and I expect to dump my cell phone for a PDA again. VOIP and reasonably ubiquitous wireless broadband will make that the way to go, for me. GPRS, 3G, etc. aren't going to cut it... I'm counting on wifi, WiMAX, etc. to mature in the next two years so that it will be reasonably convenient to carry a decent pda and use a softphone...
Sure, I'll be buying bandwidth from someone... but it might not be from an ILEC or a cellco.:-)
I used to run a heavily trafficked ISP site with a searchbox (various services, including Google, used at different times)... some people might be astonished at how many users would use, say, Google, and type in "yahoo.com" (No. 1, as I recall.)
Seeds of this were planted quite some time ago. I noticed when I was first annoyed by the fact that, in Office 2000, if you choose to save a document as html, you get -- presto! xml instead of the crud html that Word 97 produced.
(No, I don't use Office to produce web documents. But it's occasionally useful as a shortcut when you're STARTING with material originally produced with Office to save it as html and then do a couple of search-and-destroys and search-and-replaces.)
Slashdot Mirror
"When a distinguished but elderly scientist states that something is possible, he is almost certainly right. When he states that something is impossible, he is very probably wrong." -- Arthur Clarke ;-)
Not saying you're elderly (leaving "distinguished" aside for the nonce) ... but suggest that there is not enough information for immediate acceptance or dismissal of the claim. That they have gotten this far -- I'll pay attention for a while, anyway.
"Of the approximately 5 million terabytes of information out in the world, only about 170 terabytes have been indexed, he (Schmidt) said earlier during his speech."
So ... how many terrabytes of info will be produced in the next 300 years, and does anyone really think that Google (and anyone, or everyone) could keep up?
Especially, once all 20 billion people who live in the Solar System are video-documenting every moment of their existence ...
OK, so I project and exaggerate ...
How about "We are the World" ...
AOL didn't even get you ON the Internet until they got scared by a couple of years of explosive dial-up growth. And it did so poorly, even then ... I think it was 1997.
The growth of the Internet terrified AOL. It forced them to go to "unlimited" dial-up. They were lucky to keep up long enough to stay at the top for a few short years.
I think I'm perplexed. A lengthy thread on slashdot about robots interacting with humans without a single mention of Asimov, the Three Laws, Susan Calvin, "positronics," ...
What the hell?
Anyway, many of the robot stories were really great thought experiments in the kinds of programming dilemmas that would (or will) come up when robots are sufficiently complex that they can be used in situations that require value judgments. We aren't close to that now (simulations notwithstanding.)
In Asimov's world there was a long buildup to mainframes that essentially ran the world ... that then designed computers, robots and technology (can't remember what the Asimovian hyperdrive was called) that were beyond the understanding of most humans, other than as "users."
Sort of like now, on a vastly bigger and more complex scale. ;-)
How's the public library?
-Bob
have no one to blame but themselves. They should have OWNED online classified. A lot of people told them so, and even told them how to do it, back in 1994-1996. But classified advertising was a huge cash cow, and newspaper/media companies thought that they could continue to produce 25-30 percent margins forever by not changing other than by consolidation. Many of them thought there was more money in becoming virtual ISPs, since that was free money. (We'll do the marketing, you provide the network, we get half.) It was one of the more stunning missed opportunities of the era, IMO.
It's 12:10 a.m. on Monday, and I really, really, really hate you. Posting an addictive game to /. ... there's a very special place in hell withyour login already entered.
I don't know I anyone personally who has ever bought a ringtone. The first time I ever read that ringtones were a billion-dollar business, I was sure it was a joke or a typo. So ... I'm guessing ... well, it could be that a few really rich stupid people, ummm ... bought a few hundred million ring tones apiece, and we're fooled into thinking that it's a big market?
"Excuse me, I have to go charge up my belt buckle ..."
BeWARE, dammit. Time for a new username.
Why ...
does everyone assume that we need incumbent cell phone companies and proprietary networks and phones for wireless voice?
I'm enjoying using a wifi handheld for voice in lots of places, free ...
WiMAX, or something like it, changes the game, when combined with VOIP. 'sallreadyhappening.
Years ago, I used to fill out bob@bob.com ...
...
...
for everything. I found out later that Microsoft owned bob.com.
Remember Microsoft Bob? aaaaiiiieeee
Anyway, MS no longer owns bob.com. I would have thought that would have been a nice one to hold on to
Sure, I'll be buying bandwidth from someone ... but it might not be from an ILEC or a cellco. :-)
I used to run a heavily trafficked ISP site with a searchbox (various services, including Google, used at different times) ... some people might be astonished at how many users would use, say, Google, and type in "yahoo.com" (No. 1, as I recall.)
(No, I don't use Office to produce web documents. But it's occasionally useful as a shortcut when you're STARTING with material originally produced with Office to save it as html and then do a couple of search-and-destroys and search-and-replaces.)