This is really cool. The ability to convert light into energy seems like it could solve the Energy Crisis while doing away with Global Warming at the same time.
But I wonder if this could be the beginning of a dark future, both figuratively and literally. When we've used this technology to construct light-fuelled power plants, I imagine that each plant would be surrounded in shadow, as the light is sucked out of the air. As energy demands increase (as they tend to do as population and technology grow), more light will be used for fuel, and less will be left over for lighting the world, growing crops, &c.
We may end up in a literal Dark Age, a perpetual nighttime. We'll live entirely indoors, as lightproof tunnels are constructed between shielded communities, and scurry beneath an artificial sky, afraid of the night creatures beyond the walls. Let's take this one step at a time, and be very cautious about what we wish for; after all, it might come true. Something to think about.
That's an interesting point. While Linux is historically a little "late" to latch on to bleeding-edge technologies (although DVD support is almost there), due to exactly these types of issues, this is usually pretty acceptable within the target market. Linux exists primarily as a server OS, and the newest flashy hardware is often eschewed in the enterprise in favor of more dependable, proven technologies. Also, in this case, remember that IBM has a big stake in Linux. They will not be likely to abondon Linux.
What I think we can look forward to is a project wherein IBM ports Linux to the BSD license. They could call it "Unlinux," for "Unlinux's Not Linux." I can't even predict what good things we'd see come out of an OS based in Linux technology but with the flexibility of a BSD license.
If this is true, it looks like Moore's Law could have a few years left in it, after all. In a few years, we may end up living in the future!
Imagine a computer small enough to fit in your pocket. Imagine a computer in your car. Imagine a computer in your glasses! It sounds like science fiction, but it looks like IBM is actually seizing the bull by the horns and making it a reality.
It's also interesting that they are doing this in New York. I thought all chip manufacturing was done overseas, where labor is cheaper. Perhaps IBM is getting some sort of government subsidy for creating American jobs. Or maybe New York has a good supply of chipmakers already, so they can find more skilled workers.
Whatever the reason, it's good to see innovation marching along. This is the kind of activity that will get us out of the current recession. Good luck, IBM!
I have considered this problem before. Basically, the time it takes to absorb the meaning of a project from its source code appears to be proportional to the square of the size of the code. This varies somewhat depending on the cleanliness of your design, but is a good rule of thumb.
What that means is, things the size of OpenOffice or Linux or Emacs require a huge time investment to even reach the point where you could spot these kinds of exploits or bugs.
So what's the solution? There are a few. One would be the creation of a business that audits code. They would maintain a database of "approved" code, and users would pay them small subscription fees and get all their code through them. If a user wants something not available in the database, he can submit the code for auditting and be notified when it passes.
Another solution would be a program that utilizes AI algorithms to look through other programs' source code. It would need to identify what a program is supposed to do, and then flag anything that does not contribute to its intended result. It would also need to look out for common exploitable errors, like buffer overflows. You'd Have to Be Truly brilliant to pull off a trojan like this with such a system in place. I wonder why something like this hasn't been written!
I don't mean to be making a "*BSD is Dying" post, but what's the deal? This is the second problem with OpenSSH in a few months, and OpenSSL was exploited just a few days ago.
Is OpenBSD in trouble? More importantly, what are security-conscious people switching to, now that OpenBSD is no longer the fortress it once was?
It is a new-ish slashcode "feature" known as "karma obfuscation." There was a hidden discussion set up to explain it, but it was not archived, so it is lost. Here is sllort's journal on it. He link's to CmdrTaco's journal on the change as well, and also talks about some other recent changes.
As a reliable member of the Slash-Dot community, with my "karma points" well into the "Positive" range, I would like to express my complete satisfaction with my new Sony-Ericsson TI-85 phone.
This baby is "phat." It does voicemail, email, plays online games, and even takes pictures! I have a blast hanging out with my "elite" friends talking about Linux and snapping shots of good times.
I would definitely recommend this product to any of my fellow Slash-Dot enthusiasts. For more information, check out their slick URL at http://www.sony.com. You will be hard pressed to find a better phone for your money. Take it from me, a supporter of Linux and Free Source.
If more people cannot be found to help freedb, it might make sense for people to start switching to cddb. For those not "up to speed" on these things, cddb is a commercial project that is basically designed to be a replacement for freedb. Because they make money from developers who use them for looking up track lists, they can afford to add servers and staff as necessary. Obviously, we'd all prefer to support a free project over a commercial one, but I think this is just a case where the "no cash flow" ideology just isn't going to work. By showing our support for cddb, we can demonstrate that their is money to be made in Free Software offshoots.
Well, back in the olden days, copyright infringement was really rare. Since it was so unusual, people were extra careful to follow the rules. Since then, with the onset of massive piracy rings and P2P networks (I repeat myself), rampant infringement has become something of a fact of life. We've discovered that the accused is guilty 99% of the time, and that the other 1% they are only not guilty thanks to some minor technicality. So while we may be violating the letter of the Constitution, we are maintaining the spirit of the Constitution. If people break the law, they had better be prepared to be treated like the criminals they are.
While I applaud any and all attempts to update the antiquated form of the novel for the modern era, I think it may be a classic case of "too little, too late." When you use the Internet as a medium, you are by necessity targetting the Internet demographic, which can be described as middle class Americans and Western Europeans in the 12-28 age bracket. That means the oldest people in your target audience will have been born when disco was in full swing.
These people came of age in the early 80's. They grew up with cartoons, MTV, hair bands and cocaine. They've been disillusioned, become disillusioned with their disillusionment, and are jaded and cynical as a result. With middle age creeping up on them, they have neither the time nor the desire to sit down and read, whether in a library or on a computer screen.
But is this so terrible? I'd propose that, no, it isn't. Look at what has gone before: we've lost great art forms such as traditional oral storytelling, the inscription of heiroglyphics into stone tablets, papyrus scrolls. The printing press upset the wonderful tradition of books copied and illuminated (illustrated) by monks. Yes, it is sad when traditional and familiar art forms fade away, but it also signifies progress.
We're reaching a point where the sheer amount of information available exceeds the expressive power of the book. Flash, DVD, and video games are the media of the future. This attempt to adapt what is essentially a dying and doomed art form to modern tastes is touching, but ultimately doomed to failure. And while we should (and probably will) all look back fondly on the Book Era, we should not shy from our destiny in the Information Age.
We are on the verge of accomplishing great things for Mankind. This is a time like no other previous, and with all probability like none to come. Let us not be distracted by nostalgia and wistful dreams.
I can't believe people take this stuff seriously. For those who flunked physics (apparently the entire Slashdot readership), I'll spell it out for you.
Gliders cannot fly. Airplanes only go up because their jet engines push off the atmosphere. The wings allow them to glide to conserve fuel. In a pure glider (i.e., a plane with no engines), you can pretty much just slow down your descent, and maneuver a little bit on the way down. Trying to get a sailplane into the stratosphere is going to be about as successful as trying to throw a paper airplane into orbit.
It's basic conservation of energy. The higher you go, the more gravitational potential energy you have. The difference has to come from somewhere, and gliding ain't it.
After the power outages a couple weeks ago (most of Lower Manhattan was affected), it was starting to feel a little too much like California, if you ask me.
Seriously, flywheels are a really cool energy storage technique. They are a little scary when you consider the damage that a giant, heavy disk spinning very quickly could do in the event of a collision, but that is a small price to pay with the cost of energy so high these days.
OpenVMS and RISC-OS in the same article. I think we've met the mention of an obscure operating system quota for today. And barely past noon, at that. Good work, everyone.
Is it just me, or has Science started to seem a little too, oh, I don't know, spammish? It seems like most of the scientific announcements are either hoaxes or have to do with losing weight.
Maybe we're just in a slump, but a lot seems to have changed since the days when Einstein unleashed the power of the atom, Sir Isaac Newton invented gravity, and Archimedes invented the bathtub. These days we just get to look at circus-freak mice with ears on their backs (yuck) and get told that Twinkies (gasp) make you fat.
So, I pose this question to those of you in the [non-Computer] Scientific community: is Science dead? Will it rise again? What will take its place?
Notice how with Free Software we get the security notice and the fix for it at the same time. Thanks to "many eyes," no sooner is a flaw detected than it is patched up! Meanwhile, Micro$oft covers up its security holes and then denies they exist when servers start getting rooted (or Administratored, rather). If there were any justice in the world, Apache would be walking all over IIS, rather than the other way around. This is the kind of thing that keeps me coming back to Linux year after year (I always reserve Good Friday for an "upgrade" to the latest Linux). With Linux on my servers and even my desktop (I find DVD menus distracting, don't play games, and never print in color, so this is acceptible), I know I can always count on being safe, stable, and secure.
This sounds like a rockin' party, but I question if it perhaps sends people the wrong message. The majority of the public are unfamiliar with the EFF and the notion of Free Software.
I remember when I first mentioned Linux to my father, he responded that they'd been losing money...turns out he was referring to LNUX! Suffice it to say that even the more informed members of the public don't yet "get it" regarding electronic freedom.
Which brings us to this party. The EFF needs to demand respect. Would the ACLU, NRA, AARP, or NAACP be putting on a function like this? No. When it comes to lobbyist groups, public image is everything (well, after money, I guess). Linux users and Freedom proponents already tend to be perceived as hackers and pirates, and I don't think we need to add bohemianism (in San Francisco, no less) into the mix. Perhaps a public tennis tournament would be more in order?
Thank you for your comments. You make some excellent points that I wasn't able to touch on in my initial comments. Specifically:
And it's not as if making them recyclable will help. Americans have no taste for recycling or reuse--everything has to be new (just look at the booming sales of new garish SUVs).
This is so true. Recycled vehicles have performed almost as poorly in the marketplace as hybrid cars. Without government and consumer support, American companies are giving people exactly what they demand: bigger, stronger, shinier. And all of it would be impossible without the slave labor they import from Canada and Mexico.
Careful with this project. While it sounds useful, bear in mind that some EULA's may effectively make themselves undistributable to those who don't acquire them by purchasing the product with which they deal.
Also, this may qualify as "aggregation of information with the purpose or potential to circumvent copyright devices," rendering the entire project illegal under the damned DMCA.
IANAL, of course, but can any lawyers out there comment on this?
I am no Luddite. I support the development of nuclear power and human cloning. But weather strikes me as the kind of thing that is just not the kind of thing we should be messing with.
Don't we have more important problems than making sure there's good weather for some sporting event that's 6 years off? Weather is an inconvenience, not a threat. We need to concentrate on using our biological and biotechnological knowledge and research to solve world hunger (by growing so-called "super food" and eliminating pests), stablize primitive nations (using factory-produced soldiers so none of our sons need die), and put an end to child labor (by creating affordable and reliable robotic labor in the world's developing regions).
Never mind the fact that the primitive cultures, and even Christianity (see, e.g., the Bible) often attribute the workings of weather to divinity. The weather is quite literally a phenomenon that occurs in the domain of the Heavens. It was not meant for Man to meddle in the movements of air masses. We may study them, wonder about them, even appreciate their beauty. But when we start to presume that we can control the weather, then we are on the road to our own destruction.
This is getting ridiculous. I am as much a fan of convenience as the next guy, but this expectation that everything should be disposable, and the environment be damned, is completely out of control.
Americans seem to think that the oceans and lands of the world exist as their private dumping grounds. Well, I have news for you. If you weren't filling the world up with your McDonald's wrappers, cigarette butts, plastic trousers, and now cellular telephones, then we would have enough land to deal with the overpopulation problem.
Of course, this falls on deaf ears. America will not be happy until they have driven the civilized world into the ground, and taken themselves along with it.
Just to play the Devil's advocate here, I will propose an analogous practice. Kidnap someone's wife, force her into marriage, rape her, and then give her to someone else when you're finished. When everyone's had enough, she is divorced by the last guy and returned to the first guy. Hey, since only one person does it at a time it must be legal, right? Right?
This stuff is kind of cool to read about, and I definitely think it qualifies as "News for Nerds," so I'm glad to see it here. However, I don't think we will ever see so-called "wearable" computers really take off.
Consider the average computer user, Joe Sixpack. Mr. Sixpack doesn't ask for much out of his 56kbps (or, these days, even DSL or cable) connection. He reads email and checks sports scores through yahoo, types up the annual Christmas newsletter in Word, and maybe plays a few low-intensity games. He is not interested in "augmented reality," and has no reason for wanting any more power than can be had in a $200 generic PC.
I think we've reached the point where personal computers are as powerful as anyone really needs. Mainframes and servers will continue to improve in certain niches (especially as we see more stuff like the Final Fantasy movie (hopefully with that same hot chick from it)), but for the vast majority of desktop users, CPUs in the GHz range and 256MB of memory are more than enough.
Furthermore, people largely feel antagonistic towards their computers. The computer is a tool, a dangerous tool that often fails. People have them for the things (email, the web) that are considered essential in modern life, but they are a necessary evil at best. Yes, there are a few nerds (most of whom are probably reading this site, actually) who express physical love toward their computers, but they are an inconsequential minority. The idea that anyone would want to strap a computer to their face is right out of science fiction, with the emphasis on "fiction."
Like it or not, "wearables" just don't appear to be in our future.
Slashdot Mirror
They make fish in factories now?
Every time I think we've reached the end of human progress, someone comes up with something new.
This is really cool. The ability to convert light into energy seems like it could solve the Energy Crisis while doing away with Global Warming at the same time.
But I wonder if this could be the beginning of a dark future, both figuratively and literally. When we've used this technology to construct light-fuelled power plants, I imagine that each plant would be surrounded in shadow, as the light is sucked out of the air. As energy demands increase (as they tend to do as population and technology grow), more light will be used for fuel, and less will be left over for lighting the world, growing crops, &c.
We may end up in a literal Dark Age, a perpetual nighttime. We'll live entirely indoors, as lightproof tunnels are constructed between shielded communities, and scurry beneath an artificial sky, afraid of the night creatures beyond the walls. Let's take this one step at a time, and be very cautious about what we wish for; after all, it might come true. Something to think about.
That's an interesting point. While Linux is historically a little "late" to latch on to bleeding-edge technologies (although DVD support is almost there), due to exactly these types of issues, this is usually pretty acceptable within the target market. Linux exists primarily as a server OS, and the newest flashy hardware is often eschewed in the enterprise in favor of more dependable, proven technologies. Also, in this case, remember that IBM has a big stake in Linux. They will not be likely to abondon Linux.
What I think we can look forward to is a project wherein IBM ports Linux to the BSD license. They could call it "Unlinux," for "Unlinux's Not Linux." I can't even predict what good things we'd see come out of an OS based in Linux technology but with the flexibility of a BSD license.
If this is true, it looks like Moore's Law could have a few years left in it, after all. In a few years, we may end up living in the future!
Imagine a computer small enough to fit in your pocket. Imagine a computer in your car. Imagine a computer in your glasses! It sounds like science fiction, but it looks like IBM is actually seizing the bull by the horns and making it a reality.
It's also interesting that they are doing this in New York. I thought all chip manufacturing was done overseas, where labor is cheaper. Perhaps IBM is getting some sort of government subsidy for creating American jobs. Or maybe New York has a good supply of chipmakers already, so they can find more skilled workers.
Whatever the reason, it's good to see innovation marching along. This is the kind of activity that will get us out of the current recession. Good luck, IBM!
I have considered this problem before. Basically, the time it takes to absorb the meaning of a project from its source code appears to be proportional to the square of the size of the code. This varies somewhat depending on the cleanliness of your design, but is a good rule of thumb.
What that means is, things the size of OpenOffice or Linux or Emacs require a huge time investment to even reach the point where you could spot these kinds of exploits or bugs.
So what's the solution? There are a few. One would be the creation of a business that audits code. They would maintain a database of "approved" code, and users would pay them small subscription fees and get all their code through them. If a user wants something not available in the database, he can submit the code for auditting and be notified when it passes.
Another solution would be a program that utilizes AI algorithms to look through other programs' source code. It would need to identify what a program is supposed to do, and then flag anything that does not contribute to its intended result. It would also need to look out for common exploitable errors, like buffer overflows. You'd Have to Be Truly brilliant to pull off a trojan like this with such a system in place. I wonder why something like this hasn't been written!
I don't mean to be making a "*BSD is Dying" post, but what's the deal? This is the second problem with OpenSSH in a few months, and OpenSSL was exploited just a few days ago.
Is OpenBSD in trouble? More importantly, what are security-conscious people switching to, now that OpenBSD is no longer the fortress it once was?
It is a new-ish slashcode "feature" known as "karma obfuscation." There was a hidden discussion set up to explain it, but it was not archived, so it is lost. Here is sllort's journal on it. He link's to CmdrTaco's journal on the change as well, and also talks about some other recent changes.
As a reliable member of the Slash-Dot community, with my "karma points" well into the "Positive" range, I would like to express my complete satisfaction with my new Sony-Ericsson TI-85 phone.
This baby is "phat." It does voicemail, email, plays online games, and even takes pictures! I have a blast hanging out with my "elite" friends talking about Linux and snapping shots of good times.
I would definitely recommend this product to any of my fellow Slash-Dot enthusiasts. For more information, check out their slick URL at http://www.sony.com. You will be hard pressed to find a better phone for your money. Take it from me, a supporter of Linux and Free Source.
If more people cannot be found to help freedb, it might make sense for people to start switching to cddb. For those not "up to speed" on these things, cddb is a commercial project that is basically designed to be a replacement for freedb. Because they make money from developers who use them for looking up track lists, they can afford to add servers and staff as necessary. Obviously, we'd all prefer to support a free project over a commercial one, but I think this is just a case where the "no cash flow" ideology just isn't going to work. By showing our support for cddb, we can demonstrate that their is money to be made in Free Software offshoots.
Well, back in the olden days, copyright infringement was really rare. Since it was so unusual, people were extra careful to follow the rules. Since then, with the onset of massive piracy rings and P2P networks (I repeat myself), rampant infringement has become something of a fact of life. We've discovered that the accused is guilty 99% of the time, and that the other 1% they are only not guilty thanks to some minor technicality. So while we may be violating the letter of the Constitution, we are maintaining the spirit of the Constitution. If people break the law, they had better be prepared to be treated like the criminals they are.
While I applaud any and all attempts to update the antiquated form of the novel for the modern era, I think it may be a classic case of "too little, too late." When you use the Internet as a medium, you are by necessity targetting the Internet demographic, which can be described as middle class Americans and Western Europeans in the 12-28 age bracket. That means the oldest people in your target audience will have been born when disco was in full swing.
These people came of age in the early 80's. They grew up with cartoons, MTV, hair bands and cocaine. They've been disillusioned, become disillusioned with their disillusionment, and are jaded and cynical as a result. With middle age creeping up on them, they have neither the time nor the desire to sit down and read, whether in a library or on a computer screen.
But is this so terrible? I'd propose that, no, it isn't. Look at what has gone before: we've lost great art forms such as traditional oral storytelling, the inscription of heiroglyphics into stone tablets, papyrus scrolls. The printing press upset the wonderful tradition of books copied and illuminated (illustrated) by monks. Yes, it is sad when traditional and familiar art forms fade away, but it also signifies progress.
We're reaching a point where the sheer amount of information available exceeds the expressive power of the book. Flash, DVD, and video games are the media of the future. This attempt to adapt what is essentially a dying and doomed art form to modern tastes is touching, but ultimately doomed to failure. And while we should (and probably will) all look back fondly on the Book Era, we should not shy from our destiny in the Information Age.
We are on the verge of accomplishing great things for Mankind. This is a time like no other previous, and with all probability like none to come. Let us not be distracted by nostalgia and wistful dreams.
I can't believe people take this stuff seriously. For those who flunked physics (apparently the entire Slashdot readership), I'll spell it out for you.
Gliders cannot fly. Airplanes only go up because their jet engines push off the atmosphere. The wings allow them to glide to conserve fuel. In a pure glider (i.e., a plane with no engines), you can pretty much just slow down your descent, and maneuver a little bit on the way down. Trying to get a sailplane into the stratosphere is going to be about as successful as trying to throw a paper airplane into orbit.
It's basic conservation of energy. The higher you go, the more gravitational potential energy you have. The difference has to come from somewhere, and gliding ain't it.
After the power outages a couple weeks ago (most of Lower Manhattan was affected), it was starting to feel a little too much like California, if you ask me.
Seriously, flywheels are a really cool energy storage technique. They are a little scary when you consider the damage that a giant, heavy disk spinning very quickly could do in the event of a collision, but that is a small price to pay with the cost of energy so high these days.
When can I get one in my car?
OpenVMS and RISC-OS in the same article. I think we've met the mention of an obscure operating system quota for today. And barely past noon, at that. Good work, everyone.
That'll teach those bastards. I'm going to start copy protecting my CD's, too. Two can play at this game.
Is it just me, or has Science started to seem a little too, oh, I don't know, spammish? It seems like most of the scientific announcements are either hoaxes or have to do with losing weight.
Maybe we're just in a slump, but a lot seems to have changed since the days when Einstein unleashed the power of the atom, Sir Isaac Newton invented gravity, and Archimedes invented the bathtub. These days we just get to look at circus-freak mice with ears on their backs (yuck) and get told that Twinkies (gasp) make you fat.
So, I pose this question to those of you in the [non-Computer] Scientific community: is Science dead? Will it rise again? What will take its place?
Notice how with Free Software we get the security notice and the fix for it at the same time. Thanks to "many eyes," no sooner is a flaw detected than it is patched up! Meanwhile, Micro$oft covers up its security holes and then denies they exist when servers start getting rooted (or Administratored, rather). If there were any justice in the world, Apache would be walking all over IIS, rather than the other way around. This is the kind of thing that keeps me coming back to Linux year after year (I always reserve Good Friday for an "upgrade" to the latest Linux). With Linux on my servers and even my desktop (I find DVD menus distracting, don't play games, and never print in color, so this is acceptible), I know I can always count on being safe, stable, and secure.
As I always say, Linux for serving, OpenBSD for firewalling and Mac OS X for when you got to get things done.
Assuming by "serving" you mean "applying kernel patches," and by "getting things done" you mean "waiting for windows to render."
This sounds like a rockin' party, but I question if it perhaps sends people the wrong message. The majority of the public are unfamiliar with the EFF and the notion of Free Software.
I remember when I first mentioned Linux to my father, he responded that they'd been losing money...turns out he was referring to LNUX! Suffice it to say that even the more informed members of the public don't yet "get it" regarding electronic freedom.
Which brings us to this party. The EFF needs to demand respect. Would the ACLU, NRA, AARP, or NAACP be putting on a function like this? No. When it comes to lobbyist groups, public image is everything (well, after money, I guess). Linux users and Freedom proponents already tend to be perceived as hackers and pirates, and I don't think we need to add bohemianism (in San Francisco, no less) into the mix. Perhaps a public tennis tournament would be more in order?
Thank you for your comments. You make some excellent points that I wasn't able to touch on in my initial comments. Specifically:
And it's not as if making them recyclable will help. Americans have no taste for recycling or reuse--everything has to be new (just look at the booming sales of new garish SUVs).
This is so true. Recycled vehicles have performed almost as poorly in the marketplace as hybrid cars. Without government and consumer support, American companies are giving people exactly what they demand: bigger, stronger, shinier. And all of it would be impossible without the slave labor they import from Canada and Mexico.
Careful with this project. While it sounds useful, bear in mind that some EULA's may effectively make themselves undistributable to those who don't acquire them by purchasing the product with which they deal.
Also, this may qualify as "aggregation of information with the purpose or potential to circumvent copyright devices," rendering the entire project illegal under the damned DMCA.
IANAL, of course, but can any lawyers out there comment on this?
I am no Luddite. I support the development of nuclear power and human cloning. But weather strikes me as the kind of thing that is just not the kind of thing we should be messing with.
Don't we have more important problems than making sure there's good weather for some sporting event that's 6 years off? Weather is an inconvenience, not a threat. We need to concentrate on using our biological and biotechnological knowledge and research to solve world hunger (by growing so-called "super food" and eliminating pests), stablize primitive nations (using factory-produced soldiers so none of our sons need die), and put an end to child labor (by creating affordable and reliable robotic labor in the world's developing regions).
Never mind the fact that the primitive cultures, and even Christianity (see, e.g., the Bible) often attribute the workings of weather to divinity. The weather is quite literally a phenomenon that occurs in the domain of the Heavens. It was not meant for Man to meddle in the movements of air masses. We may study them, wonder about them, even appreciate their beauty. But when we start to presume that we can control the weather, then we are on the road to our own destruction.
This is getting ridiculous. I am as much a fan of convenience as the next guy, but this expectation that everything should be disposable, and the environment be damned, is completely out of control.
Americans seem to think that the oceans and lands of the world exist as their private dumping grounds. Well, I have news for you. If you weren't filling the world up with your McDonald's wrappers, cigarette butts, plastic trousers, and now cellular telephones, then we would have enough land to deal with the overpopulation problem.
Of course, this falls on deaf ears. America will not be happy until they have driven the civilized world into the ground, and taken themselves along with it.
Just to play the Devil's advocate here, I will propose an analogous practice. Kidnap someone's wife, force her into marriage, rape her, and then give her to someone else when you're finished. When everyone's had enough, she is divorced by the last guy and returned to the first guy. Hey, since only one person does it at a time it must be legal, right? Right?
This stuff is kind of cool to read about, and I definitely think it qualifies as "News for Nerds," so I'm glad to see it here. However, I don't think we will ever see so-called "wearable" computers really take off.
Consider the average computer user, Joe Sixpack. Mr. Sixpack doesn't ask for much out of his 56kbps (or, these days, even DSL or cable) connection. He reads email and checks sports scores through yahoo, types up the annual Christmas newsletter in Word, and maybe plays a few low-intensity games. He is not interested in "augmented reality," and has no reason for wanting any more power than can be had in a $200 generic PC.
I think we've reached the point where personal computers are as powerful as anyone really needs. Mainframes and servers will continue to improve in certain niches (especially as we see more stuff like the Final Fantasy movie (hopefully with that same hot chick from it)), but for the vast majority of desktop users, CPUs in the GHz range and 256MB of memory are more than enough.
Furthermore, people largely feel antagonistic towards their computers. The computer is a tool, a dangerous tool that often fails. People have them for the things (email, the web) that are considered essential in modern life, but they are a necessary evil at best. Yes, there are a few nerds (most of whom are probably reading this site, actually) who express physical love toward their computers, but they are an inconsequential minority. The idea that anyone would want to strap a computer to their face is right out of science fiction, with the emphasis on "fiction."
Like it or not, "wearables" just don't appear to be in our future.