The question is if sitting causes problems or a sedentary positiin in general. Sitting is not natural while standing, walking and lying is (esp. when sleeping)
My point is that the genomic argument isn't relevant for addressing the objection that the brain is a system too complex to describe in any amount of code.
Even referencing the genome weakens the argument if you're using it to describe complexity. The genome is more of a bootstrap code than it is a descriptor of the system itself.
It actually strengthens the argument because ancient non-sentient cell biology plus the limited genomic seed instructions yield the brain, the consciousness and you. This is simplification, and Kurzweil simplifies too. The alternative to simplification is to simulate the scientific discoveries one by one so the prediction is based on facts. But then it would no longer be a prediction, as simulated discovery is indistinguishable from a real one.
I mentioned the genome in a completely different context. I presented a number of arguments as to why the design of the brain is not as complex as some theorists have advocated. This is to respond to the notion that it would require trillions of lines of code to create a comparable system. The argument from the amount of information in the genome is one of several such arguments. It is not a proposed strategy for accomplishing reverse-engineering. It is an argument from information theory, which Myers obviously does not understand.
Well, frankly, I don't understand it either.
That much is obvious, so you have concluded your empty rant with an ad hominem on Kurzweil.
You will not understand something you don't want, but here is a challenge.
Imagine that we do not understand how rainbows work, but we can see them. They are so wonderful and complex, lots of colors, geometric shapes, billions of droplets just working together perfectly. Folks like you will say it will never be duplicated by humans. Then we learn that the manufacturing of a suitable rainbow sprinkler can be described on one page. This is significant as it replaces the notion that God placed those droplets just perfectly with the empowerment that maybe one day we can make a rainbow sprinkler ourselves.
Imagine that in the age of relay computers, an alien civilization gave scientists a detailed floorplan of a modern microprocessor.
While scientists of that age would not have been able to immediately understand it in its entirety, they would feel that it contains sufficient information to build it once the underlying fabrication technology is available.
Now we know the brain's fabrication technology is available, because it apparently works well enough.
Those scientists would not scream that they need electron simulators at an atomic level etc. but they would sit down and reverse engineer the thing in ever finer details.
1. take one of Kurzweil's statements out of context 2. build a strawman around it 3. attack the strawman 4. profit!
But to no avail, as the truth remains: even though the brain is remarkably complex, its design is coded in a very compact manner. It's true that to actually execute that compact code on a computer needs a "virtual machine" to simulate biochemistry (whether it's feasible or not), but it's obvious.
For those asking how it is an improvement over a touchscreen: There can be a ratio of finger movement vs. cursor movement, that is, a mid-air keyboard can be made much larger than an on-screen keyboard.
I don't know, what can you do with Win7 and Office 2010 that you couldn't do with WinXP and Office 2000? What new improvements in productivity do you gain from them? How did they lower your other costs (e.g. hardware)?
Workable desktop search. Unlike Google Desktop Search, it handles partial words and characters with accents well, and is more seamlessly and pervasively integrated, and results are better presented. While a little slower, it's just better period. This alone is worth the upgrade for those using desktop search.
I never fathom how folks can consider Google Docs a competitor to Office. It's like toy prototype software or at best, abandonware. It also amazes me how they can't make better software. With HTML5, the new JS engines etc. and Google Gears caching it would be possible to make an online Office competitor such that it would have desktop software quality, features and responsiveness.
For the record: if I had the choice, MS would not be in business for their anti-competitive behavior, I support Google, and never use Bing or even Yahoo.
Having RTFA it is curious that he is involved with Nokia. Why does the CTO of a large handset maker helps out an emerging large handset provider and its handset making subcontractor, i.e. its competitors?
Same here with not using a wristwatch. But if it had some new uses, I'd reconsider. For example, it could monitor your pulse and call ambulance if a sudden cardiac death occurs to you, or it could selectively and unobtrusively project information to you at a meeting, or act as a touchless payment form. Useful computing has continuously come closer to our body, and a wrist computer or a retina-display and a bluetooth headset is closer to us than a phone with a 3" screen in the pocket.
YOU generate the hype - you clicked on the article, and even added a comment. (OK so did I.) Your last sentence is also applicable to your post. (OK so it is to mine.)
Minority vote: I scanned the responses which show an overwhelming disapproval. On the other hand it occurs to me that such a feature, which would monitor my activity on a web page would be useful as it would allow fine-tuning the web page, learning on the content creator 's part as to what people find interesting or useful. We already give away info by clicking on links and measuring how long we stay on a page. It is also a pain to see web content chopped up to small pieces just to increase hit numbers or better understand user behavior. So there is this general concept that understanding behavior is cool, and a current misunderstanding that the granularity allowed for this is one HTML page. It is OK for the privacy concerned that inter-page activity is analyzed, but intra-page is a big no-no. This is an arbitrary threshold. In fact, there is the vision that better, more complete pages are encouraged by measuring a lot of intra-page activities. Scrolling behavior, spent time on sections of the page, based on scrolling behavior or cursor behavior. In fact eye tracking would be an awesome indicator. Before any uproar let me suggest that those privacy buffs should remember that you already give this information not only at the level of HTML page visits, but also when you visit a physical shop. So I applaud this development as one more step toward providing feedback between content creator and user. I might spontaneously highlight passages that are interesting or being read. Others may paste in a copybook. No big loss of privacy.
Some might find it useful to know about different signaling mechanisms.
There are electrical neural connections called gap junctions. These do not transmit signals through neurotransmitters.
Also, what is described by the parent as the impulse propagation mechanism is true when the axon is not myelinated.
Why limit the number of investigators to a few? Just to exclude the one who committed the crime? Then mix it in some massively multiplayer game without telling gamers they solve real crimes... or do some existing MMO games already do this?
Why? Just to go to the local landfill and leave the antiquated Imperial system there. Wikipedia: "Only three nations have not officially adopted the International System of Units as their primary or sole system of measurement: Burma, Liberia, and the United States."
If the average life expectancy increased while it stagnated for some, then those who have benefited from the increase to life expectancy have experienced a higher increase to life expectancy than what the average increase suggests. How can it be anything other than good news?
Slashdot Mirror
Wrong. You forget the effect of planet rotation speed. So maybe he can be 400lbs or more.
The question is if sitting causes problems or a sedentary positiin in general. Sitting is not natural while standing, walking and lying is (esp. when sleeping)
Maybe you can evwn generate electricity.
It's called incremental search and was introduced in the emacs text editor decades ago.
A better invention would be to return relevant search results.
My point is that the genomic argument isn't relevant for addressing the objection that the brain is a system too complex to describe in any amount of code.
Even referencing the genome weakens the argument if you're using it to describe complexity. The genome is more of a bootstrap code than it is a descriptor of the system itself.
It actually strengthens the argument because ancient non-sentient cell biology plus the limited genomic seed instructions yield the brain, the consciousness and you. This is simplification, and Kurzweil simplifies too. The alternative to simplification is to simulate the scientific discoveries one by one so the prediction is based on facts. But then it would no longer be a prediction, as simulated discovery is indistinguishable from a real one.
I mentioned the genome in a completely different context. I presented a number of arguments as to why the design of the brain is not as complex as some theorists have advocated. This is to respond to the notion that it would require trillions of lines of code to create a comparable system. The argument from the amount of information in the genome is one of several such arguments. It is not a proposed strategy for accomplishing reverse-engineering. It is an argument from information theory, which Myers obviously does not understand.
Well, frankly, I don't understand it either.
That much is obvious, so you have concluded your empty rant with an ad hominem on Kurzweil.
You will not understand something you don't want, but here is a challenge.
Imagine that we do not understand how rainbows work, but we can see them. They are so wonderful and complex, lots of colors, geometric shapes, billions of droplets just working together perfectly. Folks like you will say it will never be duplicated by humans. Then we learn that the manufacturing of a suitable rainbow sprinkler can be described on one page. This is significant as it replaces the notion that God placed those droplets just perfectly with the empowerment that maybe one day we can make a rainbow sprinkler ourselves.
You will still not get it but others might.
Imagine that in the age of relay computers, an alien civilization gave scientists a detailed floorplan of a modern microprocessor.
While scientists of that age would not have been able to immediately understand it in its entirety, they would feel that it contains sufficient information to build it once the underlying fabrication technology is available.
Now we know the brain's fabrication technology is available, because it apparently works well enough.
Those scientists would not scream that they need electron simulators at an atomic level etc. but they would sit down and reverse engineer the thing in ever finer details.
All that learning and development is being carried out by the same cellular machinery with the same genes...
(although aneuploidy etc. provide variation at the epigenetic level)
Kurzweil does not claim 10 years.
His "critic" used the following steps:
1. take one of Kurzweil's statements out of context
2. build a strawman around it
3. attack the strawman
4. profit!
But to no avail, as the truth remains: even though the brain is remarkably complex, its design is coded in a very compact manner. It's true that to actually execute that compact code on a computer needs a "virtual machine" to simulate biochemistry (whether it's feasible or not), but it's obvious.
Maybe they just told everyone that the WiFi is off as a control experiment.
1023
For those asking how it is an improvement over a touchscreen: There can be a ratio of finger movement vs. cursor movement, that is, a mid-air keyboard can be made much larger than an on-screen keyboard.
I don't know, what can you do with Win7 and Office 2010 that you couldn't do with WinXP and Office 2000? What new improvements in productivity do you gain from them? How did they lower your other costs (e.g. hardware)?
Workable desktop search. Unlike Google Desktop Search, it handles partial words and characters with accents well, and is more seamlessly and pervasively integrated, and results are better presented. While a little slower, it's just better period. This alone is worth the upgrade for those using desktop search. I never fathom how folks can consider Google Docs a competitor to Office. It's like toy prototype software or at best, abandonware. It also amazes me how they can't make better software. With HTML5, the new JS engines etc. and Google Gears caching it would be possible to make an online Office competitor such that it would have desktop software quality, features and responsiveness. For the record: if I had the choice, MS would not be in business for their anti-competitive behavior, I support Google, and never use Bing or even Yahoo.
I don't think it's just about weight.
Right, there is the issue of smell, stickiness and heavy breathing too.
We get nearer ambient computing where maybe we buy granular stuff by the pound and spread it on things.
Having RTFA it is curious that he is involved with Nokia. Why does the CTO of a large handset maker helps out an emerging large handset provider and its handset making subcontractor, i.e. its competitors?
Same here with not using a wristwatch. But if it had some new uses, I'd reconsider. For example, it could monitor your pulse and call ambulance if a sudden cardiac death occurs to you, or it could selectively and unobtrusively project information to you at a meeting, or act as a touchless payment form. Useful computing has continuously come closer to our body, and a wrist computer or a retina-display and a bluetooth headset is closer to us than a phone with a 3" screen in the pocket.
YOU generate the hype - you clicked on the article, and even added a comment. (OK so did I.) Your last sentence is also applicable to your post. (OK so it is to mine.)
If you have five different bosses, you have none. You are the boss.
Minority vote: I scanned the responses which show an overwhelming disapproval. On the other hand it occurs to me that such a feature, which would monitor my activity on a web page would be useful as it would allow fine-tuning the web page, learning on the content creator 's part as to what people find interesting or useful. We already give away info by clicking on links and measuring how long we stay on a page. It is also a pain to see web content chopped up to small pieces just to increase hit numbers or better understand user behavior. So there is this general concept that understanding behavior is cool, and a current misunderstanding that the granularity allowed for this is one HTML page. It is OK for the privacy concerned that inter-page activity is analyzed, but intra-page is a big no-no. This is an arbitrary threshold. In fact, there is the vision that better, more complete pages are encouraged by measuring a lot of intra-page activities. Scrolling behavior, spent time on sections of the page, based on scrolling behavior or cursor behavior. In fact eye tracking would be an awesome indicator. Before any uproar let me suggest that those privacy buffs should remember that you already give this information not only at the level of HTML page visits, but also when you visit a physical shop. So I applaud this development as one more step toward providing feedback between content creator and user. I might spontaneously highlight passages that are interesting or being read. Others may paste in a copybook. No big loss of privacy.
Some might find it useful to know about different signaling mechanisms. There are electrical neural connections called gap junctions. These do not transmit signals through neurotransmitters. Also, what is described by the parent as the impulse propagation mechanism is true when the axon is not myelinated.
Why limit the number of investigators to a few? Just to exclude the one who committed the crime? Then mix it in some massively multiplayer game without telling gamers they solve real crimes ... or do some existing MMO games already do this?
Why? Just to go to the local landfill and leave the antiquated Imperial system there. Wikipedia: "Only three nations have not officially adopted the International System of Units as their primary or sole system of measurement: Burma, Liberia, and the United States."
If the average life expectancy increased while it stagnated for some, then those who have benefited from the increase to life expectancy have experienced a higher increase to life expectancy than what the average increase suggests. How can it be anything other than good news?