Isotropically pure Si-28 will not solve all of your problems. In fac, this will not extend the date beyond my estimation of 20 years. This isotope of Silicon addresses issues of heat distribution, but does not deal with the lithographic process. You can only produce an electrical conduit so small, and then it's use becomes moot. When you start to go lower than.1 microns, the quantum effects of electrons can be seen. An electron begins to tunnel, and a high enough fraction of your electrons will escape that the refinement of the process will have been academic.
These "theoretical maximums" you speak have only been postponed. We can only refine the lithographic process so much before it becomes too expensive or too complicated. I do not think we can do much with exotic chips either, though. If it weren't for the complexity of setting up a molecular computation, and its lack of diversity, or the difficulty in producing the utter vacuum nessecary for quantum computing, these methods would be the most appealing.
As to the validity of my point, it doesn't exist. In fact this post is mostly an off topic rant about my anger that we don't live in a world filled with bacterial computers as promised by AmSci when I was growing up.
I didn't say what I meant clearly. I do not mean that we would be using another processing medium if it weren't for corporations like Intel. I merely say that it is important to start looking for a solution that will replace silicon when it is no longer as able as we would need. For the most part, this is because we are stuck in silicon. Its cheap, relatively, to produce a silicon chip. Why blow a good thing, eh? Invest billions in researching a medium that could kill them, or spend that money to push the bottom line?
Silicon has 20 years, tops. In 20 years, the industrial revolution that is sweeping the world will hopefully be over. Then even the average citizen of the second and third world nations may have computers. but if the entire system is based on Silicon, then the cost of everyone replacing their system would astronomical. In addition, if the new method would be incompatible with Silicon processing, then these people would be isolated by their socioeconomic status once again. and if there is some way discovered to interface the two, speed of the better will surely be compromised by that of the relatively anachronistic Silicon.
worst case scenario: Mad Max meets Bill Gates best case scenario: Mad Max kills Bill Gates
There is only so much that you can work with, before you need to start throwing out the old paradigm. Silicon is dying so countless engineers develop life support for it, while claiming that things are fine.
Parallel computing, genetic algorithms, and this will not solve the problem. they will only prolong the world's suffering to a time when people will have become used to Big Silicon. Then all of the Wunderkinds of the Valley will be too old to execute for gross negligence.
While this appears to be a good idea, we must understand that we can not grow too secure in silicon. When you get below.1 micron, you can't outrun the quantum boogeyman. Minimize, dis-consolidize, but realize that our future is not that of Silicon.
One must wonder if this is a good thing, as Martha stewart would say, or something wholly evil. Apple has not exactly been good on patents, if you will recall the ALTO and such, so it is possible that this man will be equally evil in some position of power.
I think in matters of patents, that there should be an elected commitee to deal with disputes. such as the ICANN @Large program, it would be interesting to see an internet process for the US Patent Office so that we can put an end to the Patent Whores.
Quite hardly. Currently, our civilization is a Type 0 civilization. We have not met enough of the criteria to be considered a global, or Type 1, civilization. Not to mention the fact that even after we master the planet, we will still have 2 more phases to go through.
What is this obsesion with replicating a PC to a T, but making it portable? The PC was not designed for being hauled around. It's hard drives are fragile, it's monitors either too big or too expensive, and the keyboard and mouse are not a free floating interface. So what have these engineers done? They have adapted an existing design. This is where they go wrong.
I propose an alternate style. If computers are truly going to be used for information purposes, a visual interface will not be needed. Instead, development of speech recognition and speech production engines should be concentrated on. Microphones and speakers are commonly shrunk to incredibly small sizes. So wouldn't an accurate voice synthesizer, one that doesn't sound like a whino with vomit stuck in his throat, provide the interface nessecary for information exchange? The only obstructionsI can see, is the development of an operating system that synchronizes the GUI and CLI, and can portray the content accurately to the user. The only problem is the lack of an intelligent interface.
It would be required that the device become easy to use by the common man, it would be required that the device not be noticable, and it would be required that the device be accurate.
Short of getting Jane from the Ender series, though, will we see this? I would hope so. My dream is to see a country wired for a system of wireless computing. Rather than have one computer for each person, have one cluster for all persons. Tap into the system anywhere it is available, and you should have the same data access.
Let it be known, that this will be the future. In cities such as Arcosanti, this kind of technology will be easy to implement from the start. There is no reason that we should not begin to seek an organic computing experience. An integrated, and seamless experience. Let us do it! Let ours be the Alpha of remote computing, not the Omega!
You forget that there are many different sized asteroids. Provided enough velocity and shielding, even a rock the size of my head could devastate the world. Of course my head would have to be travelling close to the speed of light, but... Anyways, a small or medium sized asteroid could be harnessed as a weapon. We are not talking about droping Ceres into Earth orbit, merely a smaller asteroid.
But if the effort of snagging an asteroid from the Belt, then I suppose you could construct an artificial one with some moon dust and the water on Mars. Yeah. Sure.
Planetfall is much more appealing tactically, then a nuclear weapon is. If you nuke a city, you make the area radioactive. In addition, those who survive face lukemia and other various defects. If you drop a small asteroid on the capital, you kill the people in the area, but damage is constrained to the center of attack. Thus, your troops can be waiting relatively close by for the final tactical strike to seize the ground. As too the morality of human kind, we need not look further than Mr. Truman. To prevent the deaths of American soldiers, he killed Japanese civilians. I do not doubt that this weapon will be used. I know it.
I must wonder when a asteroid will first be used in war. With 900 near earth objects, you could decimate the world. the saddest thing, is that the technology is being developed to propel clectial objects with their own content as the fuel. Redirect an asteroid for Washington DC, Chicago, and LA and you could run your ground troops in to sweep up while the chaos ensues. While this may not be as effective in the US, a small nation would easily be taken by this method.
That is correct, but then you wasted a few million dollars on a fancy show for amateur astronomers. In addition, whilst the sattelite remains in operational limbo, it is a target for space debris. And if it is hit, then more debris is created. Also, if the sattelite is constructed imporperly, or properly depending on your view, it could cause damage when it deorbits. There have been 3 incidents now where space debris in the form of red hot shrapnel, has scattered across a town filled with people. We got lucky when Skylab landed in the outback. It could have been a lot worse.
I really don't understand. Isn't the purpose behind an open-source project to develop the best possible product based on community involvement? Is it possible, gasp, for an open-source project to be ignored by the people? Then, what makes it better than a closed-source solution? Bah. Who cares. I just want more DOS abandonware!
I would be fine with getting something for free, rgeardless of whether it is "crippled." Your analogy is flawed though. If the hood of a car is welded shut, it would take a torch to open it up. Without doing so, the car would be useless as soon as it came time for your first oil change. The use of software is in no way impeded by keeping the source closed. If you have a problem with closed-source software, write your own open-source alternative or shut up.
Besides, Star Office deserves to have it's hood welded shut. I want to see it's pistons seize and it's engine blow as soon as possible.
Art Bell is no longer host of Coast to Coast AM. He retired, and the show was taken over by Mike Siegel. Even still, I would get the ACLU and sue the DMV. Unlawful search and seizure ring a Bell?
After AOL released paersonal information on that gay sailor to the US Navy, I just assumed that the US ISPs respected everyone's privacy. Utter anonymity can be both a gift and a curse. For the part, it is a mechanism for people to speak out without the fear of being recognized. Unfortunately, as we have seen here on Slashdot, it also allows people to antagonize others and can lead to crimes being perpetrated upon the people.
Of course, I bet Sealand has the best privacy of all nations.
Attach an inflatable aeroshell to expensive sattelites that have been abandoned, and deorbit them. We need to start salvaging defunct craft, instead of letting them clog up the heavens.
If you notice, the Earth now has a ring similar to that of Saturn. With all this debris, finding an affordable commercial space solution will not be the only problem. It would be no good to see Titanic revisited. Just as icebergs are a problem at the turn of the century, space debris will be a problem during this century.
You are quite correct. The male of our species does spread his seed to the wind just like the dandelion. I was thinking more in terms of the female's role in reproduction, though. Even still, my metaphor was flawed.
The most effective solar sail we could produce would be one made with a carbon composite. It would be very tough, yet not very dense at all. NASA intends to test one in a few years.
And this frightens me more than anything else. Embracing the technologically superior caused the destruction of the South American cultures. When those of white skin came in on wings of white, they were mistaken for Gods. Instead, they were Spanish humans who proceded to murder and steal in the name of Christianity. I am anxious to see that our search was not for naught, but I would be wary of any Alien life.
How is it you find yourself speaking against the "cult of science" by one of it's very products. Is this the height of hypocrisy, or merely bait for comments that will provide you with some amusement? The Big Bang may be a flawed theory, but it's followers possess much more evidence than a Christian could ever wield to prove his master.
What of the background radiation in the Universe? Can you find equal fact that points to a god? What about the red shift of light, proven to mean that the Universe is expanding, by Doppler and Hubble?
There is much more evidence of a world without God than there is of one with. It takes cowardice and spite for a religion to strike out against science, but it takes a great deal of refinement for one to embrace it. And that is where hard-core Christianity, such as that seen during the Burning Times, will die the horrible death it deserves.
Furthermore, I find it incredibly sad for Christian fanatics to feign disgust at supposed government interference in their religion. Tell me, has the government prosecuted the Church for contributing to the delinquency of minors when they give alcohol to countless children every Sunday morning? Has the government banned performing one of your rituals, because of religous ignorance? And when have these beliefs, the beliefs you proclaim so arrogantly, been decent? After years of murder, theft, and corruption you have gained the majority. And with this, the fanatical have continued to ply a trade of immorality. Keep your fanatical and suppsedly decent Christian beliefs, for my beliefs were not won with the blood of the innocent.
Through the years, nature has developed two means of propagation: saturation and specification. While most fauna are specific in their intent, flora opt for the easier of the two. A dandelion does not release one seed into a SSW vector. It's species would have gone extinct long ago if it had. Instead, it releases a gross of seeds into the wind. Perhaps we need to do the same. Concentrating on radio alone will get us no where. We will go extinct before we meet an alien species. I am a proponent of sending out beacons. Launch a thousand small craft with a solar sails towards the most promising targets. On board is a cache of data on humanity, and a radio transmitter.
Continue to scan the skies with our antennas, but in a universe of so many stars, and so many planets, a proactive solution is the only one that will work.
Good god! Air pollution and water pollution used to be our only problems. Then we had to cope with light pollution. Now the world is becoming inundated with the rest of the EM spectrum. I used to fear the destruction of the environment. Now I fear that, and the eventual digital apocalypse. It would end the problem, but how would the people cope?
I honestly think that high frequency device communications will only develop well, without government interference. Once all of the protocols and devices have been developed thourohghly, then let the FCC or whomever take over. Interference of radio waves or interference of capitalistic government. Thats what I thought.
Slashdot Mirror
Isotropically pure Si-28 will not solve all of your problems. In fac, this will not extend the date beyond my estimation of 20 years. This isotope of Silicon addresses issues of heat distribution, but does not deal with the lithographic process. You can only produce an electrical conduit so small, and then it's use becomes moot. When you start to go lower than .1 microns, the quantum effects of electrons can be seen. An electron begins to tunnel, and a high enough fraction of your electrons will escape that the refinement of the process will have been academic.
These "theoretical maximums" you speak have only been postponed. We can only refine the lithographic process so much before it becomes too expensive or too complicated. I do not think we can do much with exotic chips either, though. If it weren't for the complexity of setting up a molecular computation, and its lack of diversity, or the difficulty in producing the utter vacuum nessecary for quantum computing, these methods would be the most appealing.
As to the validity of my point, it doesn't exist. In fact this post is mostly an off topic rant about my anger that we don't live in a world filled with bacterial computers as promised by AmSci when I was growing up.
I didn't say what I meant clearly. I do not mean that we would be using another processing medium if it weren't for corporations like Intel. I merely say that it is important to start looking for a solution that will replace silicon when it is no longer as able as we would need. For the most part, this is because we are stuck in silicon. Its cheap, relatively, to produce a silicon chip. Why blow a good thing, eh? Invest billions in researching a medium that could kill them, or spend that money to push the bottom line?
Silicon has 20 years, tops. In 20 years, the industrial revolution that is sweeping the world will hopefully be over. Then even the average citizen of the second and third world nations may have computers. but if the entire system is based on Silicon, then the cost of everyone replacing their system would astronomical. In addition, if the new method would be incompatible with Silicon processing, then these people would be isolated by their socioeconomic status once again. and if there is some way discovered to interface the two, speed of the better will surely be compromised by that of the relatively anachronistic Silicon.
worst case scenario: Mad Max meets Bill Gates
best case scenario: Mad Max kills Bill Gates
There is only so much that you can work with, before you need to start throwing out the old paradigm. Silicon is dying so countless engineers develop life support for it, while claiming that things are fine.
.1 micron, you can't outrun the quantum boogeyman. Minimize, dis-consolidize, but realize that our future is not that of Silicon.
Parallel computing, genetic algorithms, and this will not solve the problem. they will only prolong the world's suffering to a time when people will have become used to Big Silicon. Then all of the Wunderkinds of the Valley will be too old to execute for gross negligence.
While this appears to be a good idea, we must understand that we can not grow too secure in silicon. When you get below
One must wonder if this is a good thing, as Martha stewart would say, or something wholly evil. Apple has not exactly been good on patents, if you will recall the ALTO and such, so it is possible that this man will be equally evil in some position of power.
I think in matters of patents, that there should be an elected commitee to deal with disputes. such as the ICANN @Large program, it would be interesting to see an internet process for the US Patent Office so that we can put an end to the Patent Whores.
Quite hardly. Currently, our civilization is a Type 0 civilization. We have not met enough of the criteria to be considered a global, or Type 1, civilization. Not to mention the fact that even after we master the planet, we will still have 2 more phases to go through.
Or were you talking about a game?
What is this obsesion with replicating a PC to a T, but making it portable? The PC was not designed for being hauled around. It's hard drives are fragile, it's monitors either too big or too expensive, and the keyboard and mouse are not a free floating interface. So what have these engineers done? They have adapted an existing design. This is where they go wrong.
I propose an alternate style. If computers are truly going to be used for information purposes, a visual interface will not be needed. Instead, development of speech recognition and speech production engines should be concentrated on. Microphones and speakers are commonly shrunk to incredibly small sizes. So wouldn't an accurate voice synthesizer, one that doesn't sound like a whino with vomit stuck in his throat, provide the interface nessecary for information exchange? The only obstructionsI can see, is the development of an operating system that synchronizes the GUI and CLI, and can portray the content accurately to the user. The only problem is the lack of an intelligent interface.
It would be required that the device become easy to use by the common man, it would be required that the device not be noticable, and it would be required that the device be accurate.
Short of getting Jane from the Ender series, though, will we see this? I would hope so. My dream is to see a country wired for a system of wireless computing. Rather than have one computer for each person, have one cluster for all persons. Tap into the system anywhere it is available, and you should have the same data access.
Let it be known, that this will be the future. In cities such as Arcosanti, this kind of technology will be easy to implement from the start. There is no reason that we should not begin to seek an organic computing experience. An integrated, and seamless experience. Let us do it! Let ours be the Alpha of remote computing, not the Omega!
You forget that there are many different sized asteroids. Provided enough velocity and shielding, even a rock the size of my head could devastate the world. Of course my head would have to be travelling close to the speed of light, but... Anyways, a small or medium sized asteroid could be harnessed as a weapon. We are not talking about droping Ceres into Earth orbit, merely a smaller asteroid.
But if the effort of snagging an asteroid from the Belt, then I suppose you could construct an artificial one with some moon dust and the water on Mars. Yeah. Sure.
Planetfall is much more appealing tactically, then a nuclear weapon is. If you nuke a city, you make the area radioactive. In addition, those who survive face lukemia and other various defects. If you drop a small asteroid on the capital, you kill the people in the area, but damage is constrained to the center of attack. Thus, your troops can be waiting relatively close by for the final tactical strike to seize the ground. As too the morality of human kind, we need not look further than Mr. Truman. To prevent the deaths of American soldiers, he killed Japanese civilians. I do not doubt that this weapon will be used. I know it.
I must wonder when a asteroid will first be used in war. With 900 near earth objects, you could decimate the world. the saddest thing, is that the technology is being developed to propel clectial objects with their own content as the fuel. Redirect an asteroid for Washington DC, Chicago, and LA and you could run your ground troops in to sweep up while the chaos ensues. While this may not be as effective in the US, a small nation would easily be taken by this method.
That is correct, but then you wasted a few million dollars on a fancy show for amateur astronomers. In addition, whilst the sattelite remains in operational limbo, it is a target for space debris. And if it is hit, then more debris is created. Also, if the sattelite is constructed imporperly, or properly depending on your view, it could cause damage when it deorbits. There have been 3 incidents now where space debris in the form of red hot shrapnel, has scattered across a town filled with people. We got lucky when Skylab landed in the outback. It could have been a lot worse.
I really don't understand. Isn't the purpose behind an open-source project to develop the best possible product based on community involvement? Is it possible, gasp, for an open-source project to be ignored by the people? Then, what makes it better than a closed-source solution? Bah. Who cares. I just want more DOS abandonware!
I would be fine with getting something for free, rgeardless of whether it is "crippled." Your analogy is flawed though. If the hood of a car is welded shut, it would take a torch to open it up. Without doing so, the car would be useless as soon as it came time for your first oil change. The use of software is in no way impeded by keeping the source closed. If you have a problem with closed-source software, write your own open-source alternative or shut up.
Besides, Star Office deserves to have it's hood welded shut. I want to see it's pistons seize and it's engine blow as soon as possible.
Art Bell is no longer host of Coast to Coast AM. He retired, and the show was taken over by Mike Siegel. Even still, I would get the ACLU and sue the DMV. Unlawful search and seizure ring a Bell?
After AOL released paersonal information on that gay sailor to the US Navy, I just assumed that the US ISPs respected everyone's privacy. Utter anonymity can be both a gift and a curse. For the part, it is a mechanism for people to speak out without the fear of being recognized. Unfortunately, as we have seen here on Slashdot, it also allows people to antagonize others and can lead to crimes being perpetrated upon the people.
Of course, I bet Sealand has the best privacy of all nations.
Attach an inflatable aeroshell to expensive sattelites that have been abandoned, and deorbit them. We need to start salvaging defunct craft, instead of letting them clog up the heavens.
If you notice, the Earth now has a ring similar to that of Saturn. With all this debris, finding an affordable commercial space solution will not be the only problem. It would be no good to see Titanic revisited. Just as icebergs are a problem at the turn of the century, space debris will be a problem during this century.
You are quite correct. The male of our species does spread his seed to the wind just like the dandelion. I was thinking more in terms of the female's role in reproduction, though. Even still, my metaphor was flawed.
The most effective solar sail we could produce would be one made with a carbon composite. It would be very tough, yet not very dense at all. NASA intends to test one in a few years.
And this frightens me more than anything else. Embracing the technologically superior caused the destruction of the South American cultures. When those of white skin came in on wings of white, they were mistaken for Gods. Instead, they were Spanish humans who proceded to murder and steal in the name of Christianity. I am anxious to see that our search was not for naught, but I would be wary of any Alien life.
How is it you find yourself speaking against the "cult of science" by one of it's very products. Is this the height of hypocrisy, or merely bait for comments that will provide you with some amusement? The Big Bang may be a flawed theory, but it's followers possess much more evidence than a Christian could ever wield to prove his master.
What of the background radiation in the Universe? Can you find equal fact that points to a god? What about the red shift of light, proven to mean that the Universe is expanding, by Doppler and Hubble?
There is much more evidence of a world without God than there is of one with. It takes cowardice and spite for a religion to strike out against science, but it takes a great deal of refinement for one to embrace it. And that is where hard-core Christianity, such as that seen during the Burning Times, will die the horrible death it deserves.
Furthermore, I find it incredibly sad for Christian fanatics to feign disgust at supposed government interference in their religion. Tell me, has the government prosecuted the Church for contributing to the delinquency of minors when they give alcohol to countless children every Sunday morning? Has the government banned performing one of your rituals, because of religous ignorance? And when have these beliefs, the beliefs you proclaim so arrogantly, been decent? After years of murder, theft, and corruption you have gained the majority. And with this, the fanatical have continued to ply a trade of immorality. Keep your fanatical and suppsedly decent Christian beliefs, for my beliefs were not won with the blood of the innocent.
Through the years, nature has developed two means of propagation: saturation and specification. While most fauna are specific in their intent, flora opt for the easier of the two. A dandelion does not release one seed into a SSW vector. It's species would have gone extinct long ago if it had. Instead, it releases a gross of seeds into the wind. Perhaps we need to do the same. Concentrating on radio alone will get us no where. We will go extinct before we meet an alien species. I am a proponent of sending out beacons. Launch a thousand small craft with a solar sails towards the most promising targets. On board is a cache of data on humanity, and a radio transmitter.
Continue to scan the skies with our antennas, but in a universe of so many stars, and so many planets, a proactive solution is the only one that will work.
Good god! Air pollution and water pollution used to be our only problems. Then we had to cope with light pollution. Now the world is becoming inundated with the rest of the EM spectrum. I used to fear the destruction of the environment. Now I fear that, and the eventual digital apocalypse. It would end the problem, but how would the people cope?
I honestly think that high frequency device communications will only develop well, without government interference. Once all of the protocols and devices have been developed thourohghly, then let the FCC or whomever take over. Interference of radio waves or interference of capitalistic government. Thats what I thought.