I don't think this is as big a problem as you are suggesting. Yes, while jpg may not be readable in 30 years by anything of that day, emulation will still be possible. I'd imagine that every system will be part of a grand emulator in 30 years
While I can't get my hands on a decent 48k speccy easily anymore, I can run any emualted code I like through a PC. XP (and all associated software) is so massive in the world of computers that I think at least some people will still run it for fun in 30 years, if not in reality then on virtual systems.
It wouldn't be hard to store a disc image of XP with associated software along with your files, and if there's not an NTFS PC emulator in 30 years I'll eat my solar powered holographic hat.
Having adults who are slightly more informed about issues is really not worth losing out on students being able to take science at higher levels because they are either not prepared for it or have been shows science as something that it's not for 5 years at secondary school.
This is a point I try to bring across to my students - that science isn't a lot of fun, it's mostly sober hard work, but incredibly, incredibly interesting. I stress that for a scientist, interesting (in an intellectual sense) can be far more enjoyable than fun.
Science seems to be in decline in the modern climate. I'm not sure why - it's probably a lot of things, from scientists being painted in the media as bad guys most of the time, to modern youth getting used to instant answers. Ironically when the internet began I thought it would be an amazing thing but I honestly think it does kids no favours at all. Why remember anything when google can tell you in an instant?
This is our exam board at the moment. There are past papers and mark schemes etc so you can see what the kids get put up against.
Calculations have gone out of the window it seems, moved up to A-levels. That's why there is a massive drop off in A-levels - kids think that it's the same but as soon as they get a bit of real science to do, it's too hard.
We're all supposed to make science relevant etc. The courses are a joke and the science is a joke, filled with 'science for everyone'. The science of mobile phones to teach microwaves (plus discussion on phones causing brain tumours). Cooking potato as a first lesson in organic chemistry to check on texture and colour. I kid you not. Everything is a discussion and an opinion, with little right or wrong answers. They are expected to debate whether we should build nuclear power stations or not without (I'm not exaggerating here) useful knowledge of nuclear power, decent atomic structure, other forms of generation, pollution concerns, resource management or how electricity works. It's far too touchy feely with far too little rigorous intellectual content.
Stealing is it? So if I stuffed adverts through your letterbox, for which you were charged, then adjusting your letterbox to only allow legit mail through would also be stealing?
You sir, are wrong. I invoke the letterbox argument.
Does the same apply to a cancerous limb? Do you want to live with that eating at your body and try to like it? Some traumatic memories eat away at your mental health.
I don't know why games companies seem compelled to charge for every last little thing. If nintendo really are emulating past devices, then it's a trivial matter to put the roms to work on such a device.
I recently bought super mario bros for the wii - at £3.50 GBP. This I think is a lot of cash for such an old game but as I've never played it I thought I'd give it a go.
Any games company would get a HUGE amount of business (and kudos) if along with a new console they bundled an emulator and a stock set of a few hundred titles from yesteryear. These wouldn't impact on new games sales (just buy the older console much cheaper if that's all you wanted) but it would bring in exactly my type of business. Gamers in their 30's who like the new stuff but have a desire for nostalgia.
These days, emulators and a lot of old games from the 80's should be made free, not squeezed for every last penny.
Ahh, if it's pre-inflationary then that solves the FTL implication, as inflation was FTL. I think we then need a new definition of observable universe if we can now determine information this way.
I'll find time to read the article sometime....
That was my only sticking point - it seemed like people were suggesting that large scale structures were influencing far away galaxies, not pre-inflation structure being carried over to the modern universe. Thanks for persisting.
I think you are still wrong. Inflation happened very early on in the universe - between 1x10-36 seconds and 1x10-32 seconds, which is a very, very short time span. There were no galaxies present to influence at that time. No atoms of any sort as well.
The point of inflationary theory is not that there were huge parts of the universe causally connected. After inflation, the universe was only still about the size of a grapefruit.
You're missing the point. If WE see the effects here, then any effect has also had enough time and velocity to ALSO reach us, because seeing the galaxies moving IS an effect. You're thinking that the universe is instantaneous. Yes, matter from outside the observable universe may be effecting matter elsewhere, but it's not within our observable universe. It can't be. We can't see a 'knock on' effect of gravity that is travelling faster than light.
This seems to be a simple point that many are not understanding in this thread.
This analogy is breaking down. Space doesn't have tuna or bricks. As it stands, information cannot travel faster than light, and if we are getting information from beyond the observable universe, this is breaking a fundamental concept. FTL information.
either the explanation of dark flow is wrong or over-simplified, or the idea is wrong. Nothing travels FTL, even information. We cannot know, even indirectly, about the unobservable universe
That's what 'unobservable' means in this context. It's not talking about a universe that we cannot 'see'.
I don't think that's right. If the tuna effect reached the cat, and the cat has relayed that information to us, then the tuna's effect should also have reached us in parallel.
I agree. If we analysed the flow we could gain information about the unobservable universe, which means that information has travelled faster than light, which is impossible.
to see the effect, it must be from the observable universe. have I missed something as this seems simple to understand?
Maybe I'm biased as a teacher, but in this day and age, accusations like that can be very dangerous to a career.
Most kids don't realise how dangerous and so, along with being charged for the crime that she clearly committed, the school was perfectly right to suspend her.
Personally I'd want her expelled permanently for that. When kids think that the internet is a lawless, consequence free zone, that same attitude spills over into their real lives.
I think that the internet is the worst thing to happen for under 16's in the last 15 years. Complete free access to any and all information, at any age? Some here I guess would see that as a good thing but those here who are parents I suspect would fall more towards a censored internet. My youth was bad enough as it is but add to that every depravity you can find on the net being shoved at you every day by friends, and getting the impulse to seek it out yourself is not my idea of a childhood.
Bit off track there, but the school was right on. Paedophilia is not a topic that is funny in any way, shape or form and for a student to do this with her teachers in mind deserves institutional punishment as well as punishment via the law.
And you're allowed to vote, and have children? I find your type of lunatic particularly disturbing. I won't return to this thread because uneducated religious nutters aren't really worth the bother.
You say 'evolutionist' and 'old-earth geologist' as if there was any kind of rational alternative.
What makes me think that the decay rates have remained constant? You can apply that idea to anything and the net result would be....? Yes. Zero knowledge.
Grow up you imbecile and stop wasting everyones time with your 'theories'.
It's not my job to teach you reality, so instead I'll simply tell you that you are wrong and move on.
You obviously didn't take biology or study - because if you did, you'd know that a few weeks and some fruit flies could give you all the evidence that you need.
That's not even talking about the absolutely MASSIVE amount of DNA/RNA evidence in all living things today.
Here's a funny thing - you don't need to wait for millions of years to confirm evolution, just like we don't need to wait thousands of years to confirm the half life of C-14.
This post is not insightful. Gravity and electricity can be demonstrated to any idiot, within seconds, and explained.
Evolution requires a little more thought and a little more time. This leaves it at the mercy of idiots who refuse to see this evidence as it takes too long - hence "It's UNPROVABLE!!"
Scientists are facing a fight with this one, and the creationists (who are plainly, outright WRONG) seem to be better funded. It is wholly right that the education director for the Royal Society be fired for such outlandish claims.
IAAST (I am a science teacher) and I would quit if I had to teach creationsim and frankly I expose them for the lunatics that they are whenever that 'view' is asked about in my classes.
I've worked out that if I converted all my DVD's into thumb drives, they'd be the size of a Twinkie thirty-five feet long, weighing approximately six hundred pounds.....
Slashdot Mirror
I don't think this is as big a problem as you are suggesting. Yes, while jpg may not be readable in 30 years by anything of that day, emulation will still be possible. I'd imagine that every system will be part of a grand emulator in 30 years
While I can't get my hands on a decent 48k speccy easily anymore, I can run any emualted code I like through a PC. XP (and all associated software) is so massive in the world of computers that I think at least some people will still run it for fun in 30 years, if not in reality then on virtual systems.
It wouldn't be hard to store a disc image of XP with associated software along with your files, and if there's not an NTFS PC emulator in 30 years I'll eat my solar powered holographic hat.
That didnt stop JPEG
Definately. I wish there would be more vocational courses across the curriculum, but that's not the future (or so it seems)
Having adults who are slightly more informed about issues is really not worth losing out on students being able to take science at higher levels because they are either not prepared for it or have been shows science as something that it's not for 5 years at secondary school.
This is a point I try to bring across to my students - that science isn't a lot of fun, it's mostly sober hard work, but incredibly, incredibly interesting. I stress that for a scientist, interesting (in an intellectual sense) can be far more enjoyable than fun.
Science seems to be in decline in the modern climate. I'm not sure why - it's probably a lot of things, from scientists being painted in the media as bad guys most of the time, to modern youth getting used to instant answers. Ironically when the internet began I thought it would be an amazing thing but I honestly think it does kids no favours at all. Why remember anything when google can tell you in an instant?
So this is a unique opportunity to talk on /. and actually know what I'm on about.
I agree, the science exams we work towards these days are a pitiful shadow of what was taught in the past, and the slide is continuing.
Have a look yourself if you're interested:
http://www.ocr.org.uk/qualifications/gcse/index.html
This is our exam board at the moment. There are past papers and mark schemes etc so you can see what the kids get put up against.
Calculations have gone out of the window it seems, moved up to A-levels. That's why there is a massive drop off in A-levels - kids think that it's the same but as soon as they get a bit of real science to do, it's too hard.
We're all supposed to make science relevant etc. The courses are a joke and the science is a joke, filled with 'science for everyone'. The science of mobile phones to teach microwaves (plus discussion on phones causing brain tumours). Cooking potato as a first lesson in organic chemistry to check on texture and colour. I kid you not. Everything is a discussion and an opinion, with little right or wrong answers. They are expected to debate whether we should build nuclear power stations or not without (I'm not exaggerating here) useful knowledge of nuclear power, decent atomic structure, other forms of generation, pollution concerns, resource management or how electricity works. It's far too touchy feely with far too little rigorous intellectual content.
Stealing is it? So if I stuffed adverts through your letterbox, for which you were charged, then adjusting your letterbox to only allow legit mail through would also be stealing? You sir, are wrong. I invoke the letterbox argument.
I wonder who would volunteer for the job of carrying it to term?
Does the same apply to a cancerous limb? Do you want to live with that eating at your body and try to like it? Some traumatic memories eat away at your mental health.
I don't know why games companies seem compelled to charge for every last little thing. If nintendo really are emulating past devices, then it's a trivial matter to put the roms to work on such a device.
I recently bought super mario bros for the wii - at £3.50 GBP. This I think is a lot of cash for such an old game but as I've never played it I thought I'd give it a go.
Any games company would get a HUGE amount of business (and kudos) if along with a new console they bundled an emulator and a stock set of a few hundred titles from yesteryear. These wouldn't impact on new games sales (just buy the older console much cheaper if that's all you wanted) but it would bring in exactly my type of business. Gamers in their 30's who like the new stuff but have a desire for nostalgia.
These days, emulators and a lot of old games from the 80's should be made free, not squeezed for every last penny.
"Welcome to Windows Vista."
Ahh, if it's pre-inflationary then that solves the FTL implication, as inflation was FTL. I think we then need a new definition of observable universe if we can now determine information this way.
I'll find time to read the article sometime....
That was my only sticking point - it seemed like people were suggesting that large scale structures were influencing far away galaxies, not pre-inflation structure being carried over to the modern universe. Thanks for persisting.
I think you are still wrong. Inflation happened very early on in the universe - between 1x10-36 seconds and 1x10-32 seconds, which is a very, very short time span. There were no galaxies present to influence at that time. No atoms of any sort as well.
The point of inflationary theory is not that there were huge parts of the universe causally connected. After inflation, the universe was only still about the size of a grapefruit.
You're missing the point. If WE see the effects here, then any effect has also had enough time and velocity to ALSO reach us, because seeing the galaxies moving IS an effect. You're thinking that the universe is instantaneous. Yes, matter from outside the observable universe may be effecting matter elsewhere, but it's not within our observable universe. It can't be. We can't see a 'knock on' effect of gravity that is travelling faster than light.
This seems to be a simple point that many are not understanding in this thread.
I suspect that the Universe doesn't care what you feel.
This analogy is breaking down. Space doesn't have tuna or bricks. As it stands, information cannot travel faster than light, and if we are getting information from beyond the observable universe, this is breaking a fundamental concept. FTL information.
either the explanation of dark flow is wrong or over-simplified, or the idea is wrong. Nothing travels FTL, even information. We cannot know, even indirectly, about the unobservable universe
That's what 'unobservable' means in this context. It's not talking about a universe that we cannot 'see'.
I don't think that's right. If the tuna effect reached the cat, and the cat has relayed that information to us, then the tuna's effect should also have reached us in parallel.
I agree. If we analysed the flow we could gain information about the unobservable universe, which means that information has travelled faster than light, which is impossible.
to see the effect, it must be from the observable universe. have I missed something as this seems simple to understand?
Maybe I'm biased as a teacher, but in this day and age, accusations like that can be very dangerous to a career.
Most kids don't realise how dangerous and so, along with being charged for the crime that she clearly committed, the school was perfectly right to suspend her.
Personally I'd want her expelled permanently for that. When kids think that the internet is a lawless, consequence free zone, that same attitude spills over into their real lives.
I think that the internet is the worst thing to happen for under 16's in the last 15 years. Complete free access to any and all information, at any age? Some here I guess would see that as a good thing but those here who are parents I suspect would fall more towards a censored internet. My youth was bad enough as it is but add to that every depravity you can find on the net being shoved at you every day by friends, and getting the impulse to seek it out yourself is not my idea of a childhood.
Bit off track there, but the school was right on. Paedophilia is not a topic that is funny in any way, shape or form and for a student to do this with her teachers in mind deserves institutional punishment as well as punishment via the law.
And you're allowed to vote, and have children? I find your type of lunatic particularly disturbing. I won't return to this thread because uneducated religious nutters aren't really worth the bother.
You're kidding, right?
You say 'evolutionist' and 'old-earth geologist' as if there was any kind of rational alternative.
What makes me think that the decay rates have remained constant? You can apply that idea to anything and the net result would be....? Yes. Zero knowledge.
Grow up you imbecile and stop wasting everyones time with your 'theories'.
It's not my job to teach you reality, so instead I'll simply tell you that you are wrong and move on.
ID Theorist........ what a joke.
I hadn't thought of that. I salute you sir!
Wrong Wrong Wrong.
You obviously didn't take biology or study - because if you did, you'd know that a few weeks and some fruit flies could give you all the evidence that you need.
That's not even talking about the absolutely MASSIVE amount of DNA/RNA evidence in all living things today.
Here's a funny thing - you don't need to wait for millions of years to confirm evolution, just like we don't need to wait thousands of years to confirm the half life of C-14.
This post is not insightful. Gravity and electricity can be demonstrated to any idiot, within seconds, and explained.
Evolution requires a little more thought and a little more time. This leaves it at the mercy of idiots who refuse to see this evidence as it takes too long - hence "It's UNPROVABLE!!"
Scientists are facing a fight with this one, and the creationists (who are plainly, outright WRONG) seem to be better funded. It is wholly right that the education director for the Royal Society be fired for such outlandish claims.
IAAST (I am a science teacher) and I would quit if I had to teach creationsim and frankly I expose them for the lunatics that they are whenever that 'view' is asked about in my classes.
But also, you are paying for every support call you make. What's the price of every phone call, and who is really losing out when you try this?
I've worked out that if I converted all my DVD's into thumb drives, they'd be the size of a Twinkie thirty-five feet long, weighing approximately six hundred pounds.....