That would work, but personally I wouldn't print directly. Being a perfectionist, I'd be painfully aware that 25 years underground and then through a scanner, will inevitably mean the pictures lose quality. It's more paper-friendly than my way, but lossy nonetheless.
I would propose converting the pictures into hexadecimal text, and print out those, quite small sized text. The reason being, optical mark recognition is already probably quite capable of reading that back out, and I doubt it's getting any worse in the next 25 years. Anyone should be able to see that it's hexadecimal, a note with the paper to explain wouldn't cause harm though.
Trusting in the capsule, the information could last hundreds of years if printed on the right paper, if disinfected and protected against moisture.
I'd be curious to know whether or not a laptop could survive 25 years underground. I know he said welded shut, but rust and corrosion could still be issues.
Silica gel is often used in new furniture or goods that are going to be stored for a long time, it soaks up moisture and prevents anything nasty growing inside. I expect that could quite easily be used, a significant amount and keeping as much moisture from getting into the container before it's sealed would solve that issue.
I'm more worried about knocks and magnets. If someone dug up a metal capsule in 25 years, would they know its contents were susceptible to shock or magnets?
(Talk about off-topic for something titled "Re:SATA, not IDE" xD)
I expect it's only because no-one wants to do the dull job of writing compilers in assembler for any more platforms. I figure, this way, we can get to the interesting bits quicker.:D
Hold on a moment, I am actually responding to Z34107 there, although still quite relevant to the parent. I'd like to point out this is what I thought I was replying to:
Maybe there isn't "Artificial Intelligence" as we think of it. Perhaps every problem can be reduced to brute force, algorithms, and data structures.
Perhaps we are just really good at following those yet-undiscovered algorithms.
But please be mindful that computers make calculations very differently from humans. Computers break down input into numbers, and calculate every single one to incredible precision at incredible speeds, before converting it to output. Humans use electronic pulses and chemicals, their methods are lossy (more so in the artistic side of the brain, it can solve more problems but in a less reliable manner than its partner, the mathematical side).
Therefore, it's very hard to compare which is making more calculations, and the algorithms each uses. I do, however, applaud that you thought of the brain as a simple yet mysterious number crunching machine. It's a matter of questioning what AI really is, and what consciousness is before we try and complete a program that achieves it. This was in The Crucible by George Orwell: "I know not what a witch is!" "Then how do you know that you are not one?". The same principle applies. If we do not know what AI is, how do we know if and when we have created it?
Well that is precisely my question. You're not the only one who noticed that this is a violent move against "violent" video games. What concerns me about this is; that if young people are as impressionable as he claims, then they will in turn attempt to burn/destroy/vandalize any media they deem bad, well at least by his logic anyway. So yes, it is a hateful activity, but one comes to wonder what the reverend thinks he's trying to do/achieve.
I'd like to point out that when I did read the article, none of it really struck me as hateful or vengeful as I think you've made it out to be. The answers he gave all seemed to be very calm and cool-headed.
I'll agree that this is not the right approach. He's had better ideas by the look of things I must say. My question is this: What impression will reacting to violent video games in such a, well, violent way affect the children he's so dedicated to reaching out to?
Slashdot Mirror
That would work, but personally I wouldn't print directly. Being a perfectionist, I'd be painfully aware that 25 years underground and then through a scanner, will inevitably mean the pictures lose quality. It's more paper-friendly than my way, but lossy nonetheless.
I would propose converting the pictures into hexadecimal text, and print out those, quite small sized text. The reason being, optical mark recognition is already probably quite capable of reading that back out, and I doubt it's getting any worse in the next 25 years. Anyone should be able to see that it's hexadecimal, a note with the paper to explain wouldn't cause harm though.
Trusting in the capsule, the information could last hundreds of years if printed on the right paper, if disinfected and protected against moisture.
I'd be curious to know whether or not a laptop could survive 25 years underground. I know he said welded shut, but rust and corrosion could still be issues.
Silica gel is often used in new furniture or goods that are going to be stored for a long time, it soaks up moisture and prevents anything nasty growing inside. I expect that could quite easily be used, a significant amount and keeping as much moisture from getting into the container before it's sealed would solve that issue.
I'm more worried about knocks and magnets. If someone dug up a metal capsule in 25 years, would they know its contents were susceptible to shock or magnets?
(Talk about off-topic for something titled "Re:SATA, not IDE" xD)
Except they advertise it as operating systems. (Sorry, I couldn't resist.)
Ah, but the write plays in books! ... <_<
I expect it's only because no-one wants to do the dull job of writing compilers in assembler for any more platforms. I figure, this way, we can get to the interesting bits quicker. :D
Wait, it might have been... DAMMIT! Damn my knowledge on books! You know I have a bad habit of getting the last digit wrong on 1984 too..
Maybe there isn't "Artificial Intelligence" as we think of it. Perhaps every problem can be reduced to brute force, algorithms, and data structures.
Perhaps we are just really good at following those yet-undiscovered algorithms.
*twilight zone music*
To an extent I agree.
But please be mindful that computers make calculations very differently from humans. Computers break down input into numbers, and calculate every single one to incredible precision at incredible speeds, before converting it to output. Humans use electronic pulses and chemicals, their methods are lossy (more so in the artistic side of the brain, it can solve more problems but in a less reliable manner than its partner, the mathematical side).
Therefore, it's very hard to compare which is making more calculations, and the algorithms each uses. I do, however, applaud that you thought of the brain as a simple yet mysterious number crunching machine. It's a matter of questioning what AI really is, and what consciousness is before we try and complete a program that achieves it. This was in The Crucible by George Orwell: "I know not what a witch is!" "Then how do you know that you are not one?". The same principle applies. If we do not know what AI is, how do we know if and when we have created it?
Afraid so. Care to help me spread the link?
Well that is precisely my question. You're not the only one who noticed that this is a violent move against "violent" video games. What concerns me about this is; that if young people are as impressionable as he claims, then they will in turn attempt to burn/destroy/vandalize any media they deem bad, well at least by his logic anyway. So yes, it is a hateful activity, but one comes to wonder what the reverend thinks he's trying to do/achieve.
I'd like to point out that when I did read the article, none of it really struck me as hateful or vengeful as I think you've made it out to be. The answers he gave all seemed to be very calm and cool-headed. I'll agree that this is not the right approach. He's had better ideas by the look of things I must say. My question is this: What impression will reacting to violent video games in such a, well, violent way affect the children he's so dedicated to reaching out to?