It's not a question of wether or not it will happen. Only of when.
The rich will then get richer, and better looking, and faster, and smarter, and anything they can afford.
When confronted with the fact that 'everybody is doing it', and the 'keeping up with the Joneses' mentality of the affluent sectors, there's not a question of if. With their considerable resources brought to bear on politicians (law makers), lobbyists (big-time funds), Universities (researchers), the rich will make certain that their children are better designed to run the world when their turn comes.
There is no doubt that there will be some stratification among these 'people'. There will be children specialising in sports, intelligence, comeliness, artistic talent... I'm sure mother nature will be vengeful, but nature is a whore and can be bought, or at least rented for a few generations.
There is no doubt about another thing either. This will be the playground of the rich. They will do what they can to keep it that way. After all, what right has a poor kid to measure up to out perfect little Johnny? Right?
Families will save for a gene-tweak as they now save for homes. They will not manage to do anything other than guarantee a kid free from birth defects. A kid who can earn a living.
The normal person will be the working stiff, while the enhanced homo neogeneticus will live a life of leisure and pleasure.
We're all being slowly, but surely, convenienced out of existence.
The big companies can afford to (mass) produce a conveniently available alternative. They can't do the same for specialized products, because then they incur the same costs as the small business. It is, as you suggest, a matter of profit - simple economics. And as long as the majority of us chooses to save a buck, rather than be patrons of our local small business, the trend will continue.
Ultimately, the skills needed to do anything will be held only by the big companies. (I know, I'm naysaying, but only to make the point)
I'm originally from Poland. There, families typically make a day-trip out of going to an area forest to pick edible mushrooms. There's a whole variety out there that is usable as garnish, flavoring, condiments...
In the US, the only mushroom that people know is the store bought little round one - and the very gourmet Shittake and Portabella. And for all these are worth, Americans don't know a Shittake from a Portabella from Nightshade on sight. It's only the printed label that makes the distinction. (Though, to their credit, a small segment of the population knows enough to spot the psychoactive variety that the Europeans see as poisonous.)
This is not a shot at Americans. It is simply more convenient to not have a knowledge of mushrooms. It's not a needed skill. But what about other skills. Brewing your own beer? Darning your own socks? In a society of convenience, where mega-corporations provide cheap, disposable goods, it is easy to simply buy into the convenience. It's easy to abdicate power, but it's damn hard to get it back later. This holds for consumerism, security and human rights, everything.
The article hits on some significant points, but offers nothing new, really.
It's been stated, here on/. and all over the thinking person's media, that we are becoming a 'sound byte' culture.
Educators and clinicians brand more and more children each year with the stigma of "Attention Deficit Disorder", some with the added zinger of "Hyperactive". But what they don't realize is that our culture and lifestyle not only drive them to be this way, they are demanding of such tendencies.
A child that shifts focus frequently, can not handle a 45 minute math class, but would do well at the author's openning paragraph. Consider it.
Further, with seeing news blurr by at 8 seconds per item, with commercials every 8 minutes, how can a kid these days be expected to pay attention for longer than that? How can they not think that this is what is expected of them?
The author (Gleick by proxy) decries the loss of the symphony because radio stations only play the first (most popular) movement. Everyone knows the openning bars of Beethoven's 5th, but who can actually recognize the 3rd movement? Even NPR has to cater to the whims of it's clientelle. It's a matter of funding - you keep your client happy by playing music they like.
As the pace at which information is presented increases, the depth to which it is available decreases. Deep knowledge is what separates the expert from the amateur. Depth and breadth are mutually exclusive given finite time. The gaining of 'deep knowledge' requires a time commitment, and a discipline over our access to the flurry of information that surrounds us.
If we do not exhibit this discipline, we have only shallow knowledge, and are disposable by our culture (full of others like us). If we exercise this discipline, we risk missing out on some shallow information that is significant in the context of the fast moving info-stream. We risk becoming dated and out-of-touch.
The 'instinctive' ability to be selective about information, is quickly becoming a survival skill for the information age.
What are your feelings on the 'flying cow' scene in the movie Twister? Since my first experience of airborne bovines came from your book Heavy Weather, I would like to know if you were approached by Spielberg et al. about using that piece of I.P.
While on the subject of Heavy Weather, IMHO it would make a great movie itself. Any plans?
Light vs. Heavy water has little to do with stopping the reaction. But there is a design issue.
Most designs rely on electrical power being available in order to shut themselves down. This is a design decision, and there are multiple backups and unneeded (IMO) complexity. Others require power to keep the reaction going. This way, all you do is cut power, and the control rods fall (gravity) into the core (rather than being forced up into it by a motor) and the chain reaction grinds to a halt.
A standard design is naturally more expensive than a custom one, because in a standard design, a uniform environment for the reactor must be part of the design rather than part of the location. This is much like providing a standard interface for the reactor 'code', instead of hardcoding values into the given location. So to apply the reactor to a new site, the location interface is changed but the 'code' is the same, instead of redesigning the reactor to match the location...
National pride is a small issue, except to the French, and to customers who hire foreign contractors (designers, engineers) rather than use internal expertise (natural resentment there).
BTW, the top spot is now the Yonggwang#4 reactor with, I believe, a complete fuel cycle of 2 years with an AVERAGE output of 114% of design.
There is one existing standard reactor design. It is referred to as the System 80+, designed by Combustion Engineering of Windsor, Connecticut. CE was, decades ago, involved in the development of the standard Navy design. It is now out of the military market, and a part of Asea Brown Boveri.
The design is NRC approved, and is an outgrowth of the very successful, and accident/incident free Palo Verde plant(s) (3 reactor site) in Nevada. For a U.S. site, the design does not need to go through the lengthy and costly 'per site' approval process, provided the location is geologically sound. If not, no deal - but then again, no one would build a reactor on the San Andreas fault line.:)
Other existing plants of this design (or a contractual tailoring thereof for seismic, economic or political reasons dictated by the customer) are located at Yonggwang (2 of 6 units on the site) and Ulchin (2 of 6 units now being constructed) in S. Korea. The remaining units at these sites are Candu (Canadian), Framatome (French) or Westinghouse... The variety is due to single-mode failure clauses and legal requirements for diversification. Understandable due to the ~$4 billion per unit price tag.
Future projects might include N. Korea, China, and frankly, wherever there's a market. Few people are building new plants these days due to FUD and startup costs.
As for the 'safe nukes' project, I'm all for it. Step 1 is to educate the public about the risks, costs and processes involved, and how they compare to fossil hazzards and background radiation from folks own basements and such.
Just as a clarification, this is not the worst nuclear accident ever, it is the worst accident ever in Japan.
The 1986 Chernobyl meltdown is still the worst nuclear accident ever - in the world.
This (Japanese) accident did not happen at a nuclear power facility, but rather in a Uranium processing plant. Much too much (7 times) Uranium was added to a mixing tank, resulting in a chain reaction. As of present reports (21:00 EST) the reaction is under control and clean-up has begun.
Approximatelly 40 people have been hospitalized for radiation exposure, of this 2 are critical. The Japanese government has evacuated a 0.35 km radius around the plant, and is considering expanding the evac to 0.5 km. For those not reading the U.S. vs S.I. discussion, this is about 0.3 mile proposed radius.
As of latest report, Godzilla has not yet made an appearance. Area residents (300,000 people) are advised to remain indoors and minimize open air infusion into their residences (close windows, vents, etc). The accident occured at 09:30 Friday local time, 120 km N.E. of Tokyo with winds from the ENE direction clocking now at 15 knots.
Nuclear technology is just that. Technology. Yes, it has the potential to cause a lot of harm - this is why Billy-Joe and Bubba don't get to run the plants. It takes training and an education. Any shmoe can shovel coal. Do you want to breate the exhaust? Would you rather have been down wind of that Union Carbide disaster in India in the mid 80's? The coal ash that leaves a traditional fossil plant is more radioactive than anything vented into the atmosphere in the U.S. - this includes 3 mile island.
NukeTech is highly regulated. Accidents happen because people a) make mistakes, and b) cut corners. The benefits of nuclear power are huge, but the technology must be respected, and funded well enough to implement proper respect.
The funding of nuclear facilities (in the US and abroad) is inadequate. They are expected to function like traditional fossil plants, but everyone knows they need a much more steady hand - both on part of the operators and management.
France derives 60-75% of it's electrical power from nuclear sources. They respect it, regulate it intelligently and fund is adequately. They have never, ever had a nuclear accident.
People hear the word 'nuclear' and envision giant mushrooms on the horizon, or picture pulsating, glowing goo creeping towards them. Feh!
People fear that which they do not understand. If the averabe person put 10% of their NIMBY energy into learning about nuclear energy, they'd be lining up to but plant-side property.
Well, besides the exercise of getting so many voices contributing to a strategic decision, a'la online voting?
This is a way for Kasparov to get his 'face' back, by defeating the collective chess expertise of the world single-handedly.
What I would like to see next is the world vs. Deep Thought. If the greatest chess mind in the world, capable of defeating the whole world, was himself defeated by a computer, does transitivity apply? Can the world be beaten by the computer? What would be the result on the human psyche, to be defeated by a machine? Would governments halt AI research funding out of fear as thoughts of the W.O.P.R. and SkyNet dance in their heads?
Yes, we all know that DT was coached, and in fact designed, specifically to defeat Kasparov. It was programmed with Kasparov's strategies and game history... But still, it makes one wonder how the collective ego of humanity would respond to having it's collective hinny wipped by it's own invention.
If you've ever seen One Flew Over The Coo-coo's Nest, you're probably familiar with electro-shock therapy. It's similar to what a defibrilator does, only for the brain. It is used to disrupt the electrical pattern of the brain for a variety of reasons... Ending an epileptic siesure is one, stupification (forced complacency and the removal of higher level free thought) is another.
Raising the charge in the brain is a very bad idea since the circuitry is designed for a very specific environment. However...
Boosting the levels of neurotransmitters that facilitate signal propagation across the synaptic gap might be promissing. This is what many drugs do. But, while drugs tend to act on the brain as a whole, with a particular tweak in the pleasure center areas, a boost in the cognitive or sensory regions might be what you're proposing. This, coupled with repeatedly firing the desired pathways in order to 'pave the road' for future use, should improve whatever skill or perception you're interested in boosing.
I'd recommend plenty of rest, exercise, a balanced diet, productive intellectual activity and adequate fresh air.:)
Mmmm, I have to take exception to this because the computer is no more special than any other human invention.
If we hypothetise that God would not look down on what we do with computers, we would have to make the same allowance for all of our other inventions. Guns, drugs, nuclear bombs, electric chairs, gas chambers, crowd-sized ovens, etc...
Killing is killing, lying is lying. The means itself has little moral content. What you do with it matters, what you do it with matters little.
I'm not particularly religious, in fact, I believe on the basis of Pascal's Gambit more than for any other reason. But, we have to remember that the computer is a tool. Nothing more.
No belief system in the world, be it Judeo-Christian Commandments or the Gita, or the Quoran, exempts technology as a means of deviation from 'acceptable' behavior. To do so would be to open up a can of worms the size of creation itself. Simple machines (i.e. pitfalls) would be allowable as modes of killing, and not frowned upon morally, because they would be the works of man. Crimes would only be crimes if committed with bare hands. Children would be exempted from moral behavior as creations of their parents...
Messy. Morality of an act is defined by the act, not the means by which it is performed. The intention is more significant than the medium in which it is performed.
(Wow, parochial school was useful for something after all.:) )
Jon is saying that the way to avoid over-dependence on the complexity of technology, is to subjugate ourselves to a technology that would make rational decisions for us?
Isn't that like smashing your thumb with a sledge-hammer to avoid the risk of injury while driving in nails?
Tsk-tsk Jon. Whatever you're on, send some my way.
First off, for diagnosed and severe cases of CTS, surgery may be the only available option. These are the cases where the hands simply can not function well, and the pain prevents any sensible corrective action - these cases are rare in the extreme.
The most important thing to remember about CTS is that it is a RSI (Repetative Stress Injury). It develops over time, from unchecked, unhealthy behaviour. Keyboarding is most often the culprit, but many people in hand-use fields suffer from symptoms. Barbers, jewelers, gardeners, fine motor skill hobbyists such as model makers, people who tie their own fishing flies, people who tinker with electronics...
The key to correcting and avoiding CTS is well rounded use of your hands. Exercise and flexibility are key. You must avoid having your wrists cocked back (i.e. rested on a desk while typing). You must keep your tendons limber.
Stretching the wrists is very important - take periodic breaks (a couple per hour) to slowly and steadily bend your wrists both forward and back - use one hand to gently bend the other. Do not go to the point of pain, but try to get a good stretch. Note that your wrists should never bend by more than 90 degrees... Hold the stretch for a count of 10, relax for a minute or so and repeat. Roll your wrists through the extremes of their natural range of motion. Stretch your fingers as far as you can and hold the stretch while tilting your wrists back.
Some other posters have suggested a rubber band around your finger tips, so that you can open your fingers against the resistance.. This is excellent. Anything you can do to strengthen your forearm extensor muscles (the one's you use to bend your wrist back) is good, from rubber bands, to light weights, to just using the muscle with no resistance other than your own hand. Chinese meditation balls are great too.
What's important is to use your hands in a way OTHER than the single way that's causing the condition. Vary your hand usage, while trying to limit the repetative motions that brought CTS on in the first place. Use a wrist rest, the gel types tend to put least stress on sore wrists IMHO. If you mouse a lot, try a trackball. If you haven't already, switch to an ergonomic keyboard - a full size one is best.
Do not keep your wrists on the desk. Use a pad with both the keyboard and the mouse/trackball. Reason being that the desk tends to be cool/cold. A cold surface will cause decreased tissue flexibility, and will tend to numb pain that would remind you to take a break. If you can, try an elastic bandage sleeve on your wrists. The extra warmth and support will help.
Most importantly, stop kinking your wrists backwards as you type. Your hands should angle down slightly from your forearm. You should not have to maintain muscle tension to keep your hands in their working position. Do a little homework on ergonomics to see if maybe your chair or desk are not of the correct height.
And on a related topic, it's quite a good idea to go outside and focus on far away objects every one in a while. Focusing at a monitor 3 feet away all day is bad for the eyes.
What I think we're seeing here is the difference between two philosophies.
The geeks seem to hold fast to the belief that: You can not expect differing results from the same behaviour. We've seen the Intel precedent, and the result, and so we're expecting (reasonably) that the same actions by IBM (X) will have the same outcome (Y).. Next time, when a new value of X is fed into the function, the same value of Y will pop out the other end.
On the other hand, it looks like the corporations see it as: The squeak wheel gets the grease. Intel took the brunt of the opposition to the concept. Now IBM has picked up the gauntlet and is trying to run with it. Public opinion has been tested, and now the news is old. There is less likely to be as much opposition to the idea now, since it's not 'sexy' anymore. And if enough large companies reach concensus on this, the cusotmer is likely to simply believe, or give in assuming they can't win. Intel, IBM, any X, will keep chipping away at the issue until the wall gives way.
Eventually, what this will become is a matter of will. We have already made clear the reasons why this is not a good idea. We see it as a solved problem - how many times can you run through the same process until it becomes too tedious, and we move on? Intel was shown to be wrong and has backed down (a little). Now IBM put a new spin on an old hat. Eventually, one side will get tired, and it's likely to be the side that has less PR money.
Eventually we will get tired of voicing the same objections. The customers and the public-at-large will get tired of hearing the same arguments. The right legislator will get greased, and it will come into being.
My thoughts on the tidal nukes were that: Why do it in the first place, if not to make the itdal wave appear natural in origin? If a nuke could create a tidal wave (or it was seen a worthy of study) then it itself would be devastating.
We had no problem dropping the bamb on Hiroshima. But, if we didn't want to be blatant, or wanted to appear able to control/influence the weather.. A tidal wave or earthquake induced by a nuclear weapon would probably be a good way to achieve the goal.
In retrospect, I suppose the 'tell-tale' signs of a nuke were not well known, and difficult to test for - so covering up our handiwork would not have been a high priority.
Did I miss something? The 'why' of it seems obvious.
Japan. We were at war, but taking obvious credit for nuking Japan would haunt us after the fact.. It has. If there had been a way to send tactical 'natural' disasters at Japan, we would have jumped on it.
I'd be curious to learn how the gov wanted to cover up the evidence of the detonation though.
Both of the Universities I attended as an undergraduate did the same thing. Plain sight text SSN right on the ID. My grad school didn't bother, and just gave me an ID with a serial number.
In the meat-grinder classes (the high-occupancy lecture hall ones) results were posted outside the professors office, tagged by SSN (or I should say 'student number') to protect anonymity. Too bad that almost everyone wore theirs on a cord, used them as a bookmark, paid for food with them...
You needed to show your ID to check a book out of the library, or to use a PC lab (and to get chem lab equipment etc)... All these places were staffed by students.
If you logged on to the library system, you could check your overdue books - by SSN. But, all students were listed, along with phone numbers and addresses (local and home)...
So if you worked in the PC lab, and that cute girl didn't want to give you her number, it didn't matter. And if that jock gave you a hard time in the caff, all it took was a quick peek and you could send your war-dialer after him at 3am - Hypothetically of course.
Oddly, only the tech-savvy students noticed this. Even more oddly, the sensitive records of the most talented ones didn't stay in the public-accessible databases for very long.
In many schools, the 'student ID' is all that's needed to obtain a transcript.
Now, just out of curiosity, who out there DIDN'T have their SSN as their student ID in college?
The stareotypical thing about geeks is that they rarely fit into a stereotype.
Yes, we're all quite technophilitical (new word!) but our interests span the full spectrum of all other groups.
Besides, politics and philosophy are a means of programming people, as well as programs that run on people - who are actually just massively parallel, distributed computers. So there!;)
When does Political Correctness cross the line and become simply opinion?
It can't be a matter of the number of people holding that opinion, because here the corporates would be entitled to squat.
It can't be a matter of 'majority rules' either, because I don't remember an official poll about what 'derogatory' terms I find offensive...
Just who has the right to decide what is right and wrong in the Domain Name Game?? Eh?
And what about foreign language words? Accidental mis-spellings of possibly derogatory terms? Slang?
Last I checked, there was a country called Niger. www.niger.org can be just as valid for a nationalist web-site as www.israel.org (Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs website BTW), www.israel.com and www.israel.net - and these exist...
What about hobbies? Let's pick something semi-offensive first. Should taxidermy.com be 'reserved' by the same folks as vegan.org, just because it's offensive to them? How about model-planes.com?? Maybe we should make that unavailable because some kid somewhere died from sniffing Testors glue?
Yes, it gets ridiculous, but that's exactly the point. There is not definitive bound on 'offensive'. When we start limiting freedom in an authoritarian manner (read absolutist) then we have to do it absolutely, and reduce everything to bland oatmeal that is sure to not offent anyone - I find this alternative offensive. Nyah!
Henson Productions has recently announced their intention to bring suit against Netscape for using the letter N as a logo. Henson lawyers have stated that the letter N has repeatedly been used to promote Sesame Street, and is therefore considered a trademark.
Henson lawyers went on to announce their ongoing partnership with Microsoft, regarding their innovative usage of the letter E to promote Internet Explorer. While the letter E has been used to promote Sesame Street as well, Henson Productions legal staff claims no intention of seeking damages from Microsoft, citing that E is a vowel and as such is more easily licensed to other parties. When questioned if this decision had anything to do with the $1billion donation from Bill Gates to the Henson Foundation, the lawyers replied with "no comment".
In other news, the head executives of A.O.L. have resigned for undisclosed reasons.
I know a lot of people are snickering, having seen the film. But, at least show the man's dedication some respect, and read the article.
He touches on some really good stuff there, and the potential for the new suit he's working on, the G-Man, is pretty awesome. 90% mobility, 120lbs!! As Troy says, it's the gear of a fully dressed fireman. Consider the SWAT/RIOT applications? The earthquake disaster recovery usage - where you don't have to worry about dying in a collapsed building, but you can still climb a crumbling stair case... The military apps, as some have said, approach Starship Troopers... Yeah, at $300K a piece it's pricey, but it's cheaper than a tank, and with some power-assist it might do just as much damage.
Then there's the blurb about the suit enabling him to get a sample of Grisly blood during semi-hibernation, for use in NASA research into astronaut hibernation for extended, deep-space flights.
At first glance at the vid this may seem goofy, but there's real potential there.
Lately (or at least since I've been paying attention) everyone says that we're innocent until proven guilty, but the converse seems to be true. Especially when it comes to matters of sexual misconduct. The mere accusation of misconduct is enough to make life very uncomfortable for the accused.
Even if they are aquitted, if the accusation is withdrawn - or even if it is proven false in court, the stigma remains. A person accused this way may be vindicated morally, but often loses their job, and ends up moving out of the area, because of the ghosts that follow them.
This tendency to blow accusations out of proportion is getting out of hand. Once the media and the gossip-mill get a hand on the news, it becomes so widely disseminated that facts don't have a chance.
Don't get me wrong, I think that once proved guilty, the punishment should be maximal. I personally favor tatooing the convicion on the forehead of the perpetrator. But, we should certainly withold judgement until the machine has done it's work, and a jury has returned a verdict.
And if we're not on the jury, let's get on with our lives. We'll read about the case soon enough (Except if it involves O.J., Jon Bennet, M$ or the Clintons). The Brits seem to manage this type of thing better - black out the news until it's done.
Slashdot Mirror
And my house, right there... Looks like the chimney needs cleaning again!
I'm really looking forward to going home now, and mowing obscene messages into my lawn.
"Heeeeeere's jabber!" Ha!
Everyone can now log in and see if I'm going bald yet. Great...
Ok, I'll be the first to say it... Imagine a beowulf cluster of those puppies.. Like a huge disembodied compound eye, floating around in space.
It's not a question of wether or not it will happen. Only of when.
The rich will then get richer, and better looking, and faster, and smarter, and anything they can afford.
When confronted with the fact that 'everybody is doing it', and the 'keeping up with the Joneses' mentality of the affluent sectors, there's not a question of if. With their considerable resources brought to bear on politicians (law makers), lobbyists (big-time funds), Universities (researchers), the rich will make certain that their children are better designed to run the world when their turn comes.
There is no doubt that there will be some stratification among these 'people'. There will be children specialising in sports, intelligence, comeliness, artistic talent... I'm sure mother nature will be vengeful, but nature is a whore and can be bought, or at least rented for a few generations.
There is no doubt about another thing either. This will be the playground of the rich. They will do what they can to keep it that way. After all, what right has a poor kid to measure up to out perfect little Johnny? Right?
Families will save for a gene-tweak as they now save for homes. They will not manage to do anything other than guarantee a kid free from birth defects. A kid who can earn a living.
The normal person will be the working stiff, while the enhanced homo neogeneticus will live a life of leisure and pleasure.
What do you think, fellow Morlocks?
Hmmm, I wonder if you have to know the difference between Imperial and Metric 100baseT cabling lengths...
:)
This might be my opportunity to send Mir crashing down onto the AntiOnline servers...
Seriously though, I rather like the fact that these two are now related fields.
We're all being slowly, but surely, convenienced out of existence.
The big companies can afford to (mass) produce a conveniently available alternative. They can't do the same for specialized products, because then they incur the same costs as the small business. It is, as you suggest, a matter of profit - simple economics. And as long as the majority of us chooses to save a buck, rather than be patrons of our local small business, the trend will continue.
Ultimately, the skills needed to do anything will be held only by the big companies. (I know, I'm naysaying, but only to make the point)
I'm originally from Poland. There, families typically make a day-trip out of going to an area forest to pick edible mushrooms. There's a whole variety out there that is usable as garnish, flavoring, condiments...
In the US, the only mushroom that people know is the store bought little round one - and the very gourmet Shittake and Portabella. And for all these are worth, Americans don't know a Shittake from a Portabella from Nightshade on sight. It's only the printed label that makes the distinction. (Though, to their credit, a small segment of the population knows enough to spot the psychoactive variety that the Europeans see as poisonous.)
This is not a shot at Americans. It is simply more convenient to not have a knowledge of mushrooms. It's not a needed skill. But what about other skills. Brewing your own beer? Darning your own socks? In a society of convenience, where mega-corporations provide cheap, disposable goods, it is easy to simply buy into the convenience.
It's easy to abdicate power, but it's damn hard to get it back later. This holds for consumerism, security and human rights, everything.
The article hits on some significant points, but offers nothing new, really.
/. and all over the thinking person's media, that we are becoming a 'sound byte' culture.
It's been stated, here on
Educators and clinicians brand more and more children each year with the stigma of "Attention Deficit Disorder", some with the added zinger of "Hyperactive". But what they don't realize is that our culture and lifestyle not only drive them to be this way, they are demanding of such tendencies.
A child that shifts focus frequently, can not handle a 45 minute math class, but would do well at the author's openning paragraph. Consider it.
Further, with seeing news blurr by at 8 seconds per item, with commercials every 8 minutes, how can a kid these days be expected to pay attention for longer than that? How can they not think that this is what is expected of them?
The author (Gleick by proxy) decries the loss of the symphony because radio stations only play the first (most popular) movement. Everyone knows the openning bars of Beethoven's 5th, but who can actually recognize the 3rd movement? Even NPR has to cater to the whims of it's clientelle. It's a matter of funding - you keep your client happy by playing music they like.
As the pace at which information is presented increases, the depth to which it is available decreases. Deep knowledge is what separates the expert from the amateur. Depth and breadth are mutually exclusive given finite time. The gaining of 'deep knowledge' requires a time commitment, and a discipline over our access to the flurry of information that surrounds us.
If we do not exhibit this discipline, we have only shallow knowledge, and are disposable by our culture (full of others like us). If we exercise this discipline, we risk missing out on some shallow information that is significant in the context of the fast moving info-stream. We risk becoming dated and out-of-touch.
The 'instinctive' ability to be selective about information, is quickly becoming a survival skill for the information age.
What are your feelings on the 'flying cow' scene in the movie Twister? Since my first experience of airborne bovines came from your book Heavy Weather, I would like to know if you were approached by Spielberg et al. about using that piece of I.P.
While on the subject of Heavy Weather, IMHO it would make a great movie itself. Any plans?
Light vs. Heavy water has little to do with stopping the reaction. But there is a design issue.
Most designs rely on electrical power being available in order to shut themselves down. This is a design decision, and there are multiple backups and unneeded (IMO) complexity. Others require power to keep the reaction going. This way, all you do is cut power, and the control rods fall (gravity) into the core (rather than being forced up into it by a motor) and the chain reaction grinds to a halt.
A standard design is naturally more expensive than a custom one, because in a standard design, a uniform environment for the reactor must be part of the design rather than part of the location.
This is much like providing a standard interface for the reactor 'code', instead of hardcoding values into the given location. So to apply the reactor to a new site, the location interface is changed but the 'code' is the same, instead of redesigning the reactor to match the location...
National pride is a small issue, except to the French, and to customers who hire foreign contractors (designers, engineers) rather than use internal expertise (natural resentment there).
BTW, the top spot is now the Yonggwang#4 reactor with, I believe, a complete fuel cycle of 2 years with an AVERAGE output of 114% of design.
There is one existing standard reactor design. It is referred to as the System 80+, designed by Combustion Engineering of Windsor, Connecticut. CE was, decades ago, involved in the development of the standard Navy design. It is now out of the military market, and a part of Asea Brown Boveri.
:)
... The variety is due to single-mode failure clauses and legal requirements for diversification. Understandable due to the ~$4 billion per unit price tag.
The design is NRC approved, and is an outgrowth of the very successful, and accident/incident free Palo Verde plant(s) (3 reactor site) in Nevada. For a U.S. site, the design does not need to go through the lengthy and costly 'per site' approval process, provided the location is geologically sound. If not, no deal - but then again, no one would build a reactor on the San Andreas fault line.
Other existing plants of this design (or a contractual tailoring thereof for seismic, economic or political reasons dictated by the customer) are located at Yonggwang (2 of 6 units on the site) and Ulchin (2 of 6 units now being constructed) in S. Korea. The remaining units at these sites are Candu (Canadian), Framatome (French) or Westinghouse
Future projects might include N. Korea, China, and frankly, wherever there's a market. Few people are building new plants these days due to FUD and startup costs.
As for the 'safe nukes' project, I'm all for it. Step 1 is to educate the public about the risks, costs and processes involved, and how they compare to fossil hazzards and background radiation from folks own basements and such.
Just as a clarification, this is not the worst nuclear accident ever, it is the worst accident ever in Japan.
The 1986 Chernobyl meltdown is still the worst nuclear accident ever - in the world.
This (Japanese) accident did not happen at a nuclear power facility, but rather in a Uranium processing plant. Much too much (7 times) Uranium was added to a mixing tank, resulting in a chain reaction. As of present reports (21:00 EST) the reaction is under control and clean-up has begun.
Approximatelly 40 people have been hospitalized for radiation exposure, of this 2 are critical. The Japanese government has evacuated a 0.35 km radius around the plant, and is considering expanding the evac to 0.5 km. For those not reading the U.S. vs S.I. discussion, this is about 0.3 mile proposed radius.
As of latest report, Godzilla has not yet made an appearance. Area residents (300,000 people) are advised to remain indoors and minimize open air infusion into their residences (close windows, vents, etc). The accident occured at 09:30 Friday local time, 120 km N.E. of Tokyo with winds from the ENE direction clocking now at 15 knots.
That's just so much fear-mongering.
Nuclear technology is just that. Technology.
Yes, it has the potential to cause a lot of harm - this is why Billy-Joe and Bubba don't get to run the plants. It takes training and an education. Any shmoe can shovel coal. Do you want to breate the exhaust? Would you rather have been down wind of that Union Carbide disaster in India in the mid 80's? The coal ash that leaves a traditional fossil plant is more radioactive than anything vented into the atmosphere in the U.S. - this includes 3 mile island.
NukeTech is highly regulated. Accidents happen because people a) make mistakes, and b) cut corners. The benefits of nuclear power are huge, but the technology must be respected, and funded well enough to implement proper respect.
The funding of nuclear facilities (in the US and abroad) is inadequate. They are expected to function like traditional fossil plants, but everyone knows they need a much more steady hand - both on part of the operators and management.
France derives 60-75% of it's electrical power from nuclear sources. They respect it, regulate it intelligently and fund is adequately. They have never, ever had a nuclear accident.
People hear the word 'nuclear' and envision giant mushrooms on the horizon, or picture pulsating, glowing goo creeping towards them. Feh!
People fear that which they do not understand. If the averabe person put 10% of their NIMBY energy into learning about nuclear energy, they'd be lining up to but plant-side property.
Well, besides the exercise of getting so many voices contributing to a strategic decision, a'la online voting?
This is a way for Kasparov to get his 'face' back, by defeating the collective chess expertise of the world single-handedly.
What I would like to see next is the world vs. Deep Thought. If the greatest chess mind in the world, capable of defeating the whole world, was himself defeated by a computer, does transitivity apply? Can the world be beaten by the computer? What would be the result on the human psyche, to be defeated by a machine? Would governments halt AI research funding out of fear as thoughts of the W.O.P.R. and SkyNet dance in their heads?
Yes, we all know that DT was coached, and in fact designed, specifically to defeat Kasparov. It was programmed with Kasparov's strategies and game history... But still, it makes one wonder how the collective ego of humanity would respond to having it's collective hinny wipped by it's own invention.
If you've ever seen One Flew Over The Coo-coo's Nest, you're probably familiar with electro-shock therapy. It's similar to what a defibrilator does, only for the brain. It is used to disrupt the electrical pattern of the brain for a variety of reasons... Ending an epileptic siesure is one, stupification (forced complacency and the removal of higher level free thought) is another.
:)
Raising the charge in the brain is a very bad idea since the circuitry is designed for a very specific environment. However...
Boosting the levels of neurotransmitters that facilitate signal propagation across the synaptic gap might be promissing. This is what many drugs do. But, while drugs tend to act on the brain as a whole, with a particular tweak in the pleasure center areas, a boost in the cognitive or sensory regions might be what you're proposing. This, coupled with repeatedly firing the desired pathways in order to 'pave the road' for future use, should improve whatever skill or perception you're interested in boosing.
I'd recommend plenty of rest, exercise, a balanced diet, productive intellectual activity and adequate fresh air.
Mmmm, I have to take exception to this because the computer is no more special than any other human invention.
:) )
If we hypothetise that God would not look down on what we do with computers, we would have to make the same allowance for all of our other inventions. Guns, drugs, nuclear bombs, electric chairs, gas chambers, crowd-sized ovens, etc...
Killing is killing, lying is lying. The means itself has little moral content. What you do with it matters, what you do it with matters little.
I'm not particularly religious, in fact, I believe on the basis of Pascal's Gambit more than for any other reason. But, we have to remember that the computer is a tool. Nothing more.
No belief system in the world, be it Judeo-Christian Commandments or the Gita, or the Quoran, exempts technology as a means of deviation from 'acceptable' behavior. To do so would be to open up a can of worms the size of creation itself. Simple machines (i.e. pitfalls) would be allowable as modes of killing, and not frowned upon morally, because they would be the works of man. Crimes would only be crimes if committed with bare hands. Children would be exempted from moral behavior as creations of their parents...
Messy. Morality of an act is defined by the act, not the means by which it is performed. The intention is more significant than the medium in which it is performed.
(Wow, parochial school was useful for something after all.
Jon is saying that the way to avoid over-dependence on the complexity of technology, is to subjugate ourselves to a technology that would make rational decisions for us?
Isn't that like smashing your thumb with a sledge-hammer to avoid the risk of injury while driving in nails?
Tsk-tsk Jon. Whatever you're on, send some my way.
First off, for diagnosed and severe cases of CTS, surgery may be the only available option. These are the cases where the hands simply can not function well, and the pain prevents any sensible corrective action - these cases are rare in the extreme.
The most important thing to remember about CTS is that it is a RSI (Repetative Stress Injury). It develops over time, from unchecked, unhealthy behaviour. Keyboarding is most often the culprit, but many people in hand-use fields suffer from symptoms. Barbers, jewelers, gardeners, fine motor skill hobbyists such as model makers, people who tie their own fishing flies, people who tinker with electronics...
The key to correcting and avoiding CTS is well rounded use of your hands. Exercise and flexibility are key. You must avoid having your wrists cocked back (i.e. rested on a desk while typing). You must keep your tendons limber.
Stretching the wrists is very important - take periodic breaks (a couple per hour) to slowly and steadily bend your wrists both forward and back - use one hand to gently bend the other. Do not go to the point of pain, but try to get a good stretch. Note that your wrists should never bend by more than 90 degrees... Hold the stretch for a count of 10, relax for a minute or so and repeat. Roll your wrists through the extremes of their natural range of motion. Stretch your fingers as far as you can and hold the stretch while tilting your wrists back.
Some other posters have suggested a rubber band around your finger tips, so that you can open your fingers against the resistance.. This is excellent. Anything you can do to strengthen your forearm extensor muscles (the one's you use to bend your wrist back) is good, from rubber bands, to light weights, to just using the muscle with no resistance other than your own hand. Chinese meditation balls are great too.
What's important is to use your hands in a way OTHER than the single way that's causing the condition. Vary your hand usage, while trying to limit the repetative motions that brought CTS on in the first place. Use a wrist rest, the gel types tend to put least stress on sore wrists IMHO. If you mouse a lot, try a trackball. If you haven't already, switch to an ergonomic keyboard - a full size one is best.
Do not keep your wrists on the desk. Use a pad with both the keyboard and the mouse/trackball. Reason being that the desk tends to be cool/cold. A cold surface will cause decreased tissue flexibility, and will tend to numb pain that would remind you to take a break. If you can, try an elastic bandage sleeve on your wrists. The extra warmth and support will help.
Most importantly, stop kinking your wrists backwards as you type. Your hands should angle down slightly from your forearm. You should not have to maintain muscle tension to keep your hands in their working position. Do a little homework on ergonomics to see if maybe your chair or desk are not of the correct height.
And on a related topic, it's quite a good idea to go outside and focus on far away objects every one in a while. Focusing at a monitor 3 feet away all day is bad for the eyes.
What I think we're seeing here is the difference between two philosophies.
The geeks seem to hold fast to the belief that: You can not expect differing results from the same behaviour. We've seen the Intel precedent, and the result, and so we're expecting (reasonably) that the same actions by IBM (X) will have the same outcome (Y).. Next time, when a new value of X is fed into the function, the same value of Y will pop out the other end.
On the other hand, it looks like the corporations see it as: The squeak wheel gets the grease. Intel took the brunt of the opposition to the concept. Now IBM has picked up the gauntlet and is trying to run with it. Public opinion has been tested, and now the news is old. There is less likely to be as much opposition to the idea now, since it's not 'sexy' anymore. And if enough large companies reach concensus on this, the cusotmer is likely to simply believe, or give in assuming they can't win. Intel, IBM, any X, will keep chipping away at the issue until the wall gives way.
Eventually, what this will become is a matter of will. We have already made clear the reasons why this is not a good idea. We see it as a solved problem - how many times can you run through the same process until it becomes too tedious, and we move on? Intel was shown to be wrong and has backed down (a little). Now IBM put a new spin on an old hat. Eventually, one side will get tired, and it's likely to be the side that has less PR money.
Eventually we will get tired of voicing the same objections. The customers and the public-at-large will get tired of hearing the same arguments. The right legislator will get greased, and it will come into being.
My thoughts on the tidal nukes were that:
Why do it in the first place, if not to make the itdal wave appear natural in origin? If a nuke could create a tidal wave (or it was seen a worthy of study) then it itself would be devastating.
We had no problem dropping the bamb on Hiroshima. But, if we didn't want to be blatant, or wanted to appear able to control/influence the weather.. A tidal wave or earthquake induced by a nuclear weapon would probably be a good way to achieve the goal.
In retrospect, I suppose the 'tell-tale' signs of a nuke were not well known, and difficult to test for - so covering up our handiwork would not have been a high priority.
The whole concept stinks of Lex Luthor.
Did I miss something? The 'why' of it seems obvious.
Japan. We were at war, but taking obvious credit for nuking Japan would haunt us after the fact.. It has. If there had been a way to send tactical 'natural' disasters at Japan, we would have jumped on it.
I'd be curious to learn how the gov wanted to cover up the evidence of the detonation though.
Both of the Universities I attended as an undergraduate did the same thing. Plain sight text SSN right on the ID. My grad school didn't bother, and just gave me an ID with a serial number.
In the meat-grinder classes (the high-occupancy lecture hall ones) results were posted outside the professors office, tagged by SSN (or I should say 'student number') to protect anonymity. Too bad that almost everyone wore theirs on a cord, used them as a bookmark, paid for food with them...
You needed to show your ID to check a book out of the library, or to use a PC lab (and to get chem lab equipment etc)... All these places were staffed by students.
If you logged on to the library system, you could check your overdue books - by SSN. But, all students were listed, along with phone numbers and addresses (local and home)...
So if you worked in the PC lab, and that cute girl didn't want to give you her number, it didn't matter. And if that jock gave you a hard time in the caff, all it took was a quick peek and you could send your war-dialer after him at 3am - Hypothetically of course.
Oddly, only the tech-savvy students noticed this. Even more oddly, the sensitive records of the most talented ones didn't stay in the public-accessible databases for very long.
In many schools, the 'student ID' is all that's needed to obtain a transcript.
Now, just out of curiosity, who out there DIDN'T have their SSN as their student ID in college?
The stareotypical thing about geeks is that they rarely fit into a stereotype.
;)
Yes, we're all quite technophilitical (new word!) but our interests span the full spectrum of all other groups.
Besides, politics and philosophy are a means of programming people, as well as programs that run on people - who are actually just massively parallel, distributed computers. So there!
When does Political Correctness cross the line and become simply opinion?
It can't be a matter of the number of people holding that opinion, because here the corporates would be entitled to squat.
It can't be a matter of 'majority rules' either, because I don't remember an official poll about what 'derogatory' terms I find offensive...
Just who has the right to decide what is right and wrong in the Domain Name Game?? Eh?
And what about foreign language words? Accidental mis-spellings of possibly derogatory terms? Slang?
Last I checked, there was a country called Niger. www.niger.org can be just as valid for a nationalist web-site as www.israel.org (Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs website BTW), www.israel.com and www.israel.net - and these exist...
What about hobbies? Let's pick something semi-offensive first. Should taxidermy.com be 'reserved' by the same folks as vegan.org, just because it's offensive to them? How about model-planes.com?? Maybe we should make that unavailable because some kid somewhere died from sniffing Testors glue?
Yes, it gets ridiculous, but that's exactly the point. There is not definitive bound on 'offensive'. When we start limiting freedom in an authoritarian manner (read absolutist) then we have to do it absolutely, and reduce everything to bland oatmeal that is sure to not offent anyone - I find this alternative offensive. Nyah!
Long Live Harrison Bergeron!
Henson Productions has recently announced their intention to bring suit against Netscape for using the letter N as a logo. Henson lawyers have stated that the letter N has repeatedly been used to promote Sesame Street, and is therefore considered a trademark.
Henson lawyers went on to announce their ongoing partnership with Microsoft, regarding their innovative usage of the letter E to promote Internet Explorer. While the letter E has been used to promote Sesame Street as well, Henson Productions legal staff claims no intention of seeking damages from Microsoft, citing that E is a vowel and as such is more easily licensed to other parties. When questioned if this decision had anything to do with the $1billion donation from Bill Gates to the Henson Foundation, the lawyers replied with "no comment".
In other news, the head executives of A.O.L. have resigned for undisclosed reasons.
And the first picture, on the front page of the site is of what???
Gene Roddenberry is spinning in his orbitting little tin can.
I know a lot of people are snickering, having seen the film. But, at least show the man's dedication some respect, and read the article.
He touches on some really good stuff there, and the potential for the new suit he's working on, the G-Man, is pretty awesome. 90% mobility, 120lbs!! As Troy says, it's the gear of a fully dressed fireman. Consider the SWAT/RIOT applications? The earthquake disaster recovery usage - where you don't have to worry about dying in a collapsed building, but you can still climb a crumbling stair case... The military apps, as some have said, approach Starship Troopers... Yeah, at $300K a piece it's pricey, but it's cheaper than a tank, and with some power-assist it might do just as much damage.
Then there's the blurb about the suit enabling him to get a sample of Grisly blood during semi-hibernation, for use in NASA research into astronaut hibernation for extended, deep-space flights.
At first glance at the vid this may seem goofy, but there's real potential there.
Lately (or at least since I've been paying attention) everyone says that we're innocent until proven guilty, but the converse seems to be true. Especially when it comes to matters of sexual misconduct. The mere accusation of misconduct is enough to make life very uncomfortable for the accused.
Even if they are aquitted, if the accusation is withdrawn - or even if it is proven false in court, the stigma remains. A person accused this way may be vindicated morally, but often loses their job, and ends up moving out of the area, because of the ghosts that follow them.
This tendency to blow accusations out of proportion is getting out of hand. Once the media and the gossip-mill get a hand on the news, it becomes so widely disseminated that facts don't have a chance.
Don't get me wrong, I think that once proved guilty, the punishment should be maximal. I personally favor tatooing the convicion on the forehead of the perpetrator. But, we should certainly withold judgement until the machine has done it's work, and a jury has returned a verdict.
And if we're not on the jury, let's get on with our lives. We'll read about the case soon enough (Except if it involves O.J., Jon Bennet, M$ or the Clintons). The Brits seem to manage this type of thing better - black out the news until it's done.