Could they be searching for the wrong signal? Sure, or they could be looking in the wrong place, which is more likely.
Sagan postulated in Contact, that the signal would be so un-natural as to not be missed. A sequence of prime numbers fits the bill. Now, I recall something about the frequency being related to the natural frequency of hydrogen, and I don't quite understand that. There's plenty of hydrogen out there, all lit up and transmitting - so why blend in?
I'd say that if the signal pattern is to be unique, so should the frequency/wavelength. Maybe we're just not able to detect un-natural frequencies yet? Or, maybe they just don't want to talk to us.:) Why would they want to talk to someone who can't listen to their (pi/e)GHz signal?
The whole article is full of BS. It's a clear case of a geek grad-student with no life except for his research, talking to an air-head CNN reporter who has about as much common sense as fractals have in common with chaos theory.
A 125MB datarate is a 1Gbit datarate. Gigabit Ethernet has been on fiber for some time now. Firewire is promising to bump it from the top-dog spot. A 1Gb datarate in fiber is nothing new.
On another note, they may be applying chaos theory to soliton handling - but it doesn't say anything like that in the article.
Reread the first paragraph folks, it'll tell you exactly how it got into CNN.
It certainly would get their attention, but to return something, you typically have to pay S&H, and for something as expensive and even a single notebook, you need to protect yourself with insurance. That's a cost few people are willing to eat, just to make a point.
And I'm sure this is exactly what Toshiba and MS are counting on.
besides, there's the small issue of neural networks being 'opaque' to the creator - all's good when they work, but when they break it's difficult to figure out why.
Hmmm, sort of like a real mind, isn't it?
You make excellent points, and they're all true. But they can all be rebuked with a simple "Yet." AI/NN is still a young science. Traditional AI, as in knowledge base systems, truth validation, and all that other huey, is not much more then a dump of all possibilities. It's all provided by the programmer, and the system happily falls though it like a huge if-else-else... Where's the I in that AI?
We don't know how the human mind works yet, NN is our attempt at simulating something we do not understand. The fact that it's 'opaque' just may be a clue that we're on to something. They do learn, and they do make corrections for making poor choices. As do my cow-workers, and I'm not convinced they're all human either. - Or intelligent for that matter.:)
Just as an aside, modern air-craft don't work like birds, but they're the fruit of our attempt to emulate them. I think that, in the end, AI will work, but we'll all be surprised at the how.
simulating a human brain in hardware? that has to be the silliest myth of modern computing.
Right, let's just file it with all the other truisms, like:
Who would ever want a personal computer. - Digital The telephone is not profitable. - Western Union It'll never fly. - RCA re: Led Zepellin No one will ever use all 640K. - W. Gates III Ugh! Fire of no use! - Groak, the missing link.
Saying it can't be done, just might tee someone off enough to make them go and do it, just out of spite.:)
BTW: Is there any open source AI? That is, besides Eliza, as in something actually useful?
I remember the discussions that were the best part of my AI class. The difference between intelligence and knowledge. How do you separate the two, in terms of computing? How do you even define the former - except maybe that intelligence is the ability to synthesize and validate new knowledge from old knowledge.
Computers will excell at that which they already do well, data processing. They'll be able to provide medical diagnoses based on symptoms, financial modeling and weather forecasting, all sorts of quantitative tasks which humans can't do as fast. They'll handle lots of raw data, distill it, and act on it. Pretty much what we do, isn't it?
Peripherals will broaden our senses, enhance our experience of an increasingly computerized world, and make us realise that there are some things that just can not be replaced by a machine. Consider an AI social worker or psychiatrist. It maybe be an interesting AI exercise, but could a person get over the hurdle of using one to actually solve an emotional problem? Would anyone go to confession, knowing they're spilling their guts to a microprocessor, that will then use a hash table to look up the appropriate penence?
No, computers will become prevalent, and we will become dependent on them, but not more so than we have become dependent on machines. The industrial revolution invited speculation similar to this. We're still human.
It was once thought that people would not be able to breathe on a steam locomotive. It was thought that the rush of air would suck air out of our lungs. We now fly across the Atlantic in 2 hours, and we've been to the moon. It was thought that the first nuclear test might ignite the atmosphere, and all life would cease.
We're still here, and we're still human. And we will forever be human. Evolution took billions of years to get this far. How self-righteous we are to think that we can accellerate it! We are a product of it. We are, at this point, the epitamy of evolution; and if we have anything to say about it, we will remain top-dog for a long, long time. Evolution has bestowed upon us a great gift, greater than on any other species. We can radically alter our environment. Not ony do we adapt to it, we adapt it to us!
That's all that will happen. We've created computers, and made them part of our environment. We're adapting them to service us (a'la Borg), as we adapt ourselves to use them to our benefit.
They will no more change us, then we have changed the Earth. Hmmm, maybe that's not such a good point after all.:)
Aw c'mon folks.. It's a little early for kudos and high-fives for the power of public opinion. If 'big brother' says he's no longer watching, that means that this is what 'big brother' says. Nothing more.
Besides, how 'permanently' disabled will it be though software?? I'll believe it when I smell smoke, not before.
What they ought (moral issue) to do is 1) destroy the poisoned chips already made and 2) submit a RANDOM sampling of chips to independent review, just to make sure that 'feature' didn't make it back in. Brother Intel has openned a Pandora's box, and I think all free-source free-thinkers out there should seriously consider their alternatives.
But then again, MS (as almost all other big software firms) has been putting serial numbers on individual copies of software. What's to stop them from sending data back to Redmond, each time we go on-line?? It's not as though we can look at the original code, right? With all those animated Easter eggs, who'd complain about a small auditing routine that runs each time you visit www.microsoft.com??
This, if nothing else, is good reason for open source software. The world is a truly scary place when you need open source hardware as well.
What was it a whole $0.02 extra? Yes, that's about right. $0.02 for each and every bill and letter anyone anywhere sends. That's a 6% cost increase. But we don't see any service improvement for that. (at least the $450 screwdrivers got us a B2 bomber.:) ) That money goes to subsidize the 'bulk rate' mailings from credit card companies, Wal-Mart fliers, and GASP!! political re-election funds... Personally, I'd rather make THEM pay MORE, so I would get less junk.
Gas is actually cheaper this year, and it's a state issue, not a federal one. If I go just over the state line, I pay $0.14 less on the gallon. Computers are considerably cheaper this year than last year. The SAME letter costs 2 cents more, but an equivalent computer costs $1200 less, 50% cheaper!
US post office gets something like a 99.9% reliability rating So? It was as reliable last year, and the year before. If my proverbial two cents actually buy me something new, sure, I'll pay it. Those self-stick stamps are a nice improvement, and if those cost more than the lickable ones, that I'd think about. If the P.O. were to open an ISP that would let me pay bills from home for $0.33 per transaction, I might consider it. But as it stands, all those two cents amount to is a cost of living increase for slow, rude staff. (maybe it's just in my little provincial corner of the world - elsewhere it's a very reputable career, right?)
True, they will deliver to the middle of nowhere, and that is the only redeeming quality of the P.O.Service, AFAIC. Well, at least they don't charge us TAX on stamps yet.
In today's world, no one is going to choose a substandard service to a superior one. Email is fast, cheap and reliable; and here the Post Office just increased the cost of stamps??? For what? What added service do they provide for the extra money? None.
Pretty soon everyone will have an email connection. God knows, with the Democrats in the office any thing else will be discrimination against the poor so email will be subsidized like 'universal' telephone service. At that point, the P. O. will be reduced to a gummint version of FedEx, the U. S. Parcel Service, and that will be the end of it.
Now, if someone could just convince some big name bands to cut ties with their labels, and go Shareware...
Would the Id Software mentality work in the music industry? Would the Stones, for example, release a couple of new mp3 tracks, and let you purchase the rest of the new album right off their site? For say, $5?? It would be more than what they get per sale in the current scheme..
Does anyone know anyone at the EFF or GNU, that might be able to bring music into the fold?
I'm not "in the field" but what you're saying makes a lot of sense. It's very much like the handwriting recognition of today's PDAs, or speach recognition in Dragon Dictate... Instead of the computer asking you to pronounce a particular sound, it would ask you to think a particular letter, or pattern, or command.
From what I remember of my AI course work, it sounds like a perfect opportunity for a... (oh say it with me) A NEURAL NETWORK.;)
www.rockcity.net has some REALLY original looking computers. I wish they'd sell just the cases.
Tech-wise their complete PCs are either too expensive (PII) or not too impressive. Oh, and the site has been "under construction" for far too long to inspire confidence.
Leave it to the NSA to talk to small furry toys, and expect them to talk back. Whatever will they do when they figure out how a Walkman works..
The REALLY sad thing about this
on
Cyber Vigilantes
·
· Score: 1
The really sad thing about this is that CNN is becoming about as objective as PCMagazine.
The fact that CNN would release a story in which it claims that a senior security manager at one of the country's largest financial institutions would actually say "We are drawing a line in the sand, and if any of these dweebs cross it, we are going to protect ourselves", and incriminate himself by adding "We've broken in, stolen the computers and left a note: 'See how it feels?' and "We had to resort to baseball bats. That's what these punks will understand" is an absolute joke. No one in "that" position would speak to the media this way and expect to be taken seriously.
The remainder of the article seems Kosher enough, but the Lou Cipher bit begs the question of where CNN gets it's information. Our CIO may be Beelzebub himself, but as far as I know, he doesn't have a KooL NiCk.
A formal education, such as that provided by college, is absolutely essencial. It is the difference between having a handgun, and being a trained sniper. It's the difference between flailing fists and a black belt.
Some people have a talent, a pure inherent ability with all things geeky. Some people simply already have "the edge". A college education focuses and sharpens those talents. It channels them, and imparts onto them a disciplined approach.
It makes the difference between a Mitnik and a Ritchie, a Gates and a Torvalds. It grants the wisdom to tell "do now" from "do right". It teaches patience, commitment and sacrifice. It requires that we set aside instant gratification for the sake of a long term goal.
It can not replace talent, and it is not a substitute for serendipitous learning a'la hacker. It does, however, provide a scaffod upon which the talented can climb higher and reach farther then a quick-study with an O'Reilly under his arm.
Slashdot Mirror
Could they be searching for the wrong signal? Sure, or they could be looking in the wrong place, which is more likely.
:) Why would they want to talk to someone who can't listen to their (pi/e)GHz signal?
Sagan postulated in Contact, that the signal would be so un-natural as to not be missed. A sequence of prime numbers fits the bill. Now, I recall something about the frequency being related to the natural frequency of hydrogen, and I don't quite understand that. There's plenty of hydrogen out there, all lit up and transmitting - so why blend in?
I'd say that if the signal pattern is to be unique, so should the frequency/wavelength. Maybe we're just not able to detect un-natural frequencies yet? Or, maybe they just don't want to talk to us.
So you said what? 125MB * 8 = 1GB?? Your point?
The whole article is full of BS. It's a clear case of a geek grad-student with no life except for his research, talking to an air-head CNN reporter who has about as much common sense as fractals have in common with chaos theory.
A 125MB datarate is a 1Gbit datarate. Gigabit Ethernet has been on fiber for some time now. Firewire is promising to bump it from the top-dog spot. A 1Gb datarate in fiber is nothing new.
On another note, they may be applying chaos theory to soliton handling - but it doesn't say anything like that in the article.
Reread the first paragraph folks, it'll tell you exactly how it got into CNN.
It certainly would get their attention, but to return something, you typically have to pay S&H, and for something as expensive and even a single notebook, you need to protect yourself with insurance. That's a cost few people are willing to eat, just to make a point.
And I'm sure this is exactly what Toshiba and MS are counting on.
besides, there's the small issue of neural networks being 'opaque' to the creator - all's good when they work, but when they break it's difficult to figure out why.
:)
Hmmm, sort of like a real mind, isn't it?
You make excellent points, and they're all true. But they can all be rebuked with a simple "Yet." AI/NN is still a young science. Traditional AI, as in knowledge base systems, truth validation, and all that other huey, is not much more then a dump of all possibilities. It's all provided by the programmer, and the system happily falls though it like a huge if-else-else... Where's the I in that AI?
We don't know how the human mind works yet, NN is our attempt at simulating something we do not understand. The fact that it's 'opaque' just may be a clue that we're on to something. They do learn, and they do make corrections for making poor choices. As do my cow-workers, and I'm not convinced they're all human either. - Or intelligent for that matter.
Just as an aside, modern air-craft don't work like birds, but they're the fruit of our attempt to emulate them. I think that, in the end, AI will work, but we'll all be surprised at the how.
simulating a human brain in hardware? that has to be the silliest myth of modern computing.
:)
Right, let's just file it with all the other truisms, like:
Who would ever want a personal computer. - Digital
The telephone is not profitable. - Western Union
It'll never fly. - RCA re: Led Zepellin
No one will ever use all 640K. - W. Gates III
Ugh! Fire of no use! - Groak, the missing link.
Saying it can't be done, just might tee someone off enough to make them go and do it, just out of spite.
BTW: Is there any open source AI? That is, besides Eliza, as in something actually useful?
I remember the discussions that were the best part of my AI class. The difference between intelligence and knowledge. How do you separate the two, in terms of computing? How do you even define the former - except maybe that intelligence is the ability to synthesize and validate new knowledge from old knowledge.
:)
Computers will excell at that which they already do well, data processing. They'll be able to provide medical diagnoses based on symptoms, financial modeling and weather forecasting, all sorts of quantitative tasks which humans can't do as fast. They'll handle lots of raw data, distill it, and act on it. Pretty much what we do, isn't it?
Peripherals will broaden our senses, enhance our experience of an increasingly computerized world, and make us realise that there are some things that just can not be replaced by a machine.
Consider an AI social worker or psychiatrist. It maybe be an interesting AI exercise, but could a person get over the hurdle of using one to actually solve an emotional problem? Would anyone go to confession, knowing they're spilling their guts to a microprocessor, that will then use a hash table to look up the appropriate penence?
No, computers will become prevalent, and we will become dependent on them, but not more so than we have become dependent on machines. The industrial revolution invited speculation similar to this. We're still human.
It was once thought that people would not be able to breathe on a steam locomotive. It was thought that the rush of air would suck air out of our lungs. We now fly across the Atlantic in 2 hours, and we've been to the moon. It was thought that the first nuclear test might ignite the atmosphere, and all life would cease.
We're still here, and we're still human. And we will forever be human. Evolution took billions of years to get this far. How self-righteous we are to think that we can accellerate it! We are a product of it. We are, at this point, the epitamy of evolution; and if we have anything to say about it, we will remain top-dog for a long, long time. Evolution has bestowed upon us a great gift, greater than on any other species. We can radically alter our environment. Not ony do we adapt to it, we adapt it to us!
That's all that will happen. We've created computers, and made them part of our environment. We're adapting them to service us (a'la Borg), as we adapt ourselves to use them to our benefit.
They will no more change us, then we have changed the Earth. Hmmm, maybe that's not such a good point after all.
Aw c'mon folks.. It's a little early for kudos and high-fives for the power of public opinion. If 'big brother' says he's no longer watching, that means that this is what 'big brother' says. Nothing more.
Besides, how 'permanently' disabled will it be though software?? I'll believe it when I smell smoke, not before.
What they ought (moral issue) to do is 1) destroy the poisoned chips already made and 2) submit a RANDOM sampling of chips to independent review, just to make sure that 'feature' didn't make it back in. Brother Intel has openned a Pandora's box, and I think all free-source free-thinkers out there should seriously consider their alternatives.
But then again, MS (as almost all other big software firms) has been putting serial numbers on individual copies of software. What's to stop them from sending data back to Redmond, each time we go on-line?? It's not as though we can look at the original code, right? With all those animated Easter eggs, who'd complain about a small auditing routine that runs each time you visit www.microsoft.com??
This, if nothing else, is good reason for open source software. The world is a truly scary place when you need open source hardware as well.
What was it a whole $0.02 extra? Yes, that's about right. $0.02 for each and every bill and letter anyone anywhere sends. That's a 6% cost increase. But we don't see any service improvement for that. (at least the $450 screwdrivers got us a B2 bomber. :) ) That money goes to subsidize the 'bulk rate' mailings from credit card companies, Wal-Mart fliers, and GASP!! political re-election funds... Personally, I'd rather make THEM pay MORE, so I would get less junk.
Gas is actually cheaper this year, and it's a state issue, not a federal one. If I go just over the state line, I pay $0.14 less on the gallon. Computers are considerably cheaper this year than last year. The SAME letter costs 2 cents more, but an equivalent computer costs $1200 less, 50% cheaper!
US post office gets something like a 99.9% reliability rating So? It was as reliable last year, and the year before. If my proverbial two cents actually buy me something new, sure, I'll pay it. Those self-stick stamps are a nice improvement, and if those cost more than the lickable ones, that I'd think about. If the P.O. were to open an ISP that would let me pay bills from home for $0.33 per transaction, I might consider it. But as it stands, all those two cents amount to is a cost of living increase for slow, rude staff. (maybe it's just in my little provincial corner of the world - elsewhere it's a very reputable career, right?)
True, they will deliver to the middle of nowhere, and that is the only redeeming quality of the P.O.Service, AFAIC. Well, at least they don't charge us TAX on stamps yet.
In today's world, no one is going to choose a substandard service to a superior one. Email is fast, cheap and reliable; and here the Post Office just increased the cost of stamps??? For what? What added service do they provide for the extra money? None.
Pretty soon everyone will have an email connection. God knows, with the Democrats in the office any thing else will be discrimination against the poor so email will be subsidized like 'universal' telephone service. At that point, the P. O. will be reduced to a gummint version of FedEx, the U. S. Parcel Service, and that will be the end of it.
Now, if someone could just convince some big name bands to cut ties with their labels, and go Shareware...
Would the Id Software mentality work in the music industry? Would the Stones, for example, release a couple of new mp3 tracks, and let you purchase the rest of the new album right off their site? For say, $5?? It would be more than what they get per sale in the current scheme..
Does anyone know anyone at the EFF or GNU, that might be able to bring music into the fold?
It will stop when we have to pay royalties for humming a song.
I'm not "in the field" but what you're saying makes a lot of sense. It's very much like the handwriting recognition of today's PDAs, or speach recognition in Dragon Dictate... Instead of the computer asking you to pronounce a particular sound, it would ask you to think a particular letter, or pattern, or command.
;)
From what I remember of my AI course work, it sounds like a perfect opportunity for a... (oh say it with me) A NEURAL NETWORK.
This has probably been on /. before but...
www.rockcity.net has some REALLY original looking computers. I wish they'd sell just the cases.
Tech-wise their complete PCs are either too expensive (PII) or not too impressive. Oh, and the site has been "under construction" for far too long to inspire confidence.
Well, I guess that the "freedom to innovate" mantra is starting to hurt.
:)
"You mean we actually have to COMPETE???" And with free software at that! Oh I get a warm fuzzy feeling.
Leave it to the NSA to talk to small furry toys, and expect them to talk back. Whatever will they do when they figure out how a Walkman works..
The really sad thing about this is that CNN is becoming about as objective as PCMagazine.
The fact that CNN would release a story in which it claims that a senior security manager at one
of the country's largest financial institutions would actually say "We are drawing a line in the sand, and if any of these dweebs cross it, we are going to protect ourselves", and incriminate himself by adding "We've broken in, stolen the computers and left a note: 'See how it feels?' and "We had to resort to baseball bats. That's what these punks will understand" is an absolute joke. No one in "that" position would speak to the media this way and expect to be taken seriously.
The remainder of the article seems Kosher enough, but the Lou Cipher bit begs the question of where CNN gets it's information. Our CIO may be Beelzebub himself, but as far as I know, he doesn't have a KooL NiCk.
A formal education, such as that provided by college, is absolutely essencial.
It is the difference between having a handgun, and being a trained sniper. It's the difference between flailing fists and a black belt.
Some people have a talent, a pure inherent ability with all things geeky. Some people simply already have "the edge". A college education focuses and sharpens those talents. It channels them, and imparts onto them a disciplined approach.
It makes the difference between a Mitnik and a Ritchie, a Gates and a Torvalds. It grants the wisdom to tell "do now" from "do right". It teaches patience, commitment and sacrifice. It requires that we set aside instant gratification for the sake of a long term goal.
It can not replace talent, and it is not a substitute for serendipitous learning a'la hacker. It does, however, provide a scaffod upon which the talented can climb higher and reach farther then a quick-study with an O'Reilly under his arm.