I'm tired of reading about rollup screens. This article is more about a design than an actual device (the video is computer generated). I might just as well be watching Terminator 3 to see how control over fluid metal could look.
I've seen articles and concept designs of folding and rolling of displays for the past 10 years at least. It's time that this stops making news. The next time this should show up is when someone actually builds one.
What's with this Linux thing and the n900? Sure, it's a linux netbook that fits in a pocket, but it's an AMAZING phone! Why is everyone ignoring this? I have one, and the Skype, google talk, contact list all-in-one is the most useful functionality I can imagine. I use it all the time. The QWERTY keyboard is great for texting and emails, it has a real browser, it DOES have useful regular user type apps, like Foreca Weather, Facebook, and less useful ones, like Latitude and n900 Fly:)
What else? It integrates with my google calendar, it lets me share video live, upload pictures to social networking sites, and even tell me, where I need to go. I also own an Android phone (v1.5), and Maemo kicks Android butt. I'm sure Android 2 is better, but Maemo on N900 is polished. What is boggling my mind is why Nokia doesn't seem to see it. Why did they dilute it with MeeGo? And why aren't they screaming about it from every ad?! It's Linux on mobile, it's ready, for chrissake!! Oh, yea, and give it a bigger battery.
If it's good for reading slashdot, browse facebook, read and write emails, and listen to music, then there is a market. Netbooks and verysmartphones occupy it now.
My wife is on a Nokia N97 - with gtalk chat, facebook, and photo sharing, she practically doesn't set the thing down. AND when she's not on the N97, she's on her netbook. Jobs is dead on. You bet your a** there's a big market for this: WOMEN (not many of those here, probably, so hence the lack of general comprehension). The lack of a cam is very bad, though.
Not to be the devil's advocate here, but wasn't it also extremely profitable to be helping out Hitler once upon a time? Are commercial interests really a good justification for what's going on?
This is not an area for business to make judgements on. Business will do what is legal, and no more. This is an area for governments to step in. Why not make it illegal for corps to engage in business practices that would be considered unlawful outside the jurisdiction? That would fix a lot of these ethical problems. The way it is now, a moral corp cannot afford to be outdone in China by an amoral one.
Corps should not be left alone in making judgements on ethics. The most recent lesson on that isn't Nazi Germany, btw. It happened as recently as this decade, when Mr. Greenspan trusted banks to make the right decisions.
It's idiocy to get on their bad side or lock yourselves out of their market. Smart players will play by China's rules and not try to upset them.
The thing a lot of people don't get is that morals don't matter in international politics and business. "Might makes right" *does* matter.
So, by your logic, the appropriate response to Hitler's Germany was to keep mum, because it was a superpower? By what most commenters to this article in general, it seems it was OK for IBM to supply Hitler the machines for the German census as well. History repeats itself indeed.
I, for one, welcome such an advancement. (Yea, I'm trolling with the subject, but I do want to make a point)
I have a satellite decoder/PVR on my TV that lets me record HD movies (true, I can't get them off the box), and lets me rent movies for 24 hour periods (VOD). I do not pirate, as I'm happy to pay for my content. But, guess what, I haven't rented a VOD movie yet. Why? Because the deal sucks. I'm sure the idiots who invented it will figure out what's wrong sooner or later (price).
I say: Let the MPAA have their DRM and let's see how much more they sell. If they get the kind of control they want, then we'll have the freedom not to buy their produce. I'll be more than happy to stop paying if they give me a worse product.
It's not like i need to see 2012 on my TV before it comes out on BD; hell, I don't have to go see it on my TV at all (I already paid to see it at the theatre).
Why give these idiots arguments to sponsor projects, like "pirate taxes"? I'd much rather have DRM in my TV and PVR than have to pay a pirate tax or some other stupid blanket scheme.
It's true that the simulation will not simulate analog properties, but then again, that's not your desired behaviour. You want to be able to copy your boards, so your evolved "solution" can be manufactured after you've reached it.
I read a similar article in Scientific American in the early 90's. The problem was recognizing 1000Hz signal on an input. The chips also learned to recognize it using their analog, instead of their digital, properties, and the evolved program could not be copied to a different chip.
A full simulation will let you develop an algorithm that actually takes advantage of the properties of the chips that you are able to replicate.... or not. I just remembered about glitches. Glitches on the physical chip may break your perfect simulation model. I guess the best way to do it would be to have the robots fabricate their offspring. On second thought, the first genius, who comes up with THAT will make the "4th variety" come true .
Notice how Sony, Nintendo, and Apple make billions in profits. If the scheme lets them be rich, they have no reason to do it any other way. Closing options down is walking a fine line; lock out too much, and you scare customers away. But notice that Nintendo is number 1, which means they are pretty far from crossing the line. Apple is quite far from crossing it as well. Sony might have crossed it with the PSPgo, but who knows? I'm not the average PSPgo target gamer, and probably neither are you.
Last year I was passing some cars going.. fast.. and after passing the first one I saw a cop car on the side of the road. So I hit the brakes and slowed from about 130km/h to 80 or 90. There was a guy also bassing right on my tail (Polish roads) and didn't notice the police or that I slowed down. I only heard his tires squeal and when I looked in the mirror I just saw the poor Fiat Punto punt the back of my Opel Vectra - hard. Well, I just saw the Punto start to hit me, and then my head got slammed back into the headrest. A Dell Latitude laptop was in the trunk. The trunk went in about 40cm from the impact even though there was a tow hook installed.
During the damage check, I booted up the laptop. No problems. The Punto and the Vectra had severe damage. The Vectra still runs, but I doubt the Punto was good for anything but parts.
While the laptop was in a protective laptop bag, the impact was still severe. Mind you, the braking probably sent the laptop flying right up to the back of the back seat and the impact sent it flying back, so the impact was probably not directly absorbed by the laptop against the trunk wall.
Which would lead us to the conclustion that we, indeed, have a destiny which we cannot change... The buddhists would be scientifically proven to be correct, and christians (with the causal evil vs good struggle) to be proven wrong...
It is easy to argue that the govnt employs common people, who cannot handle some info. The truth is, that the secret stuff gives the feds an advantage over spooks in other countries. If you can keep the fact that you have a fleet of F-117s on hand, you get the advantage of Saddam Hussein not buying the latest anti-stealth shoulder launched rockets from Serbia at $zillion a pop for a few more years. Simple. Military advantage. I can handle knowing that the USAF has rocket powered toilets just as well as the next guy, but may be in USAF's advantage not to let ANYONE know about it.
It's logical that if they publish this in the USA, then Osama is going to read all bout it the same day. It's not that regular people like us can't know about it, it's that us not knowing about it is the only way to guarantee that Osama won't know either.
They have full right to do this in the name of security, and it is also their duty to judge what information may be released. Remember, if they release something which allows Osama to level New York tomorrow (i.e. "suitcase thermonuclear bomb for $100 HOWTO"), it's THEIR ass on the line.
And just to drive the argument home: Foreign spies would be out of work if stuff like that was public. What's the harm? Why do you think other countries spend so much money on intelligence, if this info isn't crucial to security?
You're beyond my very limited comprehension of the universe. But, yes, if matter is being created at the centre of the universe, I can see how the amount of computation and information may not have a bound upper limit.
I wish this discussion was in the scope of the computational power of my consciousness, though. I cannot begin to fathom the implications of matter being CREATED at the centre of the universe. I don't think I fully grasp my tax return filings (I'm filing in Poland this year), much less this discussion.
Since evolution's only motto is that the fittest suvive and no holds are barred, then whatever brain can function better while making use of micro wormholes, subspace, metaphysical power, warp speed, and GTK widgets will survive. Nobody needs to know how it works. Evolution only requires that it does.
If it were possible for the brain to make use of some metaphysical data processing, it would do so without asking anyone for permission.
I base this on the observation made when making evolutionary ICs. I read an article on this in SciAm a while back. The chips circuits that evolved through 10000 some odd generations would make unlimited use of the chip's physical features, such as electromagnetic coupling between wires, inductance, temperature, and practically any and all laws of physics that apply... as a result the designs created were irreproducible on different ICs, but that's beside the point.
Using it to discuss the calculational ability of the universe is idiotic.
No it isn't. It gives an excellent measure of scale! The statement that Moore's law is limited by the universe to 600 years duration gives an idea of how unimaginably FREAKING FAST our technology is expanding at the moment. 600 years in the scale of all time is a really short time.
Also, it sorta shows how far we are from the limit in terms of what we are capable of at the moment.
For the purpose of the discussion. Who cares? The article (which I didn't read, of course!) talks about consciousness in general without specifying what you need to achieve the phenomenon.
I think the guy talks about the general concept of computation as processing information in any way shape or form. The breaking of glass is a computation. If anything exists and changes in time, I think one can say that it represents information that is "computed" as it morphs.
Consciousness and "metaphysical" involve information being reorganized no matter what your belief. Hence they involve computation.
I don't think you can believe that a universe is finite or that it contains a certain amount of information (which is useful for a lot of real physics, I believe) unless you accept that anything we preceive to be "metaphysical" must by totally contained in the universe.
My brother recently started work on researching how humans experience smell. He needs to know how many different compounds the nose can sense, and how the brain is able to process combinations of these compounds to produce the sense of smelling something.
It's interesting to know how much detail one can see. It helps in display design.
Light sensitivity and processing power of images helps define good refresh rates for our displays.
It's good to know the frequency response range of the ear. It helps with sound systems and alarms.
Sensory resolution is very important in engineering.
So why would we want to know the computational power necessary/used in our consciousness? Hm.. we may want to simulate that consciousness, for example.;)
That's probably because it would be too big. But a wearable computer you will want. Small as a wallet and a display in your glasses or contact lens. The PDA/Tablet PC is just a stepping stone.
Same was with laptops. Right now I'd rather have a laptop for my home computing than a desktop. It's powerful enough, the components are affordable. It has a nice screen. It's QUIET!!!! And the keyboard is more comfortable for touch typing.
Every time I turn on my desktop I shudder. There HAS to be an alternative. And a laptop is really it. But the laptop also has faults. It's big, it's heavy (relative to other stuff I like carrying around) and I need to sit down to use it.
The wearcomp is the future. Some people out there are working on these babies right now, and let me tell you. It is going to be hot! (I'm not talking about Xybernauts. Check out Steve Mann's work on eyetap.org. The man is perhaps not as clear as some of the marketing pros out there, but you only need to look at his work to see that he has the right idea. He's on the fringe now, because computers aren't fast enough for his algorithms yet. But when they are, you will see the real paradigm shift (dammit that's such an ugly term, but it applies here) in personal computing. Until then, you will just see a gradual merging of the cell phone with the PC(tablet/laptop whatever).
Yes, I have worked in the Mann's lab in my last year of Skule. And even though I did not really contribute to his work (hey, I don't have the gift), I saw the future in his lab. Working there, you could see the science fiction coming true. I was in constant awe and I had adrenaline in my veins when we unleashed some of the algorithms on the poor raw data we collected. I am not, nor ever will be a computer genius, but I envy the folks who work with Steve every day, because that lab is what passion for computing is all about.
It is hardware that is being standardized and software is what you have real selection in. It is too much of an investment to build a chip foundry to have a real choice in hardware for the average consumer. It's just like with telcos. You don't really pay any more or less for your copper and telephone switches. You do get to choose the telephone company tho (at least in a free market) and the services you get. The switches and hardware are not free, but they can be considered a given. Just like running water.
It is inevitable that this will be where basic commodity computing will go just looking at history. Whether it will be in Bill's lifetime? I would venture to guess "not".
Slashdot Mirror
By that definition, desktops, steam engines, and manned warplanes are also a fad.
I'm tired of reading about rollup screens. This article is more about a design than an actual device (the video is computer generated). I might just as well be watching Terminator 3 to see how control over fluid metal could look.
I've seen articles and concept designs of folding and rolling of displays for the past 10 years at least. It's time that this stops making news. The next time this should show up is when someone actually builds one.
Cuba is not poor because of the embargo. I lived in communist Poland with no embargos, and toilet paper was SCARCE. Not kidding.
What's with this Linux thing and the n900? Sure, it's a linux netbook that fits in a pocket, but it's an AMAZING phone! Why is everyone ignoring this? I have one, and the Skype, google talk, contact list all-in-one is the most useful functionality I can imagine. I use it all the time. The QWERTY keyboard is great for texting and emails, it has a real browser, it DOES have useful regular user type apps, like Foreca Weather, Facebook, and less useful ones, like Latitude and n900 Fly :)
What else? It integrates with my google calendar, it lets me share video live, upload pictures to social networking sites, and even tell me, where I need to go. I also own an Android phone (v1.5), and Maemo kicks Android butt. I'm sure Android 2 is better, but Maemo on N900 is polished. What is boggling my mind is why Nokia doesn't seem to see it. Why did they dilute it with MeeGo? And why aren't they screaming about it from every ad?! It's Linux on mobile, it's ready, for chrissake!! Oh, yea, and give it a bigger battery.
If it's good for reading slashdot, browse facebook, read and write emails, and listen to music, then there is a market. Netbooks and verysmartphones occupy it now.
My wife is on a Nokia N97 - with gtalk chat, facebook, and photo sharing, she practically doesn't set the thing down. AND when she's not on the N97, she's on her netbook. Jobs is dead on. You bet your a** there's a big market for this: WOMEN (not many of those here, probably, so hence the lack of general comprehension). The lack of a cam is very bad, though.
C# is a ripoff off Delphi Pascal, and so is the IDE. Delphi came out in 1995ish, which is way before .NET.
C# is the work of Delphi's architect, if I have my facts straight; it's a fantastic product, but it's not innovation any more than Windows.
Not to be the devil's advocate here, but wasn't it also extremely profitable to be helping out Hitler once upon a time? Are commercial interests really a good justification for what's going on?
This is not an area for business to make judgements on. Business will do what is legal, and no more. This is an area for governments to step in. Why not make it illegal for corps to engage in business practices that would be considered unlawful outside the jurisdiction? That would fix a lot of these ethical problems. The way it is now, a moral corp cannot afford to be outdone in China by an amoral one.
Corps should not be left alone in making judgements on ethics. The most recent lesson on that isn't Nazi Germany, btw. It happened as recently as this decade, when Mr. Greenspan trusted banks to make the right decisions.
As far as I can see, there is no grey area here.
It's idiocy to get on their bad side or lock yourselves out of their market. Smart players will play by China's rules and not try to upset them.
The thing a lot of people don't get is that morals don't matter in international politics and business. "Might makes right" *does* matter.
So, by your logic, the appropriate response to Hitler's Germany was to keep mum, because it was a superpower? By what most commenters to this article in general, it seems it was OK for IBM to supply Hitler the machines for the German census as well. History repeats itself indeed.
I, for one, welcome such an advancement. (Yea, I'm trolling with the subject, but I do want to make a point)
I have a satellite decoder/PVR on my TV that lets me record HD movies (true, I can't get them off the box), and lets me rent movies for 24 hour periods (VOD). I do not pirate, as I'm happy to pay for my content. But, guess what, I haven't rented a VOD movie yet. Why? Because the deal sucks. I'm sure the idiots who invented it will figure out what's wrong sooner or later (price).
I say: Let the MPAA have their DRM and let's see how much more they sell. If they get the kind of control they want, then we'll have the freedom not to buy their produce. I'll be more than happy to stop paying if they give me a worse product.
It's not like i need to see 2012 on my TV before it comes out on BD; hell, I don't have to go see it on my TV at all (I already paid to see it at the theatre).
Why give these idiots arguments to sponsor projects, like "pirate taxes"? I'd much rather have DRM in my TV and PVR than have to pay a pirate tax or some other stupid blanket scheme.
It's true that the simulation will not simulate analog properties, but then again, that's not your desired behaviour. You want to be able to copy your boards, so your evolved "solution" can be manufactured after you've reached it.
I read a similar article in Scientific American in the early 90's. The problem was recognizing 1000Hz signal on an input. The chips also learned to recognize it using their analog, instead of their digital, properties, and the evolved program could not be copied to a different chip.
A full simulation will let you develop an algorithm that actually takes advantage of the properties of the chips that you are able to replicate.... or not. I just remembered about glitches. Glitches on the physical chip may break your perfect simulation model. I guess the best way to do it would be to have the robots fabricate their offspring. On second thought, the first genius, who comes up with THAT will make the "4th variety" come true .
Right, they should've done it for something flies really like. Like poo.
Notice how Sony, Nintendo, and Apple make billions in profits. If the scheme lets them be rich, they have no reason to do it any other way.
Closing options down is walking a fine line; lock out too much, and you scare customers away. But notice that Nintendo is number 1, which means they are pretty far from crossing the line. Apple is quite far from crossing it as well. Sony might have crossed it with the PSPgo, but who knows? I'm not the average PSPgo target gamer, and probably neither are you.
Last year I was passing some cars going.. fast.. and after passing the first one I saw a cop car on the side of the road. So I hit the brakes and slowed from about 130km/h to 80 or 90. There was a guy also bassing right on my tail (Polish roads) and didn't notice the police or that I slowed down. I only heard his tires squeal and when I looked in the mirror I just saw the poor Fiat Punto punt the back of my Opel Vectra - hard. Well, I just saw the Punto start to hit me, and then my head got slammed back into the headrest. A Dell Latitude laptop was in the trunk. The trunk went in about 40cm from the impact even though there was a tow hook installed.
During the damage check, I booted up the laptop. No problems. The Punto and the Vectra had severe damage. The Vectra still runs, but I doubt the Punto was good for anything but parts.
While the laptop was in a protective laptop bag, the impact was still severe. Mind you, the braking probably sent the laptop flying right up to the back of the back seat and the impact sent it flying back, so the impact was probably not directly absorbed by the laptop against the trunk wall.
J
Which would lead us to the conclustion that we, indeed, have a destiny which we cannot change... The buddhists would be scientifically proven to be correct, and christians (with the causal evil vs good struggle) to be proven wrong...
It is easy to argue that the govnt employs common people, who cannot handle some info. The truth is, that the secret stuff gives the feds an advantage over spooks in other countries. If you can keep the fact that you have a fleet of F-117s on hand, you get the advantage of Saddam Hussein not buying the latest anti-stealth shoulder launched rockets from Serbia at $zillion a pop for a few more years. Simple. Military advantage. I can handle knowing that the USAF has rocket powered toilets just as well as the next guy, but may be in USAF's advantage not to let ANYONE know about it.
It's logical that if they publish this in the USA, then Osama is going to read all bout it the same day. It's not that regular people like us can't know about it, it's that us not knowing about it is the only way to guarantee that Osama won't know either.
They have full right to do this in the name of security, and it is also their duty to judge what information may be released. Remember, if they release something which allows Osama to level New York tomorrow (i.e. "suitcase thermonuclear bomb for $100 HOWTO"), it's THEIR ass on the line.
And just to drive the argument home: Foreign spies would be out of work if stuff like that was public. What's the harm? Why do you think other countries spend so much money on intelligence, if this info isn't crucial to security?
I wonder if this theory could be used to objectively qualify morons, no idiots, no... damn. all these already have a definition.
You're beyond my very limited comprehension of the universe. But, yes, if matter is being created at the centre of the universe, I can see how the amount of computation and information may not have a bound upper limit.
I wish this discussion was in the scope of the computational power of my consciousness, though. I cannot begin to fathom the implications of matter being CREATED at the centre of the universe. I don't think I fully grasp my tax return filings (I'm filing in Poland this year), much less this discussion.
I agree with the parent. Off-topic, yes :)
Since evolution's only motto is that the fittest suvive and no holds are barred, then whatever brain can function better while making use of micro wormholes, subspace, metaphysical power, warp speed, and GTK widgets will survive. Nobody needs to know how it works. Evolution only requires that it does.
If it were possible for the brain to make use of some metaphysical data processing, it would do so without asking anyone for permission.
I base this on the observation made when making evolutionary ICs. I read an article on this in SciAm a while back. The chips circuits that evolved through 10000 some odd generations would make unlimited use of the chip's physical features, such as electromagnetic coupling between wires, inductance, temperature, and practically any and all laws of physics that apply... as a result the designs created were irreproducible on different ICs, but that's beside the point.
J
Using it to discuss the calculational ability of the universe is idiotic.
No it isn't. It gives an excellent measure of scale! The statement that Moore's law is limited by the universe to 600 years duration gives an idea of how unimaginably FREAKING FAST our technology is expanding at the moment. 600 years in the scale of all time is a really short time.
Also, it sorta shows how far we are from the limit in terms of what we are capable of at the moment.
J
Just out of interest, where else do you suggest?
For the purpose of the discussion. Who cares? The article (which I didn't read, of course!) talks about consciousness in general without specifying what you need to achieve the phenomenon.
J
I think the guy talks about the general concept of computation as processing information in any way shape or form. The breaking of glass is a computation. If anything exists and changes in time, I think one can say that it represents information that is "computed" as it morphs.
Consciousness and "metaphysical" involve information being reorganized no matter what your belief. Hence they involve computation.
I don't think you can believe that a universe is finite or that it contains a certain amount of information (which is useful for a lot of real physics, I believe) unless you accept that anything we preceive to be "metaphysical" must by totally contained in the universe.
J
My brother recently started work on researching how humans experience smell. He needs to know how many different compounds the nose can sense, and how the brain is able to process combinations of these compounds to produce the sense of smelling something.
Interesting study. Very real.
J
I would.
;)
It's interesting to know how much detail one can see. It helps in display design.
Light sensitivity and processing power of images helps define good refresh rates for our displays.
It's good to know the frequency response range of the ear. It helps with sound systems and alarms.
Sensory resolution is very important in engineering.
So why would we want to know the computational power necessary/used in our consciousness? Hm.. we may want to simulate that consciousness, for example.
J
That's probably because it would be too big. But a wearable computer you will want. Small as a wallet and a display in your glasses or contact lens. The PDA/Tablet PC is just a stepping stone.
Same was with laptops. Right now I'd rather have a laptop for my home computing than a desktop. It's powerful enough, the components are affordable. It has a nice screen. It's QUIET!!!! And the keyboard is more comfortable for touch typing.
Every time I turn on my desktop I shudder. There HAS to be an alternative. And a laptop is really it. But the laptop also has faults. It's big, it's heavy (relative to other stuff I like carrying around) and I need to sit down to use it.
The wearcomp is the future. Some people out there are working on these babies right now, and let me tell you. It is going to be hot! (I'm not talking about Xybernauts. Check out Steve Mann's work on eyetap.org. The man is perhaps not as clear as some of the marketing pros out there, but you only need to look at his work to see that he has the right idea. He's on the fringe now, because computers aren't fast enough for his algorithms yet. But when they are, you will see the real paradigm shift (dammit that's such an ugly term, but it applies here) in personal computing. Until then, you will just see a gradual merging of the cell phone with the PC(tablet/laptop whatever).
Yes, I have worked in the Mann's lab in my last year of Skule. And even though I did not really contribute to his work (hey, I don't have the gift), I saw the future in his lab. Working there, you could see the science fiction coming true. I was in constant awe and I had adrenaline in my veins when we unleashed some of the algorithms on the poor raw data we collected. I am not, nor ever will be a computer genius, but I envy the folks who work with Steve every day, because that lab is what passion for computing is all about.
[blink,blink] what am I doing here?
I should go now...
It is hardware that is being standardized and software is what you have real selection in. It is too much of an investment to build a chip foundry to have a real choice in hardware for the average consumer. It's just like with telcos. You don't really pay any more or less for your copper and telephone switches. You do get to choose the telephone company tho (at least in a free market) and the services you get. The switches and hardware are not free, but they can be considered a given. Just like running water.
It is inevitable that this will be where basic commodity computing will go just looking at history. Whether it will be in Bill's lifetime? I would venture to guess "not".