Well, depending on the signal strength, the max range might be more that 33 miles. I am assuming that 33 miles is the distance to the horizon from the antenna on the sky scraper.
If you are in an apartment building on a upper floor, you may have a clear shot at the transmitter from more than 33 miles. This is because the horizon is a 5 to ten miles away from the apartment window, and this adds to the horizon distance as seen from the sky scaper.
Not accounting for trees, hills, and intervening objects, etc.
Well, it is NOT free standing out in the open air. and it is not animated.
It is contained inside a glass sphere. Maybe the size of a basketball, or smaller. The images are of a small section of a DNA strand, roughly one full twist. The quality of the image is similar to a nicely shadowed but obviously computer rendered diagram in 3D (well duh!) It is definitely not photograde, although that by itself should not be a problem.
The image is shown glowing, but it is in a darkened space, so probably it will not be ready for daylight presentations for a while.
I am amazed that it is done at all, although it will be a while before it progresses beyond the novelty stage.
"This File Download has been brought to you by Microsoft, ReInventing the Internet, Just for you!. Before your download begins, let us remind you to check out the latest Microsft product, Microsoft Spam..."
And Then:
"Before we continue your download..."
This would be enough to make me change my mind on gun control.
The examples in the article remind me of a marketroid who has to own it all, and has to stop people who own something that he can't own, or blew off.
That's the thing that irks me. Greed to the point of "That's a good Idea! You can't have it because I want it"
If they can't have it, they gotta stop you from having too. Worse than a bucketful of frogs.
[A bucketful of frogs refers to an old country story of if you have a bunch of frogs in a bucket, when one tries to get out, the others will try to pull the potential escapee back into the bucket.]
Even when you walk down the street, or have a debate in a bar, the reactions of your fellows have an impact on you and your own opinions. Ultimately, If you don't like the jerks to go to a particular bar, you stop patronizing the place.
I am sure that with many of the flames that go on, people here ultimately drive some MS people away, rather than converting any to the local cause.
Part of what makes a community IS the interaction of individuals, one with another. Because there are poeple who fear the word responsibility, and who foam and flame at the mouth at anything that is contrary to there opinion, you have to decide what is worthwhile in order to continue the community. Many of us have seen web communities fall apart into a mass of flame wars.
Aleister Crowley tells a story of the religious life of his mother and sisters, members of a group called the Plymouth Bretheran. (I hope I have the story right)- Basically the group kept splitting up to the point that they were down to two members, each arguing with each other over who was the saved one and who was in the ranks of the damned with the rest of the world, having committed the crime of heresy.
So to have any kind of community, you have to have some sort of interaction where you can receive the input of your fellows, and take them to heart, and make an accomodation. Show respect for the opinions of others. And have a respect for your own rights as well.
This is a koan, the koan of how you have a community and still have your self.
but it is so much more fun to use the flame thrower, isn't it?
Having a congressman who is cluefull probably is useful. I do not know of any district where there is in fact a geek/programmer representative to Congress. Many are more often business types, compared to technology types. So for a Rep to take the time to get up to speed is encouraging.
Each atom can be thought of as a little switch, a register that holds a 1 or a 0, and the latest Pentium chip contains 42 million such devices. But the paradoxical laws of quantum mechanics confer a powerful advantage: a single atom can do two calculations at once. Two atoms can do four, three atoms can do eight. By the time you reach 10, doubling and doubling and doubling along the way, you have an invisibly tiny computer that can carry out 1,024 (210) calculations at the same time.
Just when we we getting worried about Moore's law failing, here comes someone getting ready to take the acceleration curve and golf it into warp drive.
This is the second time I've heard a variant on "What sane person would buy it when they can get it for free?"
well, I guess the subtle point for the clueless would be to keep the joes that are working on it happy enough so they keep working on it.
I recall on place that used to provide free unlimited tech support for their product. It got to the point that people would be on a call helping the customer with their widget for hours. The company didn't quite go out of business,but is was damn close, and now they are a lot smaller than they were, and they charge for the live phone support.
There have been several incarnations of this with different hardware probably over the past ten years, all under the name Pen Computing.
Pen computers running Windows are used primarily in vertical markets such as
utilities, insurance, health care, transportation, government, and sales force automation. Unbeknownst to the general public, there are dozens of different pen computers available from companies such as Telxon, Symbol Technologies, Fujitsu PC, Fujitsu-ICL, MicroSlate, WalkAbout, Xplore, Melard, Panasonic, Intermec , Itronix (now including Husky), and others. Pen computers come as tablets, clamshells, and slates in many different sizes, configurations, and degrees
of ruggedness.
Check out the link for lotsa info and lotsa links.
well, eventually moore's law will have to give out. As mentioned in the article:
Whether Intel's buy-it-when-you-need-it strategy can work more generally remains to be seen. The real test may come in 15 years or so if EUV or EPL gives out and some wholly new substitute for silicon chips is needed. A paradigm shift--using molecules of DNA, nanotubes, quantum dots or other exotic materials to execute computations--may determine whether the virtual-research model can succeed. "Intel did a magnificent job of picking up the technology, recognizing its worthiness and driving it home," Freeman says. "But they're not putting
the same effort into asking the questions about what to do when you get to 100 angstroms [10 nanometers]." Maybe one of Moore's successors will have to lay down the law for quantum computing.
with the heavy investment etc onresources riding on the free lunch provided by Moore's law, it is going to be one heck of a financial collapse when Moore's law gives out. You thought the dotcom collapse was bad? just watch what happens when Moore's law gives out.
Considering the Bandwidth, I suppose this is not unexpected, although I got to wonder about the range of the cell phones in the first place. None orbital is probably fine. but lunar orbit is definitely subject to romaing charges.
Roaming Charges? oh my loord...
look at all of those zones that you used during that conversation....
Yes, flintstone was the first primetime cartoon, blah blah blah. and to top it off, alot of the jokes and plots were based on the old Jackie Gleason Show, the Honey Mooners. That is where a lot of the original creativity was, in the shows and characters from the 1950's; tossed around like old hand me downs.
but some of the humor was situational, based on the absurdity of a modern technology based on dinosaur power.
This maybe the start of something that could turn into an AOL/OS. (much rumored for many years) Even though based on Linux, it would be sure to give MS the cold sweats. Most people do not care what the brand name is beyond simple functionality.
Let's just see how long these "anti-piracy" hardware last in the market before they are hacked or taken off the market.:)
Well as the article said:
A key problem is that partial measures aren't particularly useful. Security locks are foolproof only when all brands of stereos, computers and MP3 players use the same
antipiracy technology, leaving consumers little choice but to accept it. When products with no protections have been left on the market, consumers have purchased those instead. This consumer trend has been evident for years. Circuit City's Divx DVD player, designed to control the use of digital videos, died a quick market death. Sony's Vaio Music Clip was the only music player to add early versions of the SDMI's proposals, but the technology was removed after negative reviews and slow sales
In Other words, it only works when you build a cartel, or when you have a monopoly. MS is marketing the advantadges of being a monopoly to its clients, because then you can limit trade and deliver a product that meets the expectations of absolute control.
So the only solution to this IS Open Source. But the in-fighting that takes place from time to time gets hideous. It is almost as bad as what you see if you ever watch the UFO fringe groups. There they "eat their own young". Each little group proclaims that they have the truth, and a pox on anyone else that claims otherwise. (Then again, they get into conspiracy theories that make MS look like a candidate for SaintHood)
You have the highly financed and organized Anti-Piracy Alliance vs the hoards of Open Source programmers. Remember that the American indian was the best Light calvary in the world in their day, better than the horse soldiers they fought. The problem was that they they were all small groups who only fought when they were bothered in their neck of the woods. The soldiers could operate with a much wider plan.
Open Source needs to become sufficiently widespread that when these other products hit the market, that the APA shoots itself in the foot, and breaks the monopoly with its own stupidity.
You could have a marketing campaign for something like the "Computer Freedom Seal of Approval". "These computers maintain your rights to use the software on it as you see fit. Only buy computers with this label. Other computers restrict your rights and your freedoms. Fight back today!
Then again, what are the odds that hoards of anarchistic individualists could every organize together to a common goal? They tend to shoot even at those folks who could be their friends, never mind their enemies.
Some points that I think are important (in no particular order) are:
Culture clashes between sub groups in the industry (Mac vs PC, vi vs emacs, MS vs Linux) and the characteristics of the individual subgroups
Culture Clashes between subgroups in terms of levels of expertise (newbies vs experts vs old timers) as a side note, the phenomena of the "September that never ended" is educational
Culture clashes with the outside world, this starts touching into the hacker ethis, etc. but also is illustrated in things like comments made to Babbage (along the line of, "if we put in the wrong questions, will it still give us the right answers?")
The size of some the communities often has been much smaller than would have been imagined from the eventual impact. The original hacker communities in the 1980's did not number thousands, more like a few hundred, with a few dozen core experts. As such, there is often a certain provicialism that creeps in from time to time. The world is often not seen as being as big and diverse as it really is.
The resemblance of some communities to a religion (Mac evangalism, for example. But there are many others) and the clashes this creates.
The unsung hereos, people who invented the basic technology, and who never saw a decent return. (I still thing everyone should send the guy who invented the mouse a buck or two just to say "thank you!". This should be a community project of some sort)
The Dead Media Project, found at deadmedia.org (and as noted earlier here on/.), is an interesting overview on the obsolescence of technology. the articles on the Information technology of ancient Athens are particularly worthwhile. (Seen here in the numeric listing as items 38.6 - 39.0)
Also, Scientific American had a recent storythat mused about being an information technology worker in Mesopotamia, crunching the numbers that made the cities work.
The generations of older technologies, including the older tube computers, relay based logic (which is wild in it's own right), and even music technologies such as used by Raymond Scott, (teacher of Robert Moog)
Tradition has it, never buy version 1.0 of a product. Tradition has it that this is also very true of MS products (windows, for example).
The switching of who was the top dog in the industry depends an awful lot on having a product that doesn't suck, and in fact is prety damn good.
MS has made it's money in the PC market by the method of incremental improvement. each version sucked less, as far as the consumer was concerned. In fact to a certain degree, that has been part of the microsoft marketing (New! Improved! Sucks Less!) campaigns.
This contrasts with the Game market, which really depends on getting it mostly right, right out of the box in version 1.0 - News reports include lines like "It is my job to make sure it doesn't suck" from certain senior execs of the project.
While we know the power of MS marketing to push a product that is not better than the competition, it will be interesting to see if they have the temperment to change the company pattern of version 1.0 being hohum at best.
As the old sig line goes:
"I picked up a Magic 8-Ball the other day and it said 'Outlook not so good.'
I said, 'Sure, but Microsoft still ships it.'"
Sometimes people have to make life and death decisions, or "play God". You see this in severe medical situations all of the time. The practical results of the high rate of defects is to discourage human cloning. But it does not stop it. And people complain about people playing "God" when they contemplate clocning humans, etc.
And so we need to examine the rules for playing God, what that is all about, and the reasons why we want to clone. Without examining this we leave ourselves open to all kinds of criticism, bullets, and other consequences. Of course, if you are a god, you might have the option of not caring, or you may care too much. Opinions vary.
Part of playing at a God in this is being totally responsible for the act and for the consequences. Now you will have some that will say "I want to do it, and not be responsible for the results." Aside from the illogic of this, there is a certain similarity to criminal thought that some will find disturbing.
So part of this is in determining what your definition of a God is, what is a god responsible for, etc.
You also have to determine why you are doing the clone in the first place.Why are you doing this?
You also have to determine the fate of the human result. This is very sticky because it gets into the abortion issues, and the fates of embryos, etc. And you have to decide your position on this, and the fate of the people if they are born. After all, there is the argument that you wouldn't try of some these things after the birth event.
You also have to inspect the fruits of all of these actions for all lines of consequences. It is very usual to argue towards a pre-defined end-result, putting on blinders to other consequences. Leading to the "I didn't know it was loaded" argument when things go bad. This leads into the political arguments about such things as cloned armies (star wars), body part banks, and paranoid visions from the third Reich.
Which means that you need to sort what is means to be a god to in order to cover all of the loose ends. Even if it is to say that you are not responsible for that disaster over there, that belongs to the henchmen.
It's far better, imho, to let certain things remain unsolved. NP problems are one class of such things. If humans solve everything, then we'll grow lazy and ungrateful. Goedel showed that there are infinitely many unsolvable problems in the world (and Turing showed there are infinitely many uncalculable ones), but there's no guarantee that this infinity of problems consists of interesting problems. In fact, they might all be dull ones!
where would that leave us?
Is it just me, but doesn't this just seem to be a bit non-logical?
Not to worry, since as pointed out there are an infinitely unsolvable problems, etc. This means that the methods of mathematics ar not adequate to that class of problems. Since this class is infinite, it means that any simple sub divisions of this group are infinite as well. Therefore, not only are there an infinite number of unsolvable problems, but there are an infinite number of solvable problems. Furthermore, these are dividable into an infinite number of other types of problems, such as an infinite number of interesting problems vs an infinite number of boring problems.
So therefore it is impossible for humans to solve all interesting mathematics problems using the methods of mathematics, because these are infinite.
You could use the method of Alexander the Great, who was a very good practical mathematician in his own right. [He was taught by Archimedes, who certainly was not a slouch.]
Alexander is famous for solving the mathematical problem of the Gordian Knot. He used a sword.
the author says: In fact, as research on so many fronts is becoming increasingly dependent on computation, all science, it seems, is becoming computer science.
The Logical flaw is supposing that all computation is computer science.
There is the science of the problem you are trying to solve, and then there is the science of the tools you use to solve the problem. The two are not the same.
Solving the Human genome is different than programming the computer to analyse the data.
but there is an overlap. In the same way that it helps to have business and accounting experience to be a systems analyst in a business. Although alot of system analysts do not have this either.
Like all things, this sounds like a really good Idea so long as only the people you trust are in charge. And a really bad idea when the people you don't like could get their fingers into it. And a really horrible idea if you do not or cannot trust anyone.
Of course, the authorities do not have an answer to this. They may not want to have an answer to this.
The mental health authorities do not have any answer to this. Yet you would think they would have some effective answer to trustworthiness that would not have orwellian overtones. But their focus is not on human values like social virtues like being trustworthy. Their focus is very much elsewhere. Ultimately their focus is on control.
But I do not blame them for this, because that is not where the money is. For many many years the big bucks for research have gone into the high profit areas, such as advertising and drugs. Madison Avenue has paid billions of dollars to find out how to more effectively manipulate their market. The drug research has gone to helping people be outwardly calm and peaceful. NOTE: Calm and peaceful sounds nice, but I do not think that calm and peaceful is always an appropriate response to a situation. But being passive is often defined as the appropriate and healthiest response
This is troubling in the context of the emerging Global legal system. The rule used to be that you had to be in a country to break it's laws (such as a traffic accident). Now we have a problem of WHOSE laws and standards are going to be enforced world wide. The emerging answer is EVERYONES, and when in doubt, well you have the lunacy of France barring Yahoo for content on USA sites.
We'll have to have porno like disclaimers saying "warning this content may be illegal outside of the USA" with perl and java setup to block access from non-USA ip addresses.
The fragmentation of the Internet continues, and the legal system is a bloody mess.
Even though this isn't about moving huge amounts of stuff around, moving individual atoms is 'matter transmission'. This could be interesting if some of the quantum state of the atom is preserved - maybe use it for information storage?
The mechanical movement of matter via a wire is interesting, but probablt is not what most people think of when they think of transmission. People usually think of something from Start Trek
On top of that, there is the small problem of "bandwidth" for such a device. It's going to be a while before it becomes substantial, moving things on an atom by atom basis.
Slashdot Mirror
If you are in an apartment building on a upper floor, you may have a clear shot at the transmitter from more than 33 miles. This is because the horizon is a 5 to ten miles away from the apartment window, and this adds to the horizon distance as seen from the sky scaper.
Not accounting for trees, hills, and intervening objects, etc.
Well, it is NOT free standing out in the open air. and it is not animated.
It is contained inside a glass sphere. Maybe the size of a basketball, or smaller. The images are of a small section of a DNA strand, roughly one full twist. The quality of the image is similar to a nicely shadowed but obviously computer rendered diagram in 3D (well duh!) It is definitely not photograde, although that by itself should not be a problem.
The image is shown glowing, but it is in a darkened space, so probably it will not be ready for daylight presentations for a while.
I am amazed that it is done at all, although it will be a while before it progresses beyond the novelty stage.
"This File Download has been brought to you by Microsoft, ReInventing the Internet, Just for you!. Before your download begins, let us remind you to check out the latest Microsft product, Microsoft Spam ..."
And Then:
"Before we continue your download ..."
This would be enough to make me change my mind on gun control.
;-)
That's the thing that irks me. Greed to the point of "That's a good Idea! You can't have it because I want it"
If they can't have it, they gotta stop you from having too. Worse than a bucketful of frogs.
[A bucketful of frogs refers to an old country story of if you have a bunch of frogs in a bucket, when one tries to get out, the others will try to pull the potential escapee back into the bucket.]
I am sure that with many of the flames that go on, people here ultimately drive some MS people away, rather than converting any to the local cause.
Part of what makes a community IS the interaction of individuals, one with another. Because there are poeple who fear the word responsibility, and who foam and flame at the mouth at anything that is contrary to there opinion, you have to decide what is worthwhile in order to continue the community. Many of us have seen web communities fall apart into a mass of flame wars.
Aleister Crowley tells a story of the religious life of his mother and sisters, members of a group called the Plymouth Bretheran. (I hope I have the story right)- Basically the group kept splitting up to the point that they were down to two members, each arguing with each other over who was the saved one and who was in the ranks of the damned with the rest of the world, having committed the crime of heresy.
So to have any kind of community, you have to have some sort of interaction where you can receive the input of your fellows, and take them to heart, and make an accomodation. Show respect for the opinions of others. And have a respect for your own rights as well.
This is a koan, the koan of how you have a community and still have your self.
but it is so much more fun to use the flame thrower, isn't it?
Having a congressman who is cluefull probably is useful. I do not know of any district where there is in fact a geek/programmer representative to Congress. Many are more often business types, compared to technology types. So for a Rep to take the time to get up to speed is encouraging.
Just when we we getting worried about Moore's law failing, here comes someone getting ready to take the acceleration curve and golf it into warp drive.
Damn!
well, I guess the subtle point for the clueless would be to keep the joes that are working on it happy enough so they keep working on it.
I recall on place that used to provide free unlimited tech support for their product. It got to the point that people would be on a call helping the customer with their widget for hours. The company didn't quite go out of business,but is was damn close, and now they are a lot smaller than they were, and they charge for the live phone support.
This looks like to be an interesting read all around.
Pen computers running Windows are used primarily in vertical markets such as utilities, insurance, health care, transportation, government, and sales force automation. Unbeknownst to the general public, there are dozens of different pen computers available from companies such as Telxon, Symbol Technologies, Fujitsu PC, Fujitsu-ICL, MicroSlate, WalkAbout, Xplore, Melard, Panasonic, Intermec , Itronix (now including Husky), and others. Pen computers come as tablets, clamshells, and slates in many different sizes, configurations, and degrees of ruggedness.
Check out the link for lotsa info and lotsa links.
Whether Intel's buy-it-when-you-need-it strategy can work more generally remains to be seen. The real test may come in 15 years or so if EUV or EPL gives out and some wholly new substitute for silicon chips is needed. A paradigm shift--using molecules of DNA, nanotubes, quantum dots or other exotic materials to execute computations--may determine whether the virtual-research model can succeed. "Intel did a magnificent job of picking up the technology, recognizing its worthiness and driving it home," Freeman says. "But they're not putting the same effort into asking the questions about what to do when you get to 100 angstroms [10 nanometers]." Maybe one of Moore's successors will have to lay down the law for quantum computing.
with the heavy investment etc onresources riding on the free lunch provided by Moore's law, it is going to be one heck of a financial collapse when Moore's law gives out. You thought the dotcom collapse was bad? just watch what happens when Moore's law gives out.
Between this and all of the other tech toys that never seem to make it to the rest of the planet, it sort of makes one jealous
Roaming Charges? oh my loord ...
look at all of those zones that you used during that conversation....
but some of the humor was situational, based on the absurdity of a modern technology based on dinosaur power.
[shrug] I should be so successful.
This maybe the start of something that could turn into an AOL/OS. (much rumored for many years) Even though based on Linux, it would be sure to give MS the cold sweats. Most people do not care what the brand name is beyond simple functionality.
Well as the article said:
A key problem is that partial measures aren't particularly useful. Security locks are foolproof only when all brands of stereos, computers and MP3 players use the same antipiracy technology, leaving consumers little choice but to accept it. When products with no protections have been left on the market, consumers have purchased those instead. This consumer trend has been evident for years. Circuit City's Divx DVD player, designed to control the use of digital videos, died a quick market death. Sony's Vaio Music Clip was the only music player to add early versions of the SDMI's proposals, but the technology was removed after negative reviews and slow sales
In Other words, it only works when you build a cartel, or when you have a monopoly. MS is marketing the advantadges of being a monopoly to its clients, because then you can limit trade and deliver a product that meets the expectations of absolute control.
So the only solution to this IS Open Source. But the in-fighting that takes place from time to time gets hideous. It is almost as bad as what you see if you ever watch the UFO fringe groups. There they "eat their own young". Each little group proclaims that they have the truth, and a pox on anyone else that claims otherwise. (Then again, they get into conspiracy theories that make MS look like a candidate for SaintHood)
You have the highly financed and organized Anti-Piracy Alliance vs the hoards of Open Source programmers. Remember that the American indian was the best Light calvary in the world in their day, better than the horse soldiers they fought. The problem was that they they were all small groups who only fought when they were bothered in their neck of the woods. The soldiers could operate with a much wider plan.
Open Source needs to become sufficiently widespread that when these other products hit the market, that the APA shoots itself in the foot, and breaks the monopoly with its own stupidity.
You could have a marketing campaign for something like the "Computer Freedom Seal of Approval". "These computers maintain your rights to use the software on it as you see fit. Only buy computers with this label. Other computers restrict your rights and your freedoms. Fight back today!
Then again, what are the odds that hoards of anarchistic individualists could every organize together to a common goal? They tend to shoot even at those folks who could be their friends, never mind their enemies.
The switching of who was the top dog in the industry depends an awful lot on having a product that doesn't suck, and in fact is prety damn good.
MS has made it's money in the PC market by the method of incremental improvement. each version sucked less, as far as the consumer was concerned. In fact to a certain degree, that has been part of the microsoft marketing (New! Improved! Sucks Less!) campaigns.
This contrasts with the Game market, which really depends on getting it mostly right, right out of the box in version 1.0 - News reports include lines like "It is my job to make sure it doesn't suck" from certain senior execs of the project.
While we know the power of MS marketing to push a product that is not better than the competition, it will be interesting to see if they have the temperment to change the company pattern of version 1.0 being hohum at best.
As the old sig line goes:
"I picked up a Magic 8-Ball the other day and it said 'Outlook not so good.'
I said, 'Sure, but Microsoft still ships it.'"
And so we need to examine the rules for playing God, what that is all about, and the reasons why we want to clone. Without examining this we leave ourselves open to all kinds of criticism, bullets, and other consequences. Of course, if you are a god, you might have the option of not caring, or you may care too much. Opinions vary.
Part of playing at a God in this is being totally responsible for the act and for the consequences. Now you will have some that will say "I want to do it, and not be responsible for the results." Aside from the illogic of this, there is a certain similarity to criminal thought that some will find disturbing.
So part of this is in determining what your definition of a God is, what is a god responsible for, etc.
You also have to determine why you are doing the clone in the first place.Why are you doing this?
You also have to determine the fate of the human result. This is very sticky because it gets into the abortion issues, and the fates of embryos, etc. And you have to decide your position on this, and the fate of the people if they are born. After all, there is the argument that you wouldn't try of some these things after the birth event.
You also have to inspect the fruits of all of these actions for all lines of consequences. It is very usual to argue towards a pre-defined end-result, putting on blinders to other consequences. Leading to the "I didn't know it was loaded" argument when things go bad. This leads into the political arguments about such things as cloned armies (star wars), body part banks, and paranoid visions from the third Reich.
Which means that you need to sort what is means to be a god to in order to cover all of the loose ends. Even if it is to say that you are not responsible for that disaster over there, that belongs to the henchmen.
Is it just me, but doesn't this just seem to be a bit non-logical?
Not to worry, since as pointed out there are an infinitely unsolvable problems, etc. This means that the methods of mathematics ar not adequate to that class of problems. Since this class is infinite, it means that any simple sub divisions of this group are infinite as well. Therefore, not only are there an infinite number of unsolvable problems, but there are an infinite number of solvable problems. Furthermore, these are dividable into an infinite number of other types of problems, such as an infinite number of interesting problems vs an infinite number of boring problems.
So therefore it is impossible for humans to solve all interesting mathematics problems using the methods of mathematics, because these are infinite.
You could use the method of Alexander the Great, who was a very good practical mathematician in his own right. [He was taught by Archimedes, who certainly was not a slouch.]
Alexander is famous for solving the mathematical problem of the Gordian Knot. He used a sword.
The Logical flaw is supposing that all computation is computer science.
There is the science of the problem you are trying to solve, and then there is the science of the tools you use to solve the problem. The two are not the same.
Solving the Human genome is different than programming the computer to analyse the data.
but there is an overlap. In the same way that it helps to have business and accounting experience to be a systems analyst in a business. Although alot of system analysts do not have this either.
Of course, the authorities do not have an answer to this. They may not want to have an answer to this.
The mental health authorities do not have any answer to this. Yet you would think they would have some effective answer to trustworthiness that would not have orwellian overtones. But their focus is not on human values like social virtues like being trustworthy. Their focus is very much elsewhere. Ultimately their focus is on control.
But I do not blame them for this, because that is not where the money is. For many many years the big bucks for research have gone into the high profit areas, such as advertising and drugs. Madison Avenue has paid billions of dollars to find out how to more effectively manipulate their market. The drug research has gone to helping people be outwardly calm and peaceful. NOTE: Calm and peaceful sounds nice, but I do not think that calm and peaceful is always an appropriate response to a situation. But being passive is often defined as the appropriate and healthiest response
This is troubling in the context of the emerging Global legal system. The rule used to be that you had to be in a country to break it's laws (such as a traffic accident). Now we have a problem of WHOSE laws and standards are going to be enforced world wide. The emerging answer is EVERYONES, and when in doubt, well you have the lunacy of France barring Yahoo for content on USA sites.
We'll have to have porno like disclaimers saying "warning this content may be illegal outside of the USA" with perl and java setup to block access from non-USA ip addresses.
The fragmentation of the Internet continues, and the legal system is a bloody mess.
Well the link is here, with the download page here, just in case the URLs for the place not not obvious.
;-)
The mechanical movement of matter via a wire is interesting, but probablt is not what most people think of when they think of transmission. People usually think of something from Start Trek
On top of that, there is the small problem of "bandwidth" for such a device. It's going to be a while before it becomes substantial, moving things on an atom by atom basis.