Right, if an ancient computer takes twenty thousand vacuum tubes, and a vacuum tube lasts two years on average, how long will the computer run between breakdowns? You do the math.
Remember, especially if you look at the TI site, they are describing the engineering problem they had. You can argue if this is sensible or a fraud of whatever, but these engineers were describing the problem they actually had.
Your reluctance to accept it is not their problem.
Simply put, your objections are not all that relevant because they are contradicted by facts. It is nothing personal. It is just some sort of a blind spot that needs to be sorted out. The facts of the matter are as real as the millions of 1950's dollars that were spent searching for a solution.
Development of the IC
on
Electronic Abacus
·
· Score: 4, Informative
Transistors *are* solid-state devices, and there is no reason for discrete transistors to fail any more often than does a single transistor out of the many that make up an integrated circuit.
This is all documented in the book "the Chip" by T. R. Reid, which I literally have on my desk as I write this. It is briefly summarized here:
In those days, electrical engineers were aware on the potential of digital electronics, however, they faced a big limitation known as the "Tyranny of Numbers." This was the metaphor that described the exponentially increasing number of components required to design improved circuits, against the physical limitations derived from the number of components that could be assembled together. Both, Kilby at Texas Instruments, and Noyce at Fairchild Semiconductor, were working on a solution to this problem during 1958 and 1959.
[First Integrated Circuit] The solution was found in the monolithic (meaning formed from a single crystal) integrated circuit. Instead of designing smaller components, they found the way to fabricate entire networks of discrete components in a single sequence by laying them into a single crystal (chip) of semiconductor material. Kilby used germanium and Noyce used silicon.
In other words, it wasn't just solid state as in a single transistor, but solid state, as in entire cirsuits, the integrated IC that was the solution.
The problem was that transistors still had to be interconnected to form electronic circuits, and hand-soldering thousands of components to thousands of bits of wire was expensive and time-consuming. It was also unreliable; every soldered joint was a potential source of trouble. The challenge was to find cost-effective, reliable ways of producing these components and interconnecting them.
The Tyranny of Numbers was quite real, and occupied minds for most of the 50s. The solution of this basic and fundamental problem made possible the computer age. They are probably as important as the binary logic that runs on them.
But there is this drawback: a full-sized computor carries 4,000 to 5,000 valves and thousands of other small electronic components. Although there are no moving parts to go wrong, the law of averages seems to dictate that some of the myriad components will occasionally fail, and scientists who work regularly on computors rely on the machine being available for at best only 80 per cent of its theoretical working time.
There were several big problems for all such devices before the invention of Solid state components. onw of these was reliability. Tubes (valves) burning out, etc. And the other was the hand manufacter nature of these devices. The end result was that the was an effective limit to the size that you could build these things before it was down for repair and maintenance most of the time. This was ultimately true, even for transistor devices.
Solid state devices, being able to combine all of these thing onto a chip solved the problem.
Without a ruling like this, you can get all kinds of things happening, like people people putting together wacky license agreements just to protect free speech and stuff like that.
There is this whole thing of while the government cannot suppress certain rights (your milage may vary) that companies routinely do this via their employment agreements.
As for "The task of getting it into orbit is likely somewhat trivial", coming from "Alien54", I suppose it could be for you, but it certainly is not for us humans
Humans _have_ solved the problem, and have been doing it for almost 50 years. Of course, it has not been solved as far as making it truly cheap and convenient for everyone. This is more a matter of cost and local politics than it is of technology.
perhaps you would prefer phrasing it as "easy enough given an extra billion or so in spare cash."
Given the attempts of the RIAA to ensure encryption of music products, etc. where do you stand philosophically on the issues of Copyright protections, etc?
If I recall right, alot of the x planes, like the X15, etc were launched from planes like the B-52s etc. Proof of concept was achived long ago for just about any large aircraft as a launch platform.
The task of getting it into orbit is likely somewhat trivial. As a cost cutting measure, I can see not having to use a booster stage.
but then you would not have all of those fancy PR events for Nasa to toot its' horn
You cannot just issue a fiat and make something nice. That would be like passing a law mandating the admiration of bill clinton, bill gates, or george bush.
The only really effective way to handle all of this is to get through to people on a one by one basis. This makes it difficult as the task is enormous.
There are also the subtle points made in this article I cames across on Jefferson and his slaves
Jefferson, looking at the history of Revolutions and the later confirming experiences of the French revolutionary disaster, understood well with his contemporaries the subtle danger. A serf's idea of freedom is not to sit at his homestead, polishing his gun, saving his wealth while his son read Milton. His idea of freedom was to enslave someone else. His idea of democracy was the government as feudal lord, providing all needs, just nicer and with an occasional say.
the article is providing me much food for thought on many levels.
Because this precise issue is what we are encountering in the internet around the world, where some people's idea of freedom = they can be the dictator.
Because they have never figured out what it is to be a truly free person. They do not know what a true culture of freedom is.
The biggest problem about getting science fiction applied in what is laughingly called 'the real world' is the old Catch-22. It is best exemplified by Arthur C. Clarke's explanation of why he is not rather better off than he actually is. When he first had the idea of the communications satellite, he tried to get it patented. 'Come, come, Mr Clarke,' said the people at the Patent Office. 'We're a serious outfit, we haven't got time to waste on fantastic ideas like this.' Years later, when the first satellite (with which Arthur was actively involved) actually went up, and the nations were queuing to get their own satellites up, Arthur went back to the Patent Office. 'But, Mr Clarke,' they said, 'the satellite already exists. You should have come to us earlier.'
You would also likely need to check out the pulp fiction era from the 30s and 40s - especially editors like John W. Campbell, who discovered authors like Asimov. They provided a market for people who talented in an age when work was hard to find (the late depression)
From what I recall, many of the old authors from the golden age of science fiction semi-deliberately made it their job to promote space travel, etc so that people would get away from trying to blow each other up on planet Earth, and would get into space exploration as a new thing to do. A sort of informal agenda for the future of the planet.
We seem to be missing this kind of vision these days, cynicism being much more fashionable.
There is a report on CNN that has a little more info.
In the study, which was published in the Journal of Regenerative Medicine, scientists removed the DNA from human egg cells and replaced it with DNA from a human body cell. The egg cells began to develop "to an embryonic state," according to a press release from the company.
Of the eight eggs, two divided to form early embryos of four cells and one progressed to a six-cell stage before it stopped dividing. This breakthrough occurred October 13, 2001.
So it sounds like it wasn't very viable to begin with. But the fact that the egg started dividing at all indicates some progress.
Random side thought: I can just see the efforts to implement copy protection in the world of clones. The DMCA and the rest. And the ethical debates involved.
This patent claim is just another attempt by BT to make money with having to compete fairly with other organizations.
I presume you meant "to make money withOUT having to compete"
Sounds like MS. Which reminds me, why would they not have sued MS? Or on the other end of the scale, a really small developer or company, following a tactic against piracy,etc. Then with their legal resources they could say develop a string of legal wins that become more "evidence" in their favor.
Next thing you know we have cardboard boxes with popups.
Well the really awful thing would be the little terribly cute voices squeelling at you, waving their little hands, shouting in their little voices, "Pick Me! Pick Me!"
. Or just an aisle filled with a sea of animated cartons.
As noted on other sites, the battery is about half a millimeter thick, and is good enough for all kinds of uses.
The horror story in my head is that these things get cheap enough to be used to power animated and interactive displays on the boxes you see from products in department stores, etc.
I have visions of products shouting out to you to "buy me" as you walk down the product aisles. The real world equivalent of banner ads and popup displays.
I coverted the doc to HTML. Scroll done the page and look for the mirror link.
What is funny is the size drop when converting to HTML. the original doc was 3.7 meg with graphics, and the html is 65k without graphics, just under.5 meg with the graphics.
To be fair, the submittal processing module does not display previous posts for an editor to take a quick look at. so mistakes are easy. That area of the software needs work.
US armed forces are to have decided against the use of the new Microsoft operating system Windows XP. By its on-line registration the Redmonder software company would get too much information about the computers and software of the American Department of Defense into the hands. That again would be a violation of the government regulations to data security. The pentagon is to have cancelled therefore the purchase of PCS, on which Windows XP is installed. How it is called further, the Ministry of Defense wants also in the future to acquire no licenses for Windows XP.
All this maintains anyhow Charles R. Smith, Cyberwar Cyberwar-Kolumnist of the NewsMax appearing in the Web . He sees himself as one of the prominent American experts for Cyber technology and their meaning for the war, the terrorism, the data security and the daily life. Charles Smith says about itself, he has good contacts since the cold war to the US Army, which was he with " Games Programs " supplied. Today he is a president and CEO von Softwar, its own consulting firm, writes additionally for the " USAF information of throwing AR journal " and maintains as a journalist regular contacts to American secret service sets.
The press department of the American Department of Defense did not want to acknowledge Charles Smith in the fact that Windows XP was generally gebannt in the area of the US Army. Windows XP is new on the market. One must regard that only once. The pentagon became general on the fact however always notes that the software used there does not contain back doors, traps, viruses and Trojaner.
Manufacturer Microsoft does not take the security doubts of authorities and enterprises on the light shoulder. The software giant has therefore a " Corporate edition " of its new operating system in the delivery program, which does without the on-line registration
This wasn't hard. Fired up the old copy of word 97 saved it out as HTML, changed colors to something appropriate:-P , Threw together a quick freebie account, then posted the result -
Slashdot Mirror
Remember, especially if you look at the TI site, they are describing the engineering problem they had. You can argue if this is sensible or a fraud of whatever, but these engineers were describing the problem they actually had.
Your reluctance to accept it is not their problem.
here is a google search link to help you out
http://www.google.com/search?q=Kilby+tyranny+numbe rs+engineering
Simply put, your objections are not all that relevant because they are contradicted by facts. It is nothing personal. It is just some sort of a blind spot that needs to be sorted out. The facts of the matter are as real as the millions of 1950's dollars that were spent searching for a solution.
This is all documented in the book "the Chip" by T. R. Reid, which I literally have on my desk as I write this. It is briefly summarized here:
In other words, it wasn't just solid state as in a single transistor, but solid state, as in entire cirsuits, the integrated IC that was the solution.The problem was that transistors still had to be interconnected to form electronic circuits, and hand-soldering thousands of components to thousands of bits of wire was expensive and time-consuming. It was also unreliable; every soldered joint was a potential source of trouble. The challenge was to find cost-effective, reliable ways of producing these components and interconnecting them.
The Tyranny of Numbers was quite real, and occupied minds for most of the 50s. The solution of this basic and fundamental problem made possible the computer age. They are probably as important as the binary logic that runs on them.
You can also read more about this on the Texas Instrument Website.
There were several big problems for all such devices before the invention of Solid state components. onw of these was reliability. Tubes (valves) burning out, etc. And the other was the hand manufacter nature of these devices. The end result was that the was an effective limit to the size that you could build these things before it was down for repair and maintenance most of the time. This was ultimately true, even for transistor devices.
Solid state devices, being able to combine all of these thing onto a chip solved the problem.
There is this whole thing of while the government cannot suppress certain rights (your milage may vary) that companies routinely do this via their employment agreements.
glad to see some progress in the right direction.
Humans _have_ solved the problem, and have been doing it for almost 50 years. Of course, it has not been solved as far as making it truly cheap and convenient for everyone. This is more a matter of cost and local politics than it is of technology.
perhaps you would prefer phrasing it as "easy enough given an extra billion or so in spare cash."
Given the attempts of the RIAA to ensure encryption of music products, etc. where do you stand philosophically on the issues of Copyright protections, etc?
The task of getting it into orbit is likely somewhat trivial. As a cost cutting measure, I can see not having to use a booster stage.
but then you would not have all of those fancy PR events for Nasa to toot its' horn
The only really effective way to handle all of this is to get through to people on a one by one basis. This makes it difficult as the task is enormous.
There are also the subtle points made in this article I cames across on Jefferson and his slaves
Jefferson, looking at the history of Revolutions and the later confirming experiences of the French revolutionary disaster, understood well with his contemporaries the subtle danger. A serf's idea of freedom is not to sit at his homestead, polishing his gun, saving his wealth while his son read Milton. His idea of freedom was to enslave someone else. His idea of democracy was the government as feudal lord, providing all needs, just nicer and with an occasional say.
the article is providing me much food for thought on many levels.
Because this precise issue is what we are encountering in the internet around the world, where some people's idea of freedom = they can be the dictator.
Because they have never figured out what it is to be a truly free person. They do not know what a true culture of freedom is.
Erotic Computing Group - Mit Media Lab
http://ecg.media.mit.edu/
[smile]
Under the patent laws of the day, he would have had 17 years. Not very renewable.
1945 + 17 = 1962.
Note, the first geosynchronous satellite was launched in 1964
The patent would have likely run out anyhow.
http://www.globalideasbank.org/BOV/BV-393.HTML
The biggest problem about getting science fiction applied in what is laughingly called 'the real world' is the old Catch-22. It is best exemplified by Arthur C. Clarke's explanation of why he is not rather better off than he actually is. When he first had the idea of the communications satellite, he tried to get it patented. 'Come, come, Mr Clarke,' said the people at the Patent Office. 'We're a serious outfit, we haven't got time to waste on fantastic ideas like this.' Years later, when the first satellite (with which Arthur was actively involved) actually went up, and the nations were queuing to get their own satellites up, Arthur went back to the Patent Office. 'But, Mr Clarke,' they said, 'the satellite already exists. You should have come to us earlier.'
Typical Bureaucratic bungling.
and there is more:
The very first paper describing the very first constellation, consisting of three satellites in geostationary orbit. Allegedly the only accurate science-fiction prediction ever. Authored by the famous Arthur C. Clarke, before the space race, before Sputnik 1, and before Arthur C. Clarke became a famous author. (There's a mirror of the paper. And now we call it the Clarke orbit, and you can simulate the original proposal.
This Page also discusses the legal issues because at the time Clarke wrote his paper, there was no way to get a satellite into orbit to begin with.
You would also likely need to check out the pulp fiction era from the 30s and 40s - especially editors like John W. Campbell, who discovered authors like Asimov. They provided a market for people who talented in an age when work was hard to find (the late depression)
We seem to be missing this kind of vision these days, cynicism being much more fashionable.
If I understand correctly, his description was so good that he actually has a patent on the darn things.
So if you had something that induced odd magnetic patterns, like a sleeping pad under the sheets, you could get weird effects.
Taking it to the next step and hooking it up to internet control would perhaps not be wise.
I keep imagining the end results of Dream Hackers reprogramming your dreams for their pleasure.
Someting that would only happen in a science fiction story, of course.
Random side thought: I can just see the efforts to implement copy protection in the world of clones. The DMCA and the rest. And the ethical debates involved.
feh
I presume you meant "to make money withOUT having to compete"
Sounds like MS. Which reminds me, why would they not have sued MS? Or on the other end of the scale, a really small developer or company, following a tactic against piracy,etc. Then with their legal resources they could say develop a string of legal wins that become more "evidence" in their favor.
Assuming they are already going to burn in hell, I can only hope they wind up in the version of moslem hell described here. Even if they are not moslem.
Besides, wasn't there a bunch of prior art that was found? I hope these guys get laughed out of court.
Well the really awful thing would be the little terribly cute voices squeelling at you, waving their little hands, shouting in their little voices, "Pick Me! Pick Me!"
. Or just an aisle filled with a sea of animated cartons.
The horror story in my head is that these things get cheap enough to be used to power animated and interactive displays on the boxes you see from products in department stores, etc.
I have visions of products shouting out to you to "buy me" as you walk down the product aisles. The real world equivalent of banner ads and popup displays.
I coverted the doc to HTML. Scroll done the page and look for the mirror link.
What is funny is the size drop when converting to HTML. the original doc was 3.7 meg with graphics, and the html is 65k without graphics, just under .5 meg with the graphics.
all in all not bad.
but we like lashing timothy, we do!
before long someone is going to post some weird and sick S&M troll that might even be vaguely on topic for once.
never mind about that thought. really.
To be fair, the submittal processing module does not display previous posts for an editor to take a quick look at. so mistakes are easy. That area of the software needs work.
http://www.heise.de/newsticker/data/psz-24.11.01-0 00/
of course that is in german, so use this babelfish link
US Army wants allegedly no Windows XP
US armed forces are to have decided against the use of the new Microsoft operating system Windows XP. By its on-line registration the Redmonder software company would get too much information about the computers and software of the American Department of Defense into the hands. That again would be a violation of the government regulations to data security. The pentagon is to have cancelled therefore the purchase of PCS, on which Windows XP is installed. How it is called further, the Ministry of Defense wants also in the future to acquire no licenses for Windows XP.
All this maintains anyhow Charles R. Smith, Cyberwar Cyberwar-Kolumnist of the NewsMax appearing in the Web . He sees himself as one of the prominent American experts for Cyber technology and their meaning for the war, the terrorism, the data security and the daily life. Charles Smith says about itself, he has good contacts since the cold war to the US Army, which was he with " Games Programs " supplied. Today he is a president and CEO von Softwar, its own consulting firm, writes additionally for the " USAF information of throwing AR journal " and maintains as a journalist regular contacts to American secret service sets.
The press department of the American Department of Defense did not want to acknowledge Charles Smith in the fact that Windows XP was generally gebannt in the area of the US Army. Windows XP is new on the market. One must regard that only once. The pentagon became general on the fact however always notes that the software used there does not contain back doors, traps, viruses and Trojaner.
Manufacturer Microsoft does not take the security doubts of authorities and enterprises on the light shoulder. The software giant has therefore a " Corporate edition " of its new operating system in the delivery program, which does without the on-line registration
too lazy to fix the grammar and the broken english tho.
;-)
http://www.escalix.com/freepage/doomhistory/
Graphics and all, in HTML format, it comes to 478K, the HTML alone was 65k
The original word format was 3700+ K
Go figure