I think you're really thinking too narrowly about CS. CS hasn't died out, it's exploded. Even 4-year BS programs require the students focus on one or few topics in the space and neglecting others.
There are vast areas of CS that are being improved upon every day (search, concurrency, vision, communications, collaborative work) - and these are having huge impacts on the world. Essentially the "ground level" of CS is taught, but then one must choose a senior year that skips a lot of middle ground to essentially prepare a student for a "large project" or a "team situation" or a specialized environment. Cell phones will soon be a machine-aided universal translation devices (probably pay-per-use) and after that, may be be able to help blind people navigate rooms using auditory clues, from a simple cheap camera. The list is endless, and these things are not silly business apps that one tweaks over the life of their career. They are market-making (and destroying) shifts in how we use machines.
In my day, the senior projects were modem controllers, network stacks, database design (not table modeling but construction of a basic DB). These days, it social collaboration, mashups of web APIs, or something in the AI sphere (gaming, etc). These are HUGE environments (gaming alone is poised to eclipse movie investment soon). Just check on the intertubes' offerings over a decade and see whats done by thousands of students in their dorm rooms dreaming up the next google, facebook, wikipedia, amazon, ebay, etc.
Sitting alone and groking the 2's complement of a number may be interesting, but the crowd for that does not make them a "true" CS degree, any more than someone who knows the algorithms for edge detecting by heart (and those are in hardware anyways today).
The trend is that the machines will be so complex, productivity judgments (and thus pay scales) will be based on results, not wisdom about the internals, just like nobody can tell you the best gallium arsenide compound for a nice laser diode inside your (coming) optical computer.
As the top rises, the fog covers more of the bottom. Fly higher.
You make my point perfectly: Movies - and thus TV (under certain conditions) - now show penises in non-sexual acts quite liberally (Walk Hard, etc). I hate to break it to you, but the wikipedia article on a penis has also fallen under the "is it informational or sexual" argument for internet access. Penises and breasts have been in National Geographic, etc. Unless you depicting sexual acts (and even then, arguably "erotic" sexual acts), then its open to public display in the media and in person.
Now urination in public is illegal, but not because everyone can see your dick.
I'm kinda saddened you'd compare breast feeding to taking a piss. I feel a little sorry for any children you might have...
Because breast feeding has been socially accepted as no more obscene than the clothing some people wear, or the act of changing a baby's diaper. Frankly, the folks who object to those parts of the body being "thrust" at them might not want to open their eyes almost anywhere. If it's OK for the news wires to show nudity when its in classical art, fashion news, or body painting, or medical stories, etc....essentially you're going to have to realize that breasts are only as erotic as the act they portray. Alone, they have no inert dangerous influence or effect.
Would you object to the wikipedia article on "breast" over the various "girls on trampolines" nightly TV? One is clearly informational, while the other expressly designed to arouse. And yet, the objections are askew. People gotta get over the skin phobia.
Oregon is a circus of strange tax experiments. OR's income tax rates are relatively high (9%), but they do not have a sales tax. Discussions about introducing a sales tax are non-starters, as there are so many changes that multiple parties object. Economic gains/losses are magnified due to this, as the employment numbers rise/fall, but out-of-state shopper populations change on different cycles.
There is also a "kicker" that is given back when state revenue from taxes exceeds the estimate (budget) by 2% or more. But then the state spends about 1.3$million on mailing individual checks, tracking people down, etc - instead of simply putting tax credits on the books for the next year.
There have been serious talks about taxing/licensing bicycles due their use of roads (no idea if its by wheel, weight, speed, rider's age, etc). Portland, OR has a large population of cyclists that intermingle with cars on many local roads.
The state has a huge income disparity between urban and rural districts, and thus pools its school funding monies for dispersal but other statistics, which creates lots of friction all around.
Property taxes go up, but there are endless initiatives to deny funding increases to social services, since they are under constant accusal of being bloated. The truth depends on what you define as adequate social servicing.
Isn't contracting on a per-hour basis exactly what this is supposed to balance? If a market can hire FT employees at their rates, then the supply of developers might not be low enough to raise prices (or, in this case, reduce workweek hours).
Contractors typically supply a varying percentage of an IT workforce in any large company - it just makes more sense to the company to bring in hired hands during project "pushes" than to keep them on staff permanently. However, we all know these can last a long time, and some companies never stop rolling out projects...
If an employer doesn't want to let someone work PT, and the employee isn't willing to jump into the contractor-for-hire, market, there's that stability of a regular employer he might be relying upon, even if the salary/work pressures are not fulfilling. In this case, it simply may be the relationship that employer wants to have: "We ask you to work, a lot, and you have a regular place to work". Now, when the employer has layoffs, all bets change...
Maybe it's time for the phone company to get their fraud detection and prevention services at least on par with what the credit card companies have done.
Dude, it wasn't the phone company's equipment - hence the "outrageous" charge to the consumer.
Ray et. al. have debated this surface=reality concept quite a bit, and it is indeed interesting: If a machine can mimic all the "features" a creature, is it the same as that creature? The answer may be less interesting than the pathway the question proposes: The mimicry of a creature would probably be quite difficult in perfection (reproduction, illness, disease, self-healing, etc). In fact, I would say that the question is answered as "a machine cannot be a perfect mimicry of a creature without being that creature".
So let's supposed a machine can become a mimicry of a certain set of features of a creature. Here, we build a machine to act completely like a full-grown adult, but otherwise it suffers not from the biological drawbacks of the creature, but from typical machine-based limitations (parts wearing out differently, energy derivation and transmission are bulkier, etc).
For example, that a machine's ability to self-heal would be much more limited that its biological counterpart, but it may excel in other ways. This leads to the interesting aspects of the topic...machines may never attain perfect mimicry, but they can certainly exhibit behavior that surpasses and morphs into creatures of their own.
Take a adult-cockroach-mimicking machine, perfect its ability for a few behaviors: detect an environment, navigate and move, extract energy from an organic source, evade threats (even this simple list is daunting). Now, this machine is not a cockroach, but it might not need to ever be. It could begin to head in other directions, such a hive behavior to create chains of creatures for spanning long gaps, as an example.
Anyway, in human mimicry, any machine would get close and then be limited by the physics of its own construction. However, it would probably be already vastly different (wireless internet storage, for example using today's world) for the onset. So, I don't understand how and where one puts a label of "soul" anywhere - its just a word for a summation of features, and it is probably not worth limiting a machine's capabilities to just this summation.
What line do you have, then, in your consumption? If "cool" and "douchiness" are how you choose products when you shop, you are one of the mindless sheep that is so prevalent in the world of sci-fi/fantasy backdrops. Then again, most of the members of such group are willing to rationalize and defend their membership to sheep-dom.
Would you still buy someone's books if they said outright "your money allows me to print hatemail for bulk distribution"? Would you still care if you yourself were the target of a smear campaign from a source your purchases funded? As a sheep, you'll never know.
You could move a lot of the world pretty quickly by becoming an informed consumer. But then again, you may have to give up junk food and a lot of other treats. You may never understand how it all works, but let this tiny response be a hint: There's a world outside the matrix, kid.
There is no advocacy stronger than actions, sir. You may want to check the calls for growing up at the mirror.
Whether it be entertainment, politicians or religion - all other methods of advocacy (writings, money and talk) bow down to the reality of Action as a method for change. Perhaps you missed an election that demonstrated such recently?
The growing up comes when you have to decide between pleasure ("i sure do like those books Card writes") and principle ("why am i funding a homophobic paranoid?"). There may even be a book or two in the same genre that deals with your quandary.
And you already know "Rich does not make right", as every aristocracy in history has proven. So that last line solidifies your stance as self-deluded. You have more than one lesson to learn, boy.
I'll disagree respectfully. In 100 years, services (possibly in an automaton format) will use a shared backbone of a large and ever-growing body of knowledge to convert digital information into a myriad of formats, down every specifications' pathway as long as the information is accessible.
This is because of several changes I foresee:
- ubiquitous service formats, or translation formaters in a shared backbone
- near-total wireless broadband access
- more common cooperative programming designs, divide and conquer no longer bound by core
- Growth and research of anthropomorphic machine interfaces
machines will know how to access information from a "thing", if guided, by researching the devices to read and extract the information, transferring the "thing" to such a device, capturing the information, and providing it in a explorable format using a series of interfaces (auditory, visual, etc) using hints from the creation time/era, format, program of origin, etc.
100 years in a huge span of time. in 100 years we could be much much further than this, but i'm gonna stick with the above as a safe bet. machines are changing faster than we've ever seen them, and the commercialization of businesses functions into a web format is just the tip of the iceberg. we're not going to just have "today" in a faster version, we're going along a wild trip. 100 years can swallow all of our imagination and then some.
No sure if its really "stealing money". I mean, this still allows users to buy/use the official OSX DVD.
This splits the hardware/software delineation deep into Apple's territory. But they're headed in that direction anyways. If I were Apple, I'd never officially support this because of the nightmare of vendors matching for a software-only solution (think about Microsoft's world).
But as Apple would I let people spend list price for my OS and never call about support issues? You betcha!
I'm not afraid of hitting their monthly limit, but they've deliberately hid any sort of metering concept from their public services, probably in fear of users gaming the system to use 249.9GB a month.
I'd be very interested in such a service, since I run our modem to several systems and I'm simply curious about where we rank in monthly usage.
The bandwidth changes sound like someone finally came to their senses about the purpose of an internet. Prior to this, it was an awful mess of dpi and false drops. yuck
Well, it's amazing, but there are still plenty of people left to be introduced to the Streisand Effect.
I say this should stand a strong advertisement that they are completely ignorant of how the web works, on both the original level of the case, and in the effect this latest press is giving them.
"Aren't you that famous law firm that tried to censor teh interwebs? It doesnt work like that, dude"
The warm ocean temperatures of the tropical Atlantic make for a huge buildup of atmosphere-cooling hurricanes. I propose that we simply warm the oceans and and let already existing phenomena create ever-massive storms. They can lift and transport a huge amount of water. We'd have a quickly-cooled streak of weather that would barrel westward into the southeastern US - yearly!
I think this plan is great, and we simply need a way of warming ocean temperatures just a degree or two. Perhaps if we melted down one of the ice caps...
I cannot dispute that reference, that's true for active tags. See the reference link, and subsequent quote:
September 26, 2006 - Passive RFID Tagging Update
The Department of Defense remains committed to the implementation of Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) technology as outlined in our July 30, 2004 policy memorandum. Since the publication of this initial policy memorandum, ongoing technology developments, updated IT investment strategies, and business process improvements within the DoD have clarified passive RFID requirements within the Department. The DoD July 30, 2004 RFID Policy stated that passive RFID tagging by DoD suppliers would apply to all locations worldwide. The term "all locations" in the July 30, 2004 policy refers to all major receiving locations across the world. The DoD is investing in appropriate passive RFID infrastructure in all locations that are deemed major receiving locations; the majority of those locations are already called out in the current DFARS clause. The DoD requirement will expand to tactical locations as those locations become RFID-enabled. The DoD will not require suppliers to apply passive RFID tags to the unit pack of UID items during the 2007 calendar year. The Department will continue to evaluate the appropriate time frame to begin tagging at the unit pack level for UID items and will promulgate this requirement in advance of future issuances.
In the passive RFID deployments, there's nothing changing in the signature. Essentially, you only need the know the scanner signal and the RFID response. If a scanner signal is captured without any RFID feedback, you have the clean signal (1st pass). Then, with a valid RFID, you have the response you want to mimic. Tiers of this may be applied, still passively, but essentially the logic is the same.
I believe the US government is attempting to keep things secure by using specialized scanners, and probably complex modulations and tiered signals to perform this. Again, I must reiterate: This is security from not knowing the mechanics, not actually from presenting the challenger with a problem they cannot solve within limited time. The scanner tech is fixed once the RFID chips are in flight.
Thus, reverse engineering them has unlimited time- and if I had to guess, will arrive to the world via a former contracted supplier going bankrupt and liquidating assets, or perhaps someone stealing one. Either way, its only a matter of time before the RFID layer is worth nothing more than the falsified signature, or magic paper, etc, of a passport.
Regardless of who was in on the meeting and how it happened - it was political, not scientific. This leaves standing the elephant in the room: RFID is simplistic to mimic.
If one understands the radio wave effects (backscatter or modulation), one could use a scanner to capture all the RFID's within a zone.
Then, essentially building a device tuned to emit an identical signal (for passive, this is secretive but not impossible as Adam alludes to), (for active, I'm unsure how difficult this is) and then this clone can be used in lieu of the original tag.
This means for RFID-cards using passive technology, cloning them is allegedly a education measure, not a true security measure. Like unlocking cell phones and other corner-store concepts, one could imagine RFID signatures built-to-order based on scanner values (one need not have the original RFID, just a response from it).
Both points you make are valid. I've buried 2 friends from cycling (but made dozens in the process as well).
Overall, cycling saftey is relative to the area. Here in Portland, OR things are quite enjoyable for cyclists within town.
As preachy as my email could seem, I dont see driving that much as anything annoying. I keep my car and use it whenever I like as well. However, I do believe we'll use whatever cars are presented to us. For the moment, at 99% gas-fueled, we have a long way to go. But our lifetime may see the advent of majority-power via stored electricity or other forms of energy, once the energy density moves a bit up the scale.
So what price for a gallon of gas makes you skip a trip (as a factor of distance) ?
Right now, I'm hovering around 18 miles radius for my no-load travel to switch from bike to car. Within that zone, all my schedules adjust and I'm happy to report my quality-of-life has actually gone up:
Monetary
- about 150 miles/week in gas savings (for my 20mpg car @ $4/gal = ~30$US)
- if wear = ~0.05$US/mile, then 7.50$US / week
- it builds up quickly: $150/month
Health
- cholesterol has dropped
- weight has dropped
Social
- met a few other bikers, quite a friendly demographic
- nice parking/walking distances almost everywhere
Full disclosure: At 37, I'm hitting 8 years/10k miles commuting to work in 2008. One has to work up to larger distances.
I understand what you guys are saying - I'm being somewhat cheeky with that "existing ones go faster..." but to me, the world of computing is becoming more distributed. Average bandwidth rates are already way behind in the US.
For most of the desktop/productivity apps I see in the public space, here's the future - how do more cores help?
- Constant-connection personal devices (phones + music + etc)
- Distributed desktops / licenses.
- Hosted productivity applications.
- Web 2.0 toolkit standardizations and higher adoption rates for pages.
- Embedded and small-form-factor devices become more web centric (dashboards, phones, etc)
I'll take a stab at my own question with some answers where cores could help:
- Dual monitor or 3D displays
- HD and similar video handling
- Visual and sound recognition models
- Realtime devices/systems for robotics, safety systems
I don't mind the world of multi-core arrive in a rush, but I'm questioning the need for it without an "all boats rise together" redesign of the PC architecture.
Can't they just make the existing ones go faster? Seriously, if I want to start architectures around 1000's of independent threads of execution, i'd start with communication speeds, not node count.
It's already easy to spawn thread armies that peg all IO channels. Where is all this "work" you can do without any IO?
I think Intel better starting thinking of "tens, hundreds or even thousands" of bus speed multipliers on their napkin drawings.
Aside from some heavy processing-dependent concepts (graphics, complex mathematical models, etc) the world need petabyte/sec connectivity, not instruction set munching.
Slashdot Mirror
I think you're really thinking too narrowly about CS. CS hasn't died out, it's exploded. Even 4-year BS programs require the students focus on one or few topics in the space and neglecting others.
There are vast areas of CS that are being improved upon every day (search, concurrency, vision, communications, collaborative work) - and these are having huge impacts on the world. Essentially the "ground level" of CS is taught, but then one must choose a senior year that skips a lot of middle ground to essentially prepare a student for a "large project" or a "team situation" or a specialized environment. Cell phones will soon be a machine-aided universal translation devices (probably pay-per-use) and after that, may be be able to help blind people navigate rooms using auditory clues, from a simple cheap camera. The list is endless, and these things are not silly business apps that one tweaks over the life of their career. They are market-making (and destroying) shifts in how we use machines.
In my day, the senior projects were modem controllers, network stacks, database design (not table modeling but construction of a basic DB). These days, it social collaboration, mashups of web APIs, or something in the AI sphere (gaming, etc). These are HUGE environments (gaming alone is poised to eclipse movie investment soon). Just check on the intertubes' offerings over a decade and see whats done by thousands of students in their dorm rooms dreaming up the next google, facebook, wikipedia, amazon, ebay, etc.
Sitting alone and groking the 2's complement of a number may be interesting, but the crowd for that does not make them a "true" CS degree, any more than someone who knows the algorithms for edge detecting by heart (and those are in hardware anyways today).
The trend is that the machines will be so complex, productivity judgments (and thus pay scales) will be based on results, not wisdom about the internals, just like nobody can tell you the best gallium arsenide compound for a nice laser diode inside your (coming) optical computer.
As the top rises, the fog covers more of the bottom. Fly higher.
You make my point perfectly: Movies - and thus TV (under certain conditions) - now show penises in non-sexual acts quite liberally (Walk Hard, etc). I hate to break it to you, but the wikipedia article on a penis has also fallen under the "is it informational or sexual" argument for internet access. Penises and breasts have been in National Geographic, etc. Unless you depicting sexual acts (and even then, arguably "erotic" sexual acts), then its open to public display in the media and in person.
Now urination in public is illegal, but not because everyone can see your dick.
I'm kinda saddened you'd compare breast feeding to taking a piss. I feel a little sorry for any children you might have...
Because breast feeding has been socially accepted as no more obscene than the clothing some people wear, or the act of changing a baby's diaper. Frankly, the folks who object to those parts of the body being "thrust" at them might not want to open their eyes almost anywhere. If it's OK for the news wires to show nudity when its in classical art, fashion news, or body painting, or medical stories, etc. ...essentially you're going to have to realize that breasts are only as erotic as the act they portray. Alone, they have no inert dangerous influence or effect.
Would you object to the wikipedia article on "breast" over the various "girls on trampolines" nightly TV? One is clearly informational, while the other expressly designed to arouse. And yet, the objections are askew. People gotta get over the skin phobia.
Oregon is a circus of strange tax experiments. OR's income tax rates are relatively high (9%), but they do not have a sales tax. Discussions about introducing a sales tax are non-starters, as there are so many changes that multiple parties object. Economic gains/losses are magnified due to this, as the employment numbers rise/fall, but out-of-state shopper populations change on different cycles.
There is also a "kicker" that is given back when state revenue from taxes exceeds the estimate (budget) by 2% or more. But then the state spends about 1.3$million on mailing individual checks, tracking people down, etc - instead of simply putting tax credits on the books for the next year.
There have been serious talks about taxing/licensing bicycles due their use of roads (no idea if its by wheel, weight, speed, rider's age, etc). Portland, OR has a large population of cyclists that intermingle with cars on many local roads.
The state has a huge income disparity between urban and rural districts, and thus pools its school funding monies for dispersal but other statistics, which creates lots of friction all around.
Property taxes go up, but there are endless initiatives to deny funding increases to social services, since they are under constant accusal of being bloated. The truth depends on what you define as adequate social servicing.
See the Oregon Tax Revolt for some info.
41R5T 3N6RI27ED P057 !
Tell them your a nihilist instead and confuse 'em.
Hmm. What 'L' word could be a threat?
Labia?
Laryngitis?
LeisureSuitLarry?
Lungfish?
I would definitely feel threatened by a lungfish.
Isn't contracting on a per-hour basis exactly what this is supposed to balance? If a market can hire FT employees at their rates, then the supply of developers might not be low enough to raise prices (or, in this case, reduce workweek hours).
Contractors typically supply a varying percentage of an IT workforce in any large company - it just makes more sense to the company to bring in hired hands during project "pushes" than to keep them on staff permanently. However, we all know these can last a long time, and some companies never stop rolling out projects...
If an employer doesn't want to let someone work PT, and the employee isn't willing to jump into the contractor-for-hire, market, there's that stability of a regular employer he might be relying upon, even if the salary/work pressures are not fulfilling. In this case, it simply may be the relationship that employer wants to have: "We ask you to work, a lot, and you have a regular place to work". Now, when the employer has layoffs, all bets change...
Maybe it's time for the phone company to get their fraud detection and prevention services at least on par with what the credit card companies have done.
Dude, it wasn't the phone company's equipment - hence the "outrageous" charge to the consumer.
Ray et. al. have debated this surface=reality concept quite a bit, and it is indeed interesting: If a machine can mimic all the "features" a creature, is it the same as that creature? The answer may be less interesting than the pathway the question proposes: The mimicry of a creature would probably be quite difficult in perfection (reproduction, illness, disease, self-healing, etc). In fact, I would say that the question is answered as "a machine cannot be a perfect mimicry of a creature without being that creature".
So let's supposed a machine can become a mimicry of a certain set of features of a creature. Here, we build a machine to act completely like a full-grown adult, but otherwise it suffers not from the biological drawbacks of the creature, but from typical machine-based limitations (parts wearing out differently, energy derivation and transmission are bulkier, etc).
For example, that a machine's ability to self-heal would be much more limited that its biological counterpart, but it may excel in other ways. This leads to the interesting aspects of the topic...machines may never attain perfect mimicry, but they can certainly exhibit behavior that surpasses and morphs into creatures of their own.
Take a adult-cockroach-mimicking machine, perfect its ability for a few behaviors: detect an environment, navigate and move, extract energy from an organic source, evade threats (even this simple list is daunting). Now, this machine is not a cockroach, but it might not need to ever be. It could begin to head in other directions, such a hive behavior to create chains of creatures for spanning long gaps, as an example.
Anyway, in human mimicry, any machine would get close and then be limited by the physics of its own construction. However, it would probably be already vastly different (wireless internet storage, for example using today's world) for the onset. So, I don't understand how and where one puts a label of "soul" anywhere - its just a word for a summation of features, and it is probably not worth limiting a machine's capabilities to just this summation.
What line do you have, then, in your consumption? If "cool" and "douchiness" are how you choose products when you shop, you are one of the mindless sheep that is so prevalent in the world of sci-fi/fantasy backdrops. Then again, most of the members of such group are willing to rationalize and defend their membership to sheep-dom.
Would you still buy someone's books if they said outright "your money allows me to print hatemail for bulk distribution"? Would you still care if you yourself were the target of a smear campaign from a source your purchases funded? As a sheep, you'll never know.
You could move a lot of the world pretty quickly by becoming an informed consumer. But then again, you may have to give up junk food and a lot of other treats. You may never understand how it all works, but let this tiny response be a hint: There's a world outside the matrix, kid.
There is no advocacy stronger than actions, sir. You may want to check the calls for growing up at the mirror.
Whether it be entertainment, politicians or religion - all other methods of advocacy (writings, money and talk) bow down to the reality of Action as a method for change. Perhaps you missed an election that demonstrated such recently?
The growing up comes when you have to decide between pleasure ("i sure do like those books Card writes") and principle ("why am i funding a homophobic paranoid?"). There may even be a book or two in the same genre that deals with your quandary.
And you already know "Rich does not make right", as every aristocracy in history has proven. So that last line solidifies your stance as self-deluded. You have more than one lesson to learn, boy.
Please send all your microwave transmissions to Shampoo (extracted from link above):
Kevin Nadeau 1 Lakeshore Blvd.
Ennismore Ontario, Canada
K0L 1T0
I'll disagree respectfully. In 100 years, services (possibly in an automaton format) will use a shared backbone of a large and ever-growing body of knowledge to convert digital information into a myriad of formats, down every specifications' pathway as long as the information is accessible.
This is because of several changes I foresee:
- ubiquitous service formats, or translation formaters in a shared backbone
- near-total wireless broadband access
- more common cooperative programming designs, divide and conquer no longer bound by core
- Growth and research of anthropomorphic machine interfaces
machines will know how to access information from a "thing", if guided, by researching the devices to read and extract the information, transferring the "thing" to such a device, capturing the information, and providing it in a explorable format using a series of interfaces (auditory, visual, etc) using hints from the creation time/era, format, program of origin, etc.
100 years in a huge span of time. in 100 years we could be much much further than this, but i'm gonna stick with the above as a safe bet. machines are changing faster than we've ever seen them, and the commercialization of businesses functions into a web format is just the tip of the iceberg. we're not going to just have "today" in a faster version, we're going along a wild trip. 100 years can swallow all of our imagination and then some.
No sure if its really "stealing money". I mean, this still allows users to buy/use the official OSX DVD.
This splits the hardware/software delineation deep into Apple's territory. But they're headed in that direction anyways. If I were Apple, I'd never officially support this because of the nightmare of vendors matching for a software-only solution (think about Microsoft's world).
But as Apple would I let people spend list price for my OS and never call about support issues? You betcha!
sounds perfect. thanks!
I'm not afraid of hitting their monthly limit, but they've deliberately hid any sort of metering concept from their public services, probably in fear of users gaming the system to use 249.9GB a month.
I'd be very interested in such a service, since I run our modem to several systems and I'm simply curious about where we rank in monthly usage.
The bandwidth changes sound like someone finally came to their senses about the purpose of an internet. Prior to this, it was an awful mess of dpi and false drops. yuck
Well, it's amazing, but there are still plenty of people left to be introduced to the Streisand Effect.
I say this should stand a strong advertisement that they are completely ignorant of how the web works, on both the original level of the case, and in the effect this latest press is giving them.
"Aren't you that famous law firm that tried to censor teh interwebs? It doesnt work like that, dude"
The warm ocean temperatures of the tropical Atlantic make for a huge buildup of atmosphere-cooling hurricanes. I propose that we simply warm the oceans and and let already existing phenomena create ever-massive storms. They can lift and transport a huge amount of water. We'd have a quickly-cooled streak of weather that would barrel westward into the southeastern US - yearly!
I think this plan is great, and we simply need a way of warming ocean temperatures just a degree or two. Perhaps if we melted down one of the ice caps...
I cannot dispute that reference, that's true for active tags. See the reference link, and subsequent quote:
September 26, 2006 - Passive RFID Tagging Update
The Department of Defense remains committed to the implementation of Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) technology as outlined in our July 30, 2004 policy memorandum. Since the publication of this initial policy memorandum, ongoing technology developments, updated IT investment strategies, and business process improvements within the DoD have clarified passive RFID requirements within the Department. The DoD July 30, 2004 RFID Policy stated that passive RFID tagging by DoD suppliers would apply to all locations worldwide. The term "all locations" in the July 30, 2004 policy refers to all major receiving locations across the world. The DoD is investing in appropriate passive RFID infrastructure in all locations that are deemed major receiving locations; the majority of those locations are already called out in the current DFARS clause. The DoD requirement will expand to tactical locations as those locations become RFID-enabled. The DoD will not require suppliers to apply passive RFID tags to the unit pack of UID items during the 2007 calendar year. The Department will continue to evaluate the appropriate time frame to begin tagging at the unit pack level for UID items and will promulgate this requirement in advance of future issuances.
In the passive RFID deployments, there's nothing changing in the signature. Essentially, you only need the know the scanner signal and the RFID response. If a scanner signal is captured without any RFID feedback, you have the clean signal (1st pass). Then, with a valid RFID, you have the response you want to mimic. Tiers of this may be applied, still passively, but essentially the logic is the same.
I believe the US government is attempting to keep things secure by using specialized scanners, and probably complex modulations and tiered signals to perform this. Again, I must reiterate: This is security from not knowing the mechanics, not actually from presenting the challenger with a problem they cannot solve within limited time. The scanner tech is fixed once the RFID chips are in flight.
Thus, reverse engineering them has unlimited time- and if I had to guess, will arrive to the world via a former contracted supplier going bankrupt and liquidating assets, or perhaps someone stealing one. Either way, its only a matter of time before the RFID layer is worth nothing more than the falsified signature, or magic paper, etc, of a passport.
Regardless of who was in on the meeting and how it happened - it was political, not scientific. This leaves standing the elephant in the room: RFID is simplistic to mimic.
If one understands the radio wave effects (backscatter or modulation), one could use a scanner to capture all the RFID's within a zone.
Then, essentially building a device tuned to emit an identical signal (for passive, this is secretive but not impossible as Adam alludes to), (for active, I'm unsure how difficult this is) and then this clone can be used in lieu of the original tag.
This means for RFID-cards using passive technology, cloning them is allegedly a education measure, not a true security measure. Like unlocking cell phones and other corner-store concepts, one could imagine RFID signatures built-to-order based on scanner values (one need not have the original RFID, just a response from it).
Both points you make are valid. I've buried 2 friends from cycling (but made dozens in the process as well).
Overall, cycling saftey is relative to the area. Here in Portland, OR things are quite enjoyable for cyclists within town.
As preachy as my email could seem, I dont see driving that much as anything annoying. I keep my car and use it whenever I like as well. However, I do believe we'll use whatever cars are presented to us. For the moment, at 99% gas-fueled, we have a long way to go. But our lifetime may see the advent of majority-power via stored electricity or other forms of energy, once the energy density moves a bit up the scale.
So what price for a gallon of gas makes you skip a trip (as a factor of distance) ?
Right now, I'm hovering around 18 miles radius for my no-load travel to switch from bike to car. Within that zone, all my schedules adjust and I'm happy to report my quality-of-life has actually gone up:
Monetary
- about 150 miles/week in gas savings (for my 20mpg car @ $4/gal = ~30$US)
- if wear = ~0.05$US/mile, then 7.50$US / week
- it builds up quickly: $150/month
Health
- cholesterol has dropped
- weight has dropped
Social
- met a few other bikers, quite a friendly demographic
- nice parking/walking distances almost everywhere
Full disclosure: At 37, I'm hitting 8 years/10k miles commuting to work in 2008. One has to work up to larger distances.
to the above peer posts...
I understand what you guys are saying - I'm being somewhat cheeky with that "existing ones go faster..." but to me, the world of computing is becoming more distributed. Average bandwidth rates are already way behind in the US.
For most of the desktop/productivity apps I see in the public space, here's the future - how do more cores help?
- Constant-connection personal devices (phones + music + etc)
- Distributed desktops / licenses.
- Hosted productivity applications.
- Web 2.0 toolkit standardizations and higher adoption rates for pages.
- Embedded and small-form-factor devices become more web centric (dashboards, phones, etc)
I'll take a stab at my own question with some answers where cores could help:
- Dual monitor or 3D displays
- HD and similar video handling
- Visual and sound recognition models
- Realtime devices/systems for robotics, safety systems
I don't mind the world of multi-core arrive in a rush, but I'm questioning the need for it without an "all boats rise together" redesign of the PC architecture.
Can't they just make the existing ones go faster? Seriously, if I want to start architectures around 1000's of independent threads of execution, i'd start with communication speeds, not node count.
It's already easy to spawn thread armies that peg all IO channels. Where is all this "work" you can do without any IO?
I think Intel better starting thinking of "tens, hundreds or even thousands" of bus speed multipliers on their napkin drawings.
Aside from some heavy processing-dependent concepts (graphics, complex mathematical models, etc) the world need petabyte/sec connectivity, not instruction set munching.