I think the concern with upsetting Darwinism is pretty unecessary, since both technology and globalization have forever unbalanced any 'pure' form of evolution. Without freighters and airplanes, there would be no rabbit problem in Australia, no Dutch elm disease in the States, no zebra mussels destroying the foundation of our freshwater ecosystems. No chance that, with an appropriately engineered pathogen and a normal day of international air travel, a global epidemic could de-speciate the whole blinking planet at any given moment.
But more importantly: human control of the biosphere is total. We could clone out a whole flock of sabertooth tigers and seed them over the planet with cargo jets...but the disruption to local ecosystems would still be minimal compared to other pathways of human intervention (habitat destruction, de-forestation, etc.) Other than the transient choas in the urban areas, of course.
I'm not trying to be inflammatory [all honesty] but what exactly is the deal with "woman have a genetic problem with math and spatial analysis"? That's...umm...not true.
That's the best I've been able to eek out of the IBM site...the Alameda-specific site is refusing/too busy. They do mention within the type of problem it solved and the nature of the qubits (fluorine), but their research database doesn't have any 'new' design literature that I can find.
Trying gamely to figure out how the qubits are internalized within this 'molecule' without entanglement or disruption [?]
isn't that a bit of a limited view? Corporations are just a bunch of people with sometimes-intersecting viewpoints and resources...morals and ethics are _aggregate_ properties, and hardly divorced from business. Societies can have moral properties just as humans can have rational properties; we too are governed by laws, but that doesn't keep us from pursuing things other than only programmed "goals" of feeding, sleep and reproduction.
Slashdot Mirror
I think the concern with upsetting Darwinism is pretty unecessary, since both technology and globalization have forever unbalanced any 'pure' form of evolution. Without freighters and airplanes, there would be no rabbit problem in Australia, no Dutch elm disease in the States, no zebra mussels destroying the foundation of our freshwater ecosystems. No chance that, with an appropriately engineered pathogen and a normal day of international air travel, a global epidemic could de-speciate the whole blinking planet at any given moment.
But more importantly: human control of the biosphere is total. We could clone out a whole flock of sabertooth tigers and seed them over the planet with cargo jets...but the disruption to local ecosystems would still be minimal compared to other pathways of human intervention (habitat destruction, de-forestation, etc.) Other than the transient choas in the urban areas, of course.
I'm not trying to be inflammatory [all honesty] but what exactly is the deal with "woman have a genetic problem with math and spatial analysis"? That's...umm...not true.
http://www.ibm.com/news/2000/08/15.phtml
That's the best I've been able to eek out of the IBM site...the Alameda-specific site is refusing/too busy. They do mention within the type of problem it solved and the nature of the qubits (fluorine), but their research database doesn't have any 'new' design literature that I can find. Trying gamely to figure out how the qubits are internalized within this 'molecule' without entanglement or disruption [?]isn't that a bit of a limited view? Corporations are just a bunch of people with sometimes-intersecting viewpoints and resources...morals and ethics are _aggregate_ properties, and hardly divorced from business. Societies can have moral properties just as humans can have rational properties; we too are governed by laws, but that doesn't keep us from pursuing things other than only programmed "goals" of feeding, sleep and reproduction.