Thank you Elrous for expressing what I have always said and felt. When Lucas ruined Cloud City in Empire Stikes Back I swore I never, ever forgive him for that travesty. They are completely unwatchable and heartbreaking. I haven't watched the Special Editions since, holding on to both my VHS and DVD copies of the originals.
My $87 Billion Space Program Proposal
on
The Future of NASA
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
I just wrote a piece on my blog about a possible space program that we could have if we spent the $87 Billion on a SUSTAINABLE and commercially viable space program. The results I think are spectactular - including the completion of a working space elevator, reduced cost to orbit of $10 per pound (that's only $2000 per person to go to space), asteroid mining, solar power satellites,and permanent, sustainable space colinization.
Of course this won't happen, which to me boggles the mind, as the boon to the economy and the world would be tremendous.
I just love this idea. I can just imagine the thrill I would have had a teenager back in the late 70's to be able to go down to the library and "check out" an operating system, install it, and return it the following day. Perhaps I'm simply nostalgically emoting, but this seems like a nice idea to increase the grass roots of open source generally.
Because until they can make it slide into my dash to act as a car stereo device AND easily hook into my home stereo AND easily be seen as anohter hard drive on my computer AND NOT cost over $500 AND come with at least 20GB of memory, I don't see any reason to get one.
In order to get re-elected, Bush will have to pull some serious rabbits out of his hat.
Those rabbits might include vote-fixing with rigged voting machines and another convenient "terrorist event" that he will use to increase his popularity just like he did after 9-11. Who would have thought Bush could ever get an approval rating of 70% when less than 15% of the country actually voted for him?
What's disturbing about the current map thus far, is it clearly shows how CENTRALIZED the internet really is. This old idea of traffic routing around damage is in fact a rather fragile network of handfull of backbone nodes. I would have expected more lower hierarchical nodes crisscrossing the network, forming more of spiderweb system, rather than everything going across 3 or 4 nodes.
I find it interesting that they have already decided to regulate VoIP before they have had any public hearings. Why the hasty decision? And if since they have already decided to regulate, why the public hearings then? Sounds to me as is typical of the FCC these days, that public opinion is an afterthought.
I think another soon-to-be application is when you are on road trips, and as you take pictures during the trip you can just hit the download key, and it immediatley upload the pics to your car PC, which also just got released from Xenarc Technologies.
These fucking morons still don't have a friggin clue, and it absolutely amazes me just how far their heads are up their ass.
DRM will destroy the internet faster than the can shake a stick at, as well as the general proliferation of culture, free enterprise and free communications that made the internet what it is.
The STUPIDITY is beyond belief. I still haven't figured out whether to laugh at their gross idiocy or cry at the fact that these fat-cat, greedy bastards will destroy the whole thing and bring all the hope the internet portended to its knees. And ironically the very free enterprise capitalism that thrived on it.
Yes, its true, its all part of making things more efficient, cheaper, etc. But the dire possibility is that this downward trend will take the whole world with it, as the very people who drive spending can no longer afford to buy these products are loosing income faster than these products become cheaper. Housing is a perfect indicator. Although electronics, software and other good get chepaer, real estate, cars and other necessary items get more expensive. The end result is more people living at a lower standard of living:
Shanti Housing with Plasma Wall screens and high sped wireless access
When I was in physics college back in the 80's my professor wrote a computer program in which he plugged in all of his students class hours, and with a few seconds the program would generate his office hours precisely when his students would be least likely to be able to attend without missing their other classes. I actually saw him plug this data in his computer and laugh.
Planet P Blog
I suggest you see this movie again. The Architect scene alone was the most mind-blowing thing I've seen on celluloid in at least 10 years.
After reading the reviews I was expecting a mediocre film. Boy were they wrong! This file surpasses the original in several ways, especially in the cerbreal mind-bening part. For those who didn't get all the radical and profound implications, please don't trash the film becaus you lack sufficient intelligence to comprehend it.
People forget that although the constitution is now more than two hundred years old, most of the constitional rights that are now under threat are no more than a few decades old (being the results of relatively recent Supreme Court rulings).
Excuse me. What planet have you been sleeping on? Since 1995 and especially since 9/11, more the half of the Bill of Rights has been eroded. The first ammedment has been under constant attack - DMCA, right of association = suspicion. Third Ammendment and the overturning of the Posse Cumatatus Act. The Fourth Ammednment is completely gone. It started to dissappear under the drug war, and completely dissappeared under the US PATRIOT Act. The 5th, 6th and 7th ammendments, right to a speedy trial, writ of habeus corpus, secret arrests, camp x-ray, indefinite detentions, lack of attorney-client confidentiality. And the 10th ammendment where federal law continues to usurp state ammendments.
I know what I am about to write is radical, but please give it some thought before rendering an opinion on it. It's not exactly technological speculation as it is philosophical speculation on the ultimate limits (if there are any) of the technological metaphor.
Up to this point in nearly all discussions of extreme/speculative tech what we are trying to do is maximally stretch our imagination as to what is possible within the realm of currently known scientific law. And for those of us who've been frequenting transhumanist circles for any period of time, we know the current limits of science portend a lot - uploading, indefinite lifespans, traversible wormholes, jupiter brains, basement universes, etc.
Now lets assume that our current understanding of the known laws of physics are invariable. Lets assume that the Grand Unified Theory really is the grand theory they claim it to be.
I have been engaging in some discussion lately about the begining of the universe, and for the first time (amazingly enough) I pushed the 'Where did it come from' question through as far as it can go. And, not surprisingly, it doesn't go anywhere. No matter how you try to explain the origin of the universe, none of the theories can account for the cause of it. What caused the big bang? Where did 'God' come from? etc.
From this, i concluded that there cannot be a begining. If there was a begining, then something must have caused that begining, and so something was there before the begining.
This doesn't answer anything, but I am yet to see another way around the causality problem (defining something as 'acausal' doesn't solve it, it just dodges it).
Now, linked to this 'where did the universe come from?' problem is, 'Where did the incredible laws, which make our universe a coherent place come from?', which is what I think underlies it all. Once the universe began, it is easy to say 'the laws guided the evolution of everything from there'....but how did the laws come to be? Why are they so perfect? (weak anthropic principle could be an acceptable argument here).
When you think of an omniverse that has no beginning, then we are talking about something that is temporally at least infinite in duration, something ultimately beyond time itself, where concepts of a beginning and an end have no meaning. I think what this also means is that any one set of properties/laws we experience are also ultimately entirely arbitrary. If they are not then we must ask ourselves what meta-laws are behind it governing what types of laws are allowed and which are not? And then we have to ask ourselves where did these metalaws come from? And then meta-meta-laws and so on to infinity. And, not surprisingly, it doesn't go anywhere. No matter how you try to explain the origin of any laws, none of the theories can account for the cause of those laws. From this, I concluded there can be no fundamental laws.
So if there are no fundamental laws, no limts, then everything is possible. If not, why not? And we are right back to an arbitray set of laws with no explanation. And since we are used to applying the metaphor of technology to such things, we could (at least for fun) call such tech based on a lack of laws nada-technology or onto-technology. The technology of reality itself. I like to call it nadatech becuase ulitimatly it's based on nothing... no laws, no limits, nothing at all.
So what do we do with nada- or onto-technology?
Anything. Everything.
Either way, the ultimate lack of any fundamental laws implies that everything is possible and probably already exists exists in a timeless standing quantum probability wave in eternity.
Well, nothing like what we have now. Assuming we survive the coming nanotech era, by 2100 computers and human brains will have totally merged. Thought itself will be the computer language of the future. Of course these 'thoughts' will be as far beyond both our current consciousness and computer languages, as we are beyond an insects.
This article, and Heather MacDonald is so idiotic I'm nearly speechless in responding. As someone who is a strong advocate of accelerating technology, stem-cell research, cloning, genetic engineering, nanotechnology, and space colonization, and also PRIVACY protections, I challenge anyone to back-up calling me a luddite. If I oppose the use of nuclear weapons does this also make me a luddite?
This has nothing to do with technology and luddism, this has to do with how this technology is used.
I have only this to say about invasions of privacy. If the government wants to eliminate all privacy, then I demand that it be BOTH WAYS. But when you have a government that is getting increasingly secretive while our lives become less so, then you have a gaping hole for abuse. As David Brin so eloquently shows, only societies that are transparent in every area have a chance of remaining democratic and free. What Heather is suggesting is pure Orwellian Tyranny - nothing more.
I think this is a cool development of TI, but the real future is software definied radio and the GNU Radio project, which is a general purpose computing device that can operate on any frequency - all determined by software, not hardware.
The consensus of the world is that Iraq poses a threat.
Whose consensus would that be? Name a single country in the world besides the UK who supports this war? And in the UK, over 80% of the PEOPLE do not support the war, and even Tony Blair's his own ministers are resigning in protest.
So what is this world consensus you speak of? Must be that propoganda soaked brain of yours. Please, do yourself a favor, stop watching Bill O'Reilly, turn off Fox News, wake up and see REALITY.
Slashdot Mirror
30% for Defense and Wars?? It hasn't been that low since before WW2. The current slice is right here:
http://oranges-world.com/the-federal-budget.html
Thank you Elrous for expressing what I have always said and felt. When Lucas ruined Cloud City in Empire Stikes Back I swore I never, ever forgive him for that travesty. They are completely unwatchable and heartbreaking. I haven't watched the Special Editions since, holding on to both my VHS and DVD copies of the originals.
~~
http://www.vivation.com/
Mass Produced Carbon Nanotubes
7 meters per minute!
Future Hi
Of course this won't happen, which to me boggles the mind, as the boon to the economy and the world would be tremendous.
I just love this idea. I can just imagine the thrill I would have had a teenager back in the late 70's to be able to go down to the library and "check out" an operating system, install it, and return it the following day. Perhaps I'm simply nostalgically emoting, but this seems like a nice idea to increase the grass roots of open source generally.
Because until they can make it slide into my dash to act as a car stereo device AND easily hook into my home stereo AND easily be seen as anohter hard drive on my computer AND NOT cost over $500 AND come with at least 20GB of memory, I don't see any reason to get one.
In order to get re-elected, Bush will have to pull some serious rabbits out of his hat.
Those rabbits might include vote-fixing with rigged voting machines and another convenient "terrorist event" that he will use to increase his popularity just like he did after 9-11. Who would have thought Bush could ever get an approval rating of 70% when less than 15% of the country actually voted for him?
I modded you up to +5, but when I hit submit, it modded you down to + 3 (overrated) - and I can't correct it - sorry dude, liked your post.
Paul
What's disturbing about the current map thus far, is it clearly shows how CENTRALIZED the internet really is. This old idea of traffic routing around damage is in fact a rather fragile network of handfull of backbone nodes. I would have expected more lower hierarchical nodes crisscrossing the network, forming more of spiderweb system, rather than everything going across 3 or 4 nodes.
Planet P Blog
Yes, I was beginning to think it was only my blog that was getting this. I'm now getting 4 or 5 spams on my comments every day.
Not sure what they mean by saying this plant is the only survivor of the Jurassic age, as Ginko Biloba is 200 million years old.
I think another soon-to-be application is when you are on road trips, and as you take pictures during the trip you can just hit the download key, and it immediatley upload the pics to your car PC, which also just got released from Xenarc Technologies.
Planet P
These fucking morons still don't have a friggin clue, and it absolutely amazes me just how far their heads are up their ass.
DRM will destroy the internet faster than the can shake a stick at, as well as the general proliferation of culture, free enterprise and free communications that made the internet what it is.
The STUPIDITY is beyond belief. I still haven't figured out whether to laugh at their gross idiocy or cry at the fact that these fat-cat, greedy bastards will destroy the whole thing and bring all the hope the internet portended to its knees. And ironically the very free enterprise capitalism that thrived on it.
Yes, its true, its all part of making things more efficient, cheaper, etc. But the dire possibility is that this downward trend will take the whole world with it, as the very people who drive spending can no longer afford to buy these products are loosing income faster than these products become cheaper. Housing is a perfect indicator. Although electronics, software and other good get chepaer, real estate, cars and other necessary items get more expensive. The end result is more people living at a lower standard of living:
Shanti Housing with Plasma Wall screens and high sped wireless access
When I was in physics college back in the 80's my professor wrote a computer program in which he plugged in all of his students class hours, and with a few seconds the program would generate his office hours precisely when his students would be least likely to be able to attend without missing their other classes. I actually saw him plug this data in his computer and laugh. Planet P Blog
I suggest you see this movie again. The Architect scene alone was the most mind-blowing thing I've seen on celluloid in at least 10 years.
After reading the reviews I was expecting a mediocre film. Boy were they wrong! This file surpasses the original in several ways, especially in the cerbreal mind-bening part. For those who didn't get all the radical and profound implications, please don't trash the film becaus you lack sufficient intelligence to comprehend it.
I'm giving it a 10/10.
Planet P Blog
People forget that although the constitution is now more than two hundred years old, most of the constitional rights that are now under threat are no more than a few decades old (being the results of relatively recent Supreme Court rulings).
Excuse me. What planet have you been sleeping on? Since 1995 and especially since 9/11, more the half of the Bill of Rights has been eroded. The first ammedment has been under constant attack - DMCA, right of association = suspicion. Third Ammendment and the overturning of the Posse Cumatatus Act. The Fourth Ammednment is completely gone. It started to dissappear under the drug war, and completely dissappeared under the US PATRIOT Act. The 5th, 6th and 7th ammendments, right to a speedy trial, writ of habeus corpus, secret arrests, camp x-ray, indefinite detentions, lack of attorney-client confidentiality. And the 10th ammendment where federal law continues to usurp state ammendments.
Planet P Blog
Damn, how did you do that? You been watching my surfing activities!? LOL. :-)
I know what I am about to write is radical, but please give it some thought before rendering an opinion on it. It's not exactly technological speculation as it is philosophical speculation on the ultimate limits (if there are any) of the technological metaphor.
Up to this point in nearly all discussions of extreme/speculative tech what we are trying to do is maximally stretch our imagination as to what is possible within the realm of currently known scientific law. And for those of us who've been frequenting transhumanist circles for any period of time, we know the current limits of science portend a lot - uploading, indefinite lifespans, traversible wormholes, jupiter brains, basement universes, etc.
Now lets assume that our current understanding of the known laws of physics are invariable. Lets assume that the Grand Unified Theory really is the grand theory they claim it to be.
I have been engaging in some discussion lately about the begining of the universe, and for the first time (amazingly enough) I pushed the 'Where did it come from' question through as far as it can go. And, not surprisingly, it doesn't go anywhere. No matter how you try to explain the origin of the universe, none of the theories can account for the cause of it. What caused the big bang? Where did 'God' come from? etc.
From this, i concluded that there cannot be a begining. If there was a begining, then something must have caused that begining, and so something was there before the begining.
This doesn't answer anything, but I am yet to see another way around the causality problem (defining something as 'acausal' doesn't solve it, it just dodges it).
Now, linked to this 'where did the universe come from?' problem is, 'Where did the incredible laws, which make our universe a coherent place come from?', which is what I think underlies it all. Once the universe began, it is easy to say 'the laws guided the evolution of everything from there'....but how did the laws come to be? Why are they so perfect? (weak anthropic principle could be an acceptable argument here).
When you think of an omniverse that has no beginning, then we are talking about something that is temporally at least infinite in duration, something ultimately beyond time itself, where concepts of a beginning and an end have no meaning. I think what this also means is that any one set of properties/laws we experience are also ultimately entirely arbitrary. If they are not then we must ask ourselves what meta-laws are behind it governing what types of laws are allowed and which are not? And then we have to ask ourselves where did these metalaws come from? And then meta-meta-laws and so on to infinity. And, not surprisingly, it doesn't go anywhere. No matter how you try to explain the origin of any laws, none of the theories can account for the cause of those laws. From this, I concluded there can be no fundamental laws.
So if there are no fundamental laws, no limts, then everything is possible. If not, why not? And we are right back to an arbitray set of laws with no explanation. And since we are used to applying the metaphor of technology to such things, we could (at least for fun) call such tech based on a lack of laws nada-technology or onto-technology. The technology of reality itself. I like to call it nadatech becuase ulitimatly it's based on nothing... no laws, no limits, nothing at all.
So what do we do with nada- or onto-technology?
Anything. Everything.
Either way, the ultimate lack of any fundamental laws implies that everything is possible and probably already exists exists in a timeless standing quantum probability wave in eternity.
Planet P Blog - Liberty with Technology.
Wow, I thought I was reading my own writing. :-)
I think you will appreciate my blog here:
Planet P: http://planetp.cc/
Well, nothing like what we have now. Assuming we survive the coming nanotech era, by 2100 computers and human brains will have totally merged. Thought itself will be the computer language of the future. Of course these 'thoughts' will be as far beyond both our current consciousness and computer languages, as we are beyond an insects.
Planet P Blog
This article, and Heather MacDonald is so idiotic I'm nearly speechless in responding. As someone who is a strong advocate of accelerating technology, stem-cell research, cloning, genetic engineering, nanotechnology, and space colonization, and also PRIVACY protections, I challenge anyone to back-up calling me a luddite. If I oppose the use of nuclear weapons does this also make me a luddite?
This has nothing to do with technology and luddism, this has to do with how this technology is used.
I have only this to say about invasions of privacy. If the government wants to eliminate all privacy, then I demand that it be BOTH WAYS. But when you have a government that is getting increasingly secretive while our lives become less so, then you have a gaping hole for abuse. As David Brin so eloquently shows, only societies that are transparent in every area have a chance of remaining democratic and free. What Heather is suggesting is pure Orwellian Tyranny - nothing more.
Planet P Blog
I think this is a cool development of TI, but the real future is software definied radio and the GNU Radio project, which is a general purpose computing device that can operate on any frequency - all determined by software, not hardware.
Planet P Blog
The consensus of the world is that Iraq poses a threat.
Whose consensus would that be? Name a single country in the world besides the UK who supports this war? And in the UK, over 80% of the PEOPLE do not support the war, and even Tony Blair's his own ministers are resigning in protest.
So what is this world consensus you speak of? Must be that propoganda soaked brain of yours. Please, do yourself a favor, stop watching Bill O'Reilly, turn off Fox News, wake up and see REALITY.