I think this is where Microsoft's investment in Ralph Reed is going to really pay off.
I'll be really surprised if Microsoft doesn't get off scott free.
This article just proves that the fields that used to be called "molecular science" or "surface physics" or "material science" or whatever have just renamed themselves "nanoscience" as a marketing ploy. These developments are nice but they don't have much to do with the little self-replicating bots that we've been promised by the nanotechnology pundits. Where are my nanobots! I want nanobots!
The rise of memory problems has coincided with the widespread adoption of C++. Fortunately most of these problems will go away as.Net and C# become the standard environment.
How can someone create a simulation of events in 2017 and not take nanobots into account? Nanobots are destined to become operational within the next five years, according to the Foresight Institute. They will completely undermine the assumptions that went into this simulation. These people obviously just don't get it.
Okay, my fluid dynamics is a little rusty. But won't these fans be operating well below the dissipation range for turbulent eddies in air, and consequently won't most of the energy from these fans go right back into heat rather than bulk air motion?
Rod logic, combined with Code Morphing and nano-bots, should obviate the need for convective cooling. A well-designed nano-bot should be able to operate below the quantum of heat conductance, and turbo block coding can be used to inhibit entropy leakage. Please, this forum is stuck in the 20th century.
Dubya has a keen and far ranging intellect. In conjunction with Dr. Rush Limbaugh, he has conducted his own numerical simulations which have shown that global warming is a fraud foisted upon the public by a radical leftist scientific community.
As one of his first executive actions, President George W. Bush convened a Blue Ribbon panel of distinguished scientific experts, headed by Dr. Rush Limbaugh, to study the problem of global warming. Their conclusions:
1. Global warming is a fraud.
2. Even if it's not a fraud, it's probably a good thing.
3. Even if it's not a good thing, the only way to prevent it is to allow more logging and strip mining in national parks.
Please, for the love of nanobots, take your valid quantitative reasoning elsewhere. We're never gonna make it to nano-utopia by listening to skeptics like you.
In the future, you will purchase computers by the roll, and rip one off by the perferated edge to use it surf the web while you're on the stool, then use it to wipe your butt when you're done.
You heard it here first.
Why stick to the 2D 'pages' model at all? This whole thing seems destined for obsolesence. By the time they get it working, you'll be able to 'grow' IC's with fully integrated 3D topology using nanobots.
Cringely completely fails to take into account the rise of nano-bots. According to most technology pundits, it's pretty much a certainty that within five years all computers will be manufacutured by nano-bots, will be so small as to be invisible, and will be so efficient that they are powered by ambient light. Taking this into account, who cares about a printing press computer that is a quarter inch thick?
I'd like to make some amusing, slightly funny comment which relates the printed plastic computer concept to an annoying property of some household consumer item. While I'm at it, I'll throw in something about Linux, and possibly nanotechnology. Okay, fill in the details yourself.
Slashdot Mirror
Why did'nt they just use one of them DNA computers we're always hearing about? They're supposed to be really fast.
... is that it wasn't quoted from the New Scientist.
I think this is where Microsoft's investment in Ralph Reed is going to really pay off. I'll be really surprised if Microsoft doesn't get off scott free.
This article just proves that the fields that used to be called "molecular science" or "surface physics" or "material science" or whatever have just renamed themselves "nanoscience" as a marketing ploy. These developments are nice but they don't have much to do with the little self-replicating bots that we've been promised by the nanotechnology pundits. Where are my nanobots! I want nanobots!
The rise of memory problems has coincided with the widespread adoption of C++. Fortunately most of these problems will go away as .Net and C# become the standard environment.
Yet another bit of paper-thin hype from New Scientist. New Scientist is the Weekly World News of science.
Darpa and the US Military are not quite the same thing.
How can someone create a simulation of events in 2017 and not take nanobots into account? Nanobots are destined to become operational within the next five years, according to the Foresight Institute. They will completely undermine the assumptions that went into this simulation. These people obviously just don't get it.
What's any of this got to do with nano-bots? Seems kind of off-topic if you ask me.
Okay, my fluid dynamics is a little rusty. But won't these fans be operating well below the dissipation range for turbulent eddies in air, and consequently won't most of the energy from these fans go right back into heat rather than bulk air motion?
Rod logic, combined with Code Morphing and nano-bots, should obviate the need for convective cooling. A well-designed nano-bot should be able to operate below the quantum of heat conductance, and turbo block coding can be used to inhibit entropy leakage. Please, this forum is stuck in the 20th century.
Dubya has a keen and far ranging intellect. In conjunction with Dr. Rush Limbaugh, he has conducted his own numerical simulations which have shown that global warming is a fraud foisted upon the public by a radical leftist scientific community.
I was wondering how far down I'd have to scroll before someone threw in a Transmeta reference.
As one of his first executive actions, President George W. Bush convened a Blue Ribbon panel of distinguished scientific experts, headed by Dr. Rush Limbaugh, to study the problem of global warming. Their conclusions: 1. Global warming is a fraud. 2. Even if it's not a fraud, it's probably a good thing. 3. Even if it's not a good thing, the only way to prevent it is to allow more logging and strip mining in national parks.
Please, for the love of nanobots, take your valid quantitative reasoning elsewhere. We're never gonna make it to nano-utopia by listening to skeptics like you.
Nanobots! Nanobots! Nano-nano-nano bots! Can't get enough of them nano-bots!
In the future, you will purchase computers by the roll, and rip one off by the perferated edge to use it surf the web while you're on the stool, then use it to wipe your butt when you're done. You heard it here first.
Why stick to the 2D 'pages' model at all? This whole thing seems destined for obsolesence. By the time they get it working, you'll be able to 'grow' IC's with fully integrated 3D topology using nanobots.
People have been using adaptive web-site arrays with tapped FIR adaptive spam nulling processors for years.
Ah.. but not when you're operating your Ginger in underwater mode. Bandwidth will be severely limited in deep-sea operations.
Cringely completely fails to take into account the rise of nano-bots. According to most technology pundits, it's pretty much a certainty that within five years all computers will be manufacutured by nano-bots, will be so small as to be invisible, and will be so efficient that they are powered by ambient light. Taking this into account, who cares about a printing press computer that is a quarter inch thick?
I'd like to make some amusing, slightly funny comment which relates the printed plastic computer concept to an annoying property of some household consumer item. While I'm at it, I'll throw in something about Linux, and possibly nanotechnology. Okay, fill in the details yourself.
So I can install it on my Ginger.
Excellent. Now the next time we have a war, our enemy has a great excuse to start targeting 747s. I think I'll take an Airbus, thank you.
That was a great movie.