I've seen video of neodymium magnets suspending an entire train, or a car of a train. Whether it's neodymium or some other material, I'm sure that eventually we'd be able to manufacture enough passive magnets to support this system. Passive magnets are MUCH cheaper for this sort of thing, in the long run.
Maglevs are expensive. I'm not saying we'd be able to lay tracks all over the planet in a day. But for any given stretch of rail, this system should be cheaper than traditional maglev, and much faster.
If you said that there hasn't been much innovation since Half-Life, I'd whole-heartedly agree with you. But if you're actually saying to me, with a straight face, that there hasn't been much innovation since Doom, I'd have to conclude that you really don't actually play videogames. There are a lot of those types on Slashdot lately, I've noticed. They like to blab about their opinions about video games, but they don't actually even play them.
Yay, someone who agrees with me that Monsters Inc. was better than Shrek. Trust me, I hate Disney, and I love the idea of a movie studio displacing Disney (while making fun of them at the same time), but Monsters Inc. was just a really great movie. Shrek, with it's sarcastic "wit" that was fashionable about 5 years ago is a lot less interesting to me.
Well, a million is 1,000,000 x 1000^0 a billion is is 1,000,000 x 1000^1 and a trillion is 1,000,000 x 1000^2
So a trillion is the third in the series of 1,000,000 x 1000^n.
Listen, I love the metric system, and as an American, I wish we'd adopt it officially. But I don't see how your nomenclature for numbers is any better. What do *you* call 10^12? A million million? Sorry, I like our system better. Or even if you call it a thousand billion, it still doesn't fit.
Our number system puts a comma after every three digits, starting from the right side. So if you see a number that starts off like this: 100,000,000.... You'll know it's a hundred something, whether it's a hundred million, billion, trillion or quadrillion. If you're going to call 1,000,000,000,000 (10^12) "A thousand billion", instead of "one [n-illion]" then you confuse the whole system.
Actually, the real problem has nothing to do with whether they use pure oxygen, or mixed oxygen and nitrogen. The problem has to do with the CONCENTRATION of oxygen. If you need to be in a full pressure environment, then yes, you'd need to dilute the oxygen with about 4 times as much nitrogen. But there's a simpler solution. Just use a pure oxygen atmosphere at ONE-FIFTH OF THE PRESSURE. The concentration of oxygen would remain the same, and therefore the flammability of the atmosphere would remain the same.
Covet means to desire something of someone else's, as in jealousy. Covetous means greedy. Just because you can look at the root word doesn't mean the shade of meaning doesn't differ slightly when it's in a different form. usurious. The first synonym listed is exorbitant.
No, you're absolutely right, it's not a blank slate. My point is, if we structured an artificial brain to correspond exactly to the brains structure, even if we don't understand why, it should work. Sort of like the genome. We can mess around with genes and sort of predict how our new creations will come out, but that doesn't mean we could build it from the ground up.
So if we could mimic the brain structure, like I described, imagine the possibilities for learning. Imagine being able to bypass the whole "teaching/learning" process, and just directly reconfigure your artificial neurons as you please to teach yourself new things instantly.
Also, if we didn't understand a thing about how the configuration of neurons led to development, we could still, in theory, create artificial neurons, and set it up just like in a brain. Now imagine, though, that the neurons run twice as fast as our biological neurons. That would most likely improve our intelligence, in certain ways. It might have weird time dilation effects, but there's probably ways to manipulate that too.
I don't believe the brain is a blank slate at all, but this still has nothing to do with software, and certainly nothing to do with compilers. The only thing "software" about our brains is the ability to actually change the hardware. Actually, certain things we do in every day life are like software. When we add numbers, especially on paper, we're just mechanically running through rules, and getting a right answer, even though there isn't any hardware in our brains to directly process it.
But my point is, I don't think this story and these possibilities have anything in common with the AI research going on now. I think this sort of artificial intelligence will emerge through the work ofspecialists in nanotechnology, neurobiology, and electrical engineering and stuff like that. Most likely computer scientists will have a small role in creating this.
It isn't about software. Our brain doesn't have any software. It's all hardware. All you have to do is create artificial neurons, that when grouped together, just like in the human brain, learning and behavior just emerges. The human brain, after all, is just a machine isn't it?
YOU PUT ME ON YOUR FOES LIST!!!!! NOOOOOOOOOO ------------ Please try to keep posts on topic. Try to reply to other people comments instead of starting new threads. Read other people's messages before posting your own to avoid simply duplicating what has already been said. Use a clear subject that describes what your message is about. Offtopic, Inflammatory, Inappropriate, Illegal, or Offensive comments might be moderated. (You can read everything, even moderated posts, by adjusting your threshold on the User Preferences Page)
Slashdot Mirror
Well it doesn't have to be a replicator like in ST:TNG. I think a "protein resequencer" (a la Enterprise) would be great.
I've seen video of neodymium magnets suspending an entire train, or a car of a train. Whether it's neodymium or some other material, I'm sure that eventually we'd be able to manufacture enough passive magnets to support this system. Passive magnets are MUCH cheaper for this sort of thing, in the long run.
Maglevs are expensive. I'm not saying we'd be able to lay tracks all over the planet in a day. But for any given stretch of rail, this system should be cheaper than traditional maglev, and much faster.
If you said that there hasn't been much innovation since Half-Life, I'd whole-heartedly agree with you. But if you're actually saying to me, with a straight face, that there hasn't been much innovation since Doom, I'd have to conclude that you really don't actually play videogames. There are a lot of those types on Slashdot lately, I've noticed. They like to blab about their opinions about video games, but they don't actually even play them.
Actually, neodymium magnets have just become an order of magnitude cheaper in the past year or so.
I prefer to spell it "just 'cause"
Umm, resident evil for the gamecube? Sorry, pre-rendered backgrounds don't count. Next you'll be saying that Myst has the greatest graphics ever.
neodymium(?) magnets. they're not electromagnetic, and they're extremely powerful
you've got to be kidding...
Yay, someone who agrees with me that Monsters Inc. was better than Shrek. Trust me, I hate Disney, and I love the idea of a movie studio displacing Disney (while making fun of them at the same time), but Monsters Inc. was just a really great movie. Shrek, with it's sarcastic "wit" that was fashionable about 5 years ago is a lot less interesting to me.
>The systems screwy. I blame the americans.
I'm not sure if you were just being ironic, but from your description, the European way sounds a lot more screwy.
Well, a million is 1,000,000 x 1000^0
a billion is is 1,000,000 x 1000^1
and a trillion is 1,000,000 x 1000^2
So a trillion is the third in the series of 1,000,000 x 1000^n.
Listen, I love the metric system, and as an American, I wish we'd adopt it officially. But I don't see how your nomenclature for numbers is any better. What do *you* call 10^12? A million million? Sorry, I like our system better. Or even if you call it a thousand billion, it still doesn't fit.
Our number system puts a comma after every three digits, starting from the right side. So if you see a number that starts off like this: 100,000,000.... You'll know it's a hundred something, whether it's a hundred million, billion, trillion or quadrillion. If you're going to call 1,000,000,000,000 (10^12) "A thousand billion", instead of "one [n-illion]" then you confuse the whole system.
Actually, the real problem has nothing to do with whether they use pure oxygen, or mixed oxygen and nitrogen. The problem has to do with the CONCENTRATION of oxygen. If you need to be in a full pressure environment, then yes, you'd need to dilute the oxygen with about 4 times as much nitrogen. But there's a simpler solution. Just use a pure oxygen atmosphere at ONE-FIFTH OF THE PRESSURE. The concentration of oxygen would remain the same, and therefore the flammability of the atmosphere would remain the same.
The problem is concentration, not purity.
Covet means to desire something of someone else's, as in jealousy. Covetous means greedy. Just because you can look at the root word doesn't mean the shade of meaning doesn't differ slightly when it's in a different form. usurious. The first synonym listed is exorbitant.
how much is $20cents exactly?
I guess I was a little overzealous with my first post, in an attempt to get the 'FP'.
Why, are posts sorted by zealousness, from greatest to least?
I don't get your sig, can you explain it?
Also, try afterdawn for information on video encoding and stuff. It takes some work to learn (it did for me anyway).
You have a really backwards way of saying "well, it depends how much video you wanna store"
No, you're absolutely right, it's not a blank slate. My point is, if we structured an artificial brain to correspond exactly to the brains structure, even if we don't understand why, it should work. Sort of like the genome. We can mess around with genes and sort of predict how our new creations will come out, but that doesn't mean we could build it from the ground up.
So if we could mimic the brain structure, like I described, imagine the possibilities for learning. Imagine being able to bypass the whole "teaching/learning" process, and just directly reconfigure your artificial neurons as you please to teach yourself new things instantly.
Also, if we didn't understand a thing about how the configuration of neurons led to development, we could still, in theory, create artificial neurons, and set it up just like in a brain. Now imagine, though, that the neurons run twice as fast as our biological neurons. That would most likely improve our intelligence, in certain ways. It might have weird time dilation effects, but there's probably ways to manipulate that too.
I don't believe the brain is a blank slate at all, but this still has nothing to do with software, and certainly nothing to do with compilers. The only thing "software" about our brains is the ability to actually change the hardware. Actually, certain things we do in every day life are like software. When we add numbers, especially on paper, we're just mechanically running through rules, and getting a right answer, even though there isn't any hardware in our brains to directly process it.
But my point is, I don't think this story and these possibilities have anything in common with the AI research going on now. I think this sort of artificial intelligence will emerge through the work ofspecialists in nanotechnology, neurobiology, and electrical engineering and stuff like that. Most likely computer scientists will have a small role in creating this.
I think "thumbing through" is overrated, when you can just grep for any string or word in the whole text.
Don't you mean free as in beer?
It isn't about software. Our brain doesn't have any software. It's all hardware. All you have to do is create artificial neurons, that when grouped together, just like in the human brain, learning and behavior just emerges. The human brain, after all, is just a machine isn't it?
It also forced EVERY state in the US to adopt 21 as the minimum drinking age. Talk about overstepping their boundaries.
oh no,....please, don't say it..
YOU PUT ME ON YOUR FOES LIST!!!!!
NOOOOOOOOOO
------------
Please try to keep posts on topic.
Try to reply to other people comments instead of starting new threads.
Read other people's messages before posting your own to avoid simply duplicating what has already been said.
Use a clear subject that describes what your message is about.
Offtopic, Inflammatory, Inappropriate, Illegal, or Offensive comments might be moderated. (You can read everything, even moderated posts, by adjusting your threshold on the User Preferences Page)
I think it's time to change your sig again you fag