Read the answer above for the erase/write cycle problem.
Flash eprom has no seek time. This more than makes up for the slow write times. On a HD, the vast majority of time for most applications is spent during head seek, not actual write. Also, most apps do mainly reads, which are at RAM speed.
Thus, the only type of app which is affected is streaming recorders, such as a digital video recorder.
The FLASH file system version 2 is optimized for sector wear. This is extremely important. Typical HD filesystems will rewrite the same sector over and over because the file system structures are in a fixed location. Flash Files system explicetly avoids this. It also avoids file systems objects (like databases) from doing this as well by having rolling sector allocation. Thus, it is actually impossible to rewrite the same physical sector "once a minute" because the file system changes the sector's physical (as oppososed to logical) address on every write.
You are not describing NLP, you are describing speech recoginition! Natural Language Processing is not about translating sounds to text, but about *understanding* what the text means. This has only ever been done with a very marginal level of success in limited domains.
The Flash file system, designed for flash eprom devices was run on PSION handheld devices more than 10 years ago. Version 2 of the Flash filesystem supported full read/write. Flash eproms are passive storage devices, meaning they dont need power to keep data, only power to write.
The same PSION device supported SRAM disks that worked great; they had a hearing aid battery for power backup.
The problem with the Star Trek paradigm is that is fake! As in Hollywood fake. Dramatic licence is used all over to make the show flow smoothly.
Many people have tried to build systems like Star Trek, and in fact you can get a lot closer than you many be aware. The problem is that in real life, that interface *sucks*!
In real life it is painfully annoying and insanely slow to tell a room/computer to do something.
We just don't realize how good a user interface a lightswitch is.
The Star Trek data pads are touch sensitive; we have had touch sensitive technology as long as the mouse; but the mouse is what we use because of its acceleration property.
I have built and analyzed [CMU,MIT, Microsoft et al] many systems designed to solve the exact problem you are talking about.
And although the technology isnt up to the task, you can evaluate it as if it is by using humans to "Wizard of Oz" the test. Turns out [in my and others opinions] that the whole idea is dysfunctional and annoying.
Go reread my post, then think about it a little. Then, you may notice that Microsoft's attitude is the opposite of the one expressed in my statement! You see, Microsoft is *still* working on these things, even when given evidence by their own people that its a dead end. You are correct that Microsoft isn't innovating, but it isn't innovation because they are doing the dumb thing by sticking to a loser, rather than thinking up new ideas! They are doing this to keep their six figure salaries of course.
You mod up a Microsoft put down with out paying any head to the original post. Typical of fanatical thinking.
You know, it is possible to learn from other peoples mistakes, even if you don't like the company they worked for once. How many studies have you personally done which examine the [long term] effectiveness of SR and NLP interfaces?
But HOW for got sakes could this thing ever have been hatched and shipped? Well lets connect the dots. Back in the day, there was this group working on Social Interfaces which made one product called Microsoft BOB. One of the people who worked on this project is now named Melinda Gates.
I clearly recall attending a Systems meeting where, with a straight face, Bill gates showed a slide of the historical progression of operating systems. Went like this: DOS->Windows->NT->BOB.
Millions of people suffering because Bill Gates girlfriend worked in a nutty project...
A study we did concluded that your theory is incorrect: indirect manipulation of information is very frustrating, even for very novice users. This was assuming human quality recognition and AI.
I worked in Microsoft Research for several years on Speech Recognition and Natural Language.
Some of my collegues did a study that concluded these technologies will NEVER be a good user interface. Even once the AI-complete problem of speech recognition and NLP are solved.
This study, as you might not be surprised, was totally shut down and buried. There are a LOT of people at MS Research working on this stuff, and a LOT of money is being spent. My friends came up with "the wrong answer", and where basically told to shut up.
I agree with the study: Speech Recogition and Natural Language is not a good user interface, and NEVER will be. The basic reason is direct manipulation of data is much more efficient and intuitive. Language is very low bandwidth.
For myself, and I think many Americans, NASA lost its appeal when it launched the Shuttle program. Even in school I knew it was going to be one big expensive beaureucratic bog. I remember specifically asking them for pictures of the Moon and Apollo for a class project, instead they sent me pictures of the Space Shuttle and some letter saying it how this is really what I wanted.
Decades later I don't feel the space program has moved but a teeny tiny bit because of the Shuttle. Oh, some of the cheap projects like DS1 and Pathfinder were great, but all the Shuttle stuff (and now space station) is garbage. The Shuttle cost more than it would have cost to keep using the older non-reusable rockets.
With the Shuttle, NASA tried to make space part of everyday, but instead it got the "humdrum" part right, but missed the everyday part. The Shuttle is virtually useless, and completely uninspiring.
NASA should have gone for a moon base instead, we'd be much further along with technology I think.
It is clear to me that most people who make statements about 1984 have never read the book.
Is the message in 1984 that the government is evil? No! There is a message however...
There are a lot of opinions out there thats for sure! I havent seen too many from the people who make hiring decisions though. I have made hiring decisions for hundreds of programmers, so maybe you should listen up.
While working in a team is a great skill and every manager wants that, rarely can they test that ability before the hiring decision. What they can test is your technical knowledge and interpersonal skills. Sadly, especially of late, the vast majority of applicants are failing the technical knowledge portion; the number one reason programmers fail to get hired is lack of skill. The reason for this is that the schools are teaching crap these days, and giving degrees out to people who can't "program their way out of a paper bag".
Thus, my advice to you is, hunker down on the technical skills. Teamwork you can learn on the job. [or for those lucky enough, in internships and co-ops. the best way to learn]
This is absolute nonsense. You are working in an incompetent company with incompetent boobs if this is the way you think the real world works. A smart manager never lets his project be dominated by one programmer, because if that programmer quits, dies or for any reason is unable to finish the job, the project is screwed.
Many of the problems you list can be solved by space based technology. Pollution free energy production in space ala http://www.powersatcorp.com. Crops grown in space could have a huge impact on world hunger.
You think these things are outlandish? Well consider what Christopher Columbus would have thought if you had told him that in the future, people would chop down trees, send them across the pacific ocean to china where they would make toothpicks with little unbrellas on them, ship them back across the ocean so drunks could throw them away after they tossed back a mai tai!
Quantum computers have not been shown to be able to solve NP complete problems in polynomial time as far as I know. I have read many laypersons make such claims, but have never seen an actual algorithm for it, except for one that requires a new property of quantum computers which may violate quantum mechanics.
My understanding is that the main high point of quantum computers is the ability to use quantum entanglement to do an exponential amount of computation. My understanding is also that only two useful base algorithms have been invented: factoring done in polynomial time, and database search sped up by square-root. Are there other algorithms [not just spin offs of these two] that benefit from entanglement? Anyone know for sure? [I am also aware that quantum randomness can be used in crypto, but I am interested in entanglement algorithsm]
Slashdot Mirror
http://research.microsoft.com/srg/videos/MIPADDemo _4min_300k.wmv
same link, no space
Here is a video showing a pocket PC running speech recognition. Really cool.
e mo _4min_300k.wmv
http://research.microsoft.com/srg/videos/MIPADD
Read the answer above for the erase/write cycle problem.
Flash eprom has no seek time. This more than makes up for the slow write times. On a HD, the vast majority of time for most applications is spent during head seek, not actual write. Also, most apps do mainly reads, which are at RAM speed.
Thus, the only type of app which is affected is streaming recorders, such as a digital video recorder.
The FLASH file system version 2 is optimized for sector wear. This is extremely important. Typical HD filesystems will rewrite the same sector over and over because the file system structures are in a fixed location. Flash Files system explicetly avoids this. It also avoids file systems objects (like databases) from doing this as well by having rolling sector allocation. Thus, it is actually impossible to rewrite the same physical sector "once a minute" because the file system changes the sector's physical (as oppososed to logical) address on every write.
You are not describing NLP, you are describing speech recoginition! Natural Language Processing is not about translating sounds to text, but about *understanding* what the text means. This has only ever been done with a very marginal level of success in limited domains.
The Flash file system, designed for flash eprom devices was run on PSION handheld devices more than 10 years ago. Version 2 of the Flash filesystem supported full read/write. Flash eproms are passive storage devices, meaning they dont need power to keep data, only power to write.
The same PSION device supported SRAM disks that worked great; they had a hearing aid battery for power backup.
PSION had SRAM disks 10 years ago! They were backed up with hearing aid batteries.
The problem with the Star Trek paradigm is that is fake! As in Hollywood fake. Dramatic licence is used all over to make the show flow smoothly.
Many people have tried to build systems like Star Trek, and in fact you can get a lot closer than you many be aware. The problem is that in real life, that interface *sucks*!
In real life it is painfully annoying and insanely slow to tell a room/computer to do something.
We just don't realize how good a user interface a lightswitch is.
The Star Trek data pads are touch sensitive; we have had touch sensitive technology as long as the mouse; but the mouse is what we use because of its acceleration property.
I have built and analyzed [CMU,MIT, Microsoft et al] many systems designed to solve the exact problem you are talking about.
And although the technology isnt up to the task, you can evaluate it as if it is by using humans to "Wizard of Oz" the test. Turns out [in my and others opinions] that the whole idea is dysfunctional and annoying.
Actually DOS was a fresh code base, that was partly *compatible* with CP/M programs, but was not based on CP/M code.
NT was a completely new code base as well, with absolutely no relation to VMS except that the head Architect of NT for many years also designed VMS.
Xenix was Microsoft's version of unix. However, Microsoft did not completely own it as it had a unix licence.
Anyway, the whole point isnt to nit pick about the actual history of MS OSes, but that the "future history" was ever non-jokingly viewed as MSBOB.
Er..what system is that? It can understand naturally spoken (or typed) English? What does it do? What are you using it for?
Go reread my post, then think about it a little. Then, you may notice that Microsoft's attitude is the opposite of the one expressed in my statement! You see, Microsoft is *still* working on these things, even when given evidence by their own people that its a dead end. You are correct that Microsoft isn't innovating, but it isn't innovation because they are doing the dumb thing by sticking to a loser, rather than thinking up new ideas! They are doing this to keep their six figure salaries of course.
Ok, for the simple minded, perhaps I should have said "historical progression of MICROSOFT operating systems".
You post does indeed expose arrogance, but not that of Bill Gates.
You mod up a Microsoft put down with out paying any head to the original post. Typical of fanatical thinking.
You know, it is possible to learn from other peoples mistakes, even if you don't like the company they worked for once. How many studies have you personally done which examine the [long term] effectiveness of SR and NLP interfaces?
But HOW for got sakes could this thing ever have been hatched and shipped? Well lets connect the dots. Back in the day, there was this group working on Social Interfaces which made one product called Microsoft BOB. One of the people who worked on this project is now named Melinda Gates.
I clearly recall attending a Systems meeting where, with a straight face, Bill gates showed a slide of the historical progression of operating systems. Went like this: DOS->Windows->NT->BOB.
Millions of people suffering because Bill Gates girlfriend worked in a nutty project...
A study we did concluded that your theory is incorrect: indirect manipulation of information is very frustrating, even for very novice users. This was assuming human quality recognition and AI.
I worked in Microsoft Research for several years on Speech Recognition and Natural Language.
Some of my collegues did a study that concluded these technologies will NEVER be a good user interface. Even once the AI-complete problem of speech recognition and NLP are solved.
This study, as you might not be surprised, was totally shut down and buried. There are a LOT of people at MS Research working on this stuff, and a LOT of money is being spent. My friends came up with "the wrong answer", and where basically told to shut up.
I agree with the study: Speech Recogition and Natural Language is not a good user interface, and NEVER will be. The basic reason is direct manipulation of data is much more efficient and intuitive. Language is very low bandwidth.
Don't scare me like that.
For myself, and I think many Americans, NASA lost its appeal when it launched the Shuttle program. Even in school I knew it was going to be one big expensive beaureucratic bog. I remember specifically asking them for pictures of the Moon and Apollo for a class project, instead they sent me pictures of the Space Shuttle and some letter saying it how this is really what I wanted.
Decades later I don't feel the space program has moved but a teeny tiny bit because of the Shuttle. Oh, some of the cheap projects like DS1 and Pathfinder were great, but all the Shuttle stuff (and now space station) is garbage. The Shuttle cost more than it would have cost to keep using the older non-reusable rockets.
With the Shuttle, NASA tried to make space part of everyday, but instead it got the "humdrum" part right, but missed the everyday part. The Shuttle is virtually useless, and completely uninspiring.
NASA should have gone for a moon base instead, we'd be much further along with technology I think.
Oh doh! Not spos'ed to say that here.
It is clear to me that most people who make statements about 1984 have never read the book.
Is the message in 1984 that the government is evil? No! There is a message however...
There are a lot of opinions out there thats for sure! I havent seen too many from the people who make hiring decisions though. I have made hiring decisions for hundreds of programmers, so maybe you should listen up.
While working in a team is a great skill and every manager wants that, rarely can they test that ability before the hiring decision. What they can test is your technical knowledge and interpersonal skills. Sadly, especially of late, the vast majority of applicants are failing the technical knowledge portion; the number one reason programmers fail to get hired is lack of skill. The reason for this is that the schools are teaching crap these days, and giving degrees out to people who can't "program their way out of a paper bag".
Thus, my advice to you is, hunker down on the technical skills. Teamwork you can learn on the job. [or for those lucky enough, in internships and co-ops. the best way to learn]
This is absolute nonsense. You are working in an incompetent company with incompetent boobs if this is the way you think the real world works. A smart manager never lets his project be dominated by one programmer, because if that programmer quits, dies or for any reason is unable to finish the job, the project is screwed.
Many of the problems you list can be solved by space based technology. Pollution free energy production in space ala http://www.powersatcorp.com. Crops grown in space could have a huge impact on world hunger.
You think these things are outlandish? Well consider what Christopher Columbus would have thought if you had told him that in the future, people would chop down trees, send them across the pacific ocean to china where they would make toothpicks with little unbrellas on them, ship them back across the ocean so drunks could throw them away after they tossed back a mai tai!
Quantum computers have not been shown to be able to solve NP complete problems in polynomial time as far as I know. I have read many laypersons make such claims, but have never seen an actual algorithm for it, except for one that requires a new property of quantum computers which may violate quantum mechanics.
My understanding is that the main high point of quantum computers is the ability to use quantum entanglement to do an exponential amount of computation. My understanding is also that only two useful base algorithms have been invented: factoring done in polynomial time, and database search sped up by square-root. Are there other algorithms [not just spin offs of these two] that benefit from entanglement? Anyone know for sure? [I am also aware that quantum randomness can be used in crypto, but I am interested in entanglement algorithsm]