Its funny that you mention that... I heard that recently he was trying to go through airport security and they wouldn't let him through because of all the equipment he had. Apparently he had permits etc.. but they thought he might be trying to pull something. I think that many people will view cyborg type technology as threatening.
On his website he has stories about how he'll be store employees on his WearCam, and once they find out they are on camera they start freaking out. After all, its ok for the store to videotape the customers, but its not ok for consumers to get the employee's incompetence on camera...
Great page! I especially liked the page about augmented reality. Steve Mann is truely a cyborg... how long will it be until you see people like him everywhere? Perhaps only a few years...
Those popup ads are the most annoying feature thats has ever been added to a web-browser.
I just tried out this new tool called Stumbleupon which lets you websurf with a single click, and after only about 20 stumbles I had 10 popads on my screen.
Curse the person at netscape who thought pop-ups would be a great new feature to add...
K, I agree that catching the imagination of people will help promote space exploration. Heck, putting a man on the moon was something everyone could watch and it drove alot of technological progress.
I'm not saying it shouldn't be done, it just shouldn't be done right now. Getting more space stations operational, and then manufacturing components for future crafts in zero-g is the way to go.
The current cost to get stuff into space is insane.. its like 100,000/lb... with orbiting space stations the cost of producing the materials for future spacecrafts would drop greatly. I see space stations as the first stepping stone, then a moonbase, and then mars once its a little more economically feasible.
Okay, while this may be a good idea (after all, I'm all over targeted tax collection methods - its a first step towards complete privatization) I don't think that spending this money on a trip to mars would be beneficial at all.
Much of the benefits of space technology are gained just by getting into space in the first space, not doing some huge manned mission. The round trip time for a manned mission is very long, and what is really to be gained from it?
I think that collecting such money for the space program should be funneled into activities which will benefit industries beyond aerospace. Space stations could offer advantages to many scientific fields (more precise electronic manufacturing facilities enabled by zero-g) instead of just giving more money to defense contractors.
Its our tax dollars, so why not have them work for us. I'd rather have manufacturing facilities orbiting the earth than a warm fuzzy feeling inside because we made it to mars and back....
I think one of the problems concerning spyware and intelligent agent type technologies is the fact that in order to get good performance people think they need to rely on implicitly collected data, in which case the user always wonders exactly what else they could be collecting. They justify the use of spyware to collect information that users never would take the time to submit themselves. This is a misguided approach, since good personalized recommendation technology is available with explicit user feedback instead (such as Stumbleupon for websurfing).
I think that many companies feel such approaches are necessary in order to collect information without too much user hassle. The focus should instead be on improved interfaces which allow people to easily submit information as they desire. This way the benefits of personalization can be had, yet people know exactly how much information about themselves they have revealed...
Perhaps I'm a little old fashioned here, but the prospect of getting it on with a animated mannequin gives me the creeps. Furthermore, how is that lifeless face "less threatening" than an asexual plastic mask? Will people genuinely feel more comfortable dealing with an android simply because it looks more like a human? Methinks the designer has watched austin powers a few too many times...
I would hardly call a service paid for by tax dollars as "free." If libraries/schools want to censor content, especially content which is often not objectionable to a large chunk of the population, they should get their funding elsewhere.
Of course, there is always a line, but I don't think sexually explicit material, especially if meant to be education, is where we should draw it.
I would hardly call a service paid for by tax dollars as "free." If libraries/schools want to censor content, especially content which is often not objectionable to a large chunk of the population, they should get their funding elsewhere.
Of course, there is always a line, but I don't think sexually explicit material, especially if meant to be education, is where we should draw it.
"...prevent sexually explicit material, pornography or material regarded as inappropriate for different age groups getting through"
Interesting that they mention sexual material twice, then lump all other objectionable material into a bin called "innappropriate" at the end. Why is sex our top priority when censoring for minors? Why not violence, hate propaganda, religious cults, and gun catalogues?
I think it's pretty representative of how out-of-wack regulator's attitudes are towards sex in general. I can think of many more things I'd rather prevent my kids from seeing than a little nudity.
Slashdot Mirror
Blue Gene. For protein folding eh... yeah right ;>
Websurfing done right! StumbleUpon
Its funny that you mention that... I heard that recently he was trying to go through airport security and they wouldn't let him through because of all the equipment he had. Apparently he had permits etc.. but they thought he might be trying to pull something. I think that many people will view cyborg type technology as threatening.
On his website he has stories about how he'll be store employees on his WearCam, and once they find out they are on camera they start freaking out. After all, its ok for the store to videotape the customers, but its not ok for consumers to get the employee's incompetence on camera...
Great page! I especially liked the page about augmented reality. Steve Mann is truely a cyborg... how long will it be until you see people like him everywhere? Perhaps only a few years...
Ha! Phone sex on a PS2... I think lil johnny will definitely want one of these for christmas!
"I swear mom, it was just a game..."
Those popup ads are the most annoying feature thats has ever been added to a web-browser.
I just tried out this new tool called Stumbleupon which lets you websurf with a single click, and after only about 20 stumbles I had 10 popads on my screen.
Curse the person at netscape who thought pop-ups would be a great new feature to add...
K, I agree that catching the imagination of people will help promote space exploration. Heck, putting a man on the moon was something everyone could watch and it drove alot of technological progress.
I'm not saying it shouldn't be done, it just shouldn't be done right now. Getting more space stations operational, and then manufacturing components for future crafts in zero-g is the way to go.
The current cost to get stuff into space is insane.. its like 100,000/lb... with orbiting space stations the cost of producing the materials for future spacecrafts would drop greatly. I see space stations as the first stepping stone, then a moonbase, and then mars once its a little more economically feasible.
Okay, while this may be a good idea (after all, I'm all over targeted tax collection methods - its a first step towards complete privatization) I don't think that spending this money on a trip to mars would be beneficial at all.
Much of the benefits of space technology are gained just by getting into space in the first space, not doing some huge manned mission. The round trip time for a manned mission is very long, and what is really to be gained from it?
I think that collecting such money for the space program should be funneled into activities which will benefit industries beyond aerospace. Space stations could offer advantages to many scientific fields (more precise electronic manufacturing facilities enabled by zero-g) instead of just giving more money to defense contractors.
Its our tax dollars, so why not have them work for us. I'd rather have manufacturing facilities orbiting the earth than a warm fuzzy feeling inside because we made it to mars and back....
I think one of the problems concerning spyware and intelligent agent type technologies is the fact that in order to get good performance people think they need to rely on implicitly collected data, in which case the user always wonders exactly what else they could be collecting. They justify the use of spyware to collect information that users never would take the time to submit themselves. This is a misguided approach, since good personalized recommendation technology is available with explicit user feedback instead (such as Stumbleupon for websurfing).
I think that many companies feel such approaches are necessary in order to collect information without too much user hassle. The focus should instead be on improved interfaces which allow people to easily submit information as they desire. This way the benefits of personalization can be had, yet people know exactly how much information about themselves they have revealed...
Perhaps I'm a little old fashioned here, but the prospect of getting it on with a animated mannequin gives me the creeps. Furthermore, how is that lifeless face "less threatening" than an asexual plastic mask? Will people genuinely feel more comfortable dealing with an android simply because it looks more like a human? Methinks the designer has watched austin powers a few too many times...
I would hardly call a service paid for by tax dollars as "free." If libraries/schools want to censor content, especially content which is often not objectionable to a large chunk of the population, they should get their funding elsewhere.
Of course, there is always a line, but I don't think sexually explicit material, especially if meant to be education, is where we should draw it.
I would hardly call a service paid for by tax dollars as "free." If libraries/schools want to censor content, especially content which is often not objectionable to a large chunk of the population, they should get their funding elsewhere.
Of course, there is always a line, but I don't think sexually explicit material, especially if meant to be education, is where we should draw it.
"...prevent sexually explicit material, pornography or material regarded as inappropriate for different age groups getting through"
Interesting that they mention sexual material twice, then lump all other objectionable material into a bin called "innappropriate" at the end. Why is sex our top priority when censoring for minors? Why not violence, hate propaganda, religious cults, and gun catalogues?
I think it's pretty representative of how out-of-wack regulator's attitudes are towards sex in general. I can think of many more things I'd rather prevent my kids from seeing than a little nudity.