I was wondering the same. If they really plan on making things 1000x more accurate than these, it can really be a nifty innovation. On the other hand, why is this not a Navy project? I thought that guroscopes were crucial to stealth submarine navigation. I doubt that they spend less than 2 millions on improving this already...
Building massive, highly functional supercomputers is not child's play
Yep, it is a wonder that US manages to pull that one even after it had run out of German scientists. Seriously, next time you want to make fun at China for being unable to come up with anything without using knowledge from another country, look at who managed your space program during the Cold War...
Or they want to be able to make reasonable assumptions when making solid crypto. I heard that some crypto gurus wonder if the RNG in the Intel chips could not have a voluntary flaw to make encrypted content easier to break.
Human doctors fail as well. We will judge Watson on a criterion of 0% of errors, but given the rate of malpractice in US, having a device able to cut by 2 would be a huge progress.
20 years ago they were saying "We are 40 years behind". Now they say that ITER will be achieved in 20 years. Most spectators find it too long and fail to see the difference between "40 years in the future" and "20 years in the future". They just see it as "Not here yet."
I read it as "Georges Lucas will stop rapping the Star Wars franchise." Honestly, whoever continues it, it can't be worse. Disney is the company who owns Marvel. They are not doing a too bad job I think.
Don't overestimate the TSA. Bruce Schneier has the habit of meeting journalists who want to interview him inside the "secure" part of the airport and sending them fake boarding pass to print themselves. He thinks it helps him make his point about how this is all a "security theater".
Tesla was probably the most competent engineer working for Edison. The latter refused to honor a deal he made with Tesla regarding AC generators, starting a feud between them. They are now regarded as strong opposites. Edison was a very big patent troll who ended up wealthily living out of inventions made by others but commercialized by him. Tesla was too busy inventing the foundation of the electrical century to fight in the patent system and ended up dying poor.
Some people think the story shows a flaw in the system. I think it shows a flaw in Tesla. If he wasn't good at the business side, he should have hired someone who was.
Tesla was a good engineer and a poor salesman, Edison was a poor engineer and a good salesman. Edison was retributed, I think that this is a flaw in society.
Tesla invented many of the electric devices we are still using today. All the devices necessary for an AC grid, AC electric motors, radio remote control, and several other things. Our societies retribute more highly people who know how to exploit commercially an invention than people who invent it, who can die in poverty. Saying this is a flaw in Tesla's side is like saying that a dyslexic can't be a good scientist because of poor writing skills.
On the societal bugs that should be corrected is the ability of people like Edison to hinder innovation. You know why Hollywood appeared on the West coast, right? On the East coast, Edison's company was suing anyone using his patented recording devices without paying huge fees into oblivion. He actually prevented the apparition of big movie studios on the East coast through this silliness.
Bell Labs was privately funded, through a state-sanctionned monopoly. USA accepted to maintain AT&T's monopole but made several deals to get the Bell Labs to work as a public lab in exchange. I can't find easily sources that agree on the nature of the deal. Some say that AT&T had to spend 50% of their profits in research others say that they had to release to the public anything not related to the field of telephony.
Either way, Bell Labs were very far from being a classical private R&D unit that either protect its inventions through secrecy or patents.
Very few people are working on anything of merit "for free"
Actually when I searched on the three items, I only expected one of them to be invented through public funding, as I thought Sony had a bigger role in the discovery of transistors. So I am happy that you give some balance to the list.
There is room for a criticism of capitalism that do not deny that it helped fund a lot of innovation. We all know the Tesla vs. Edison fight and we all know that nothing has been done to correct these mistakes.
This is not because this system has allowed great things that it is exempt from any criticism or that alternatives can not exist. Half of the achievements of the 20th century was publicly funded, let's not forget about that. Corporation are not the only way to make things happen.
Look at Bletchley park, look at the NASA. Look at the Bell Labs, which are an hybrid entity of public obligations and private funds and which invented Unix, C, and radioastronomy amongst other things.
Great things can be done through capitalism, free entrepreneuship and competitions, but let's not assume that this is the only way.
By the way, let's review the invention that you attribute to corporations :
Transistor : The wikipedia page on the history of the transistor proposes two first independent inventors, both working at public labs. The modern version of the transistor is attributed to the Bell Labs (which is not really a private entity : their work was public, and funded by private funds coming from a monopole negociated with the US government)
Microprocessors : The NASA seems to be attributed the creation of the first "microprocessor" : Apollo Guidance Computer
Integrated circuits : the first person to propose that worked in a public lab, the first to create a working prototype is disputable. Could be the Bell Labs (again)
So be careful with the examples you choose and realize that the computer revolution started as a governmental effort to crack German code, continued in the US as a Navy project, was given its best tools by the Bell Labs, an entity whose structure would make most business angels cringe and that software development is now driven in big part by a bunch of OSS idealists that often work on it for free.
Internet itself started as a university and military project. It was heavily funded by the government (Hello, M.Gore) before corporations could understand the interest of this thing. Afterwards, they tried very hard to break and control it, unsuccessfully. (Look at AOL, look at what MSN was supposed to be at first)
I don't deny that capitalism or even corporatism can drive innovation, but if you want examples, computer science is not the best place to get them. The feeling I get is that groundbreaking innovations are usually publicly funded while incremental innovations are made by corporations.
Actually, if the kickstarter had been made factoring in a salary, it could have been both free AND for profit.
Otherwise, look into a roleplaying game that was known to be commercial but also released under creative commons : Eclipse Phase. They sell the hardcover book, they sell the PDF, but you can distribute it freely. It is not hard to find, yet they manage to make a living this way.
.Net is a good technology. I like it and I say it as an OSS guy working most of the time in linux. The problem is not with.Net per se, it is with the notion that it is made to be easier to use by beginners, which wouldn't be a problem if companies did not believed that this made beginners suddenly able to make good code.
Except when they are not. Responsible use of psychotropic is not unheard of. See coffee and see alcohol. Two abusable substances but that can be used responsibly.
Just like the GPL but also closes the loophole that allows you to use an open source tool in SAS without giving back. I would investigate this licence. Also, map maker usually put distinctive voluntary mistakes in their maps to prove when data has been copied.
Everytime a stock is suspended because of a sudden event (that, the death of Steve Jobs) is actually a reminder that trading decisions need more than a few nanoseconds to be taken. The timestep on trade order is so fast that when a new important information arrives, the stock is suspended for a few hours. Now tell me : why isn't the timestep of a few hours? Stock trading stops on night and week ends. Why does it need a 1 ns timestamp during weekdays?
It was probably made as a joke, but one bitcoin option may be viable : the Iranian government could start their own blockchain. That way, all the initial and easy coins would start on their accounts.
They outsourced the printing of their bills? To a non-allied country? And they are unable to print them locally? Are we talking about the same country? The Iran I know has a nuclear and a space program...
Slashdot Mirror
I don't have a good source, just made a few google search. I'd be happy to know if it is wrong.
I was wondering the same. If they really plan on making things 1000x more accurate than these, it can really be a nifty innovation.
On the other hand, why is this not a Navy project? I thought that guroscopes were crucial to stealth submarine navigation. I doubt that they spend less than 2 millions on improving this already...
This particular design seems to be an evolution from a DEC chip legally licensed in 1996.
Building massive, highly functional supercomputers is not child's play
Yep, it is a wonder that US manages to pull that one even after it had run out of German scientists. Seriously, next time you want to make fun at China for being unable to come up with anything without using knowledge from another country, look at who managed your space program during the Cold War...
Or they want to be able to make reasonable assumptions when making solid crypto. I heard that some crypto gurus wonder if the RNG in the Intel chips could not have a voluntary flaw to make encrypted content easier to break.
4chan. I have been there. Now I am stronger.
Human doctors fail as well. We will judge Watson on a criterion of 0% of errors, but given the rate of malpractice in US, having a device able to cut by 2 would be a huge progress.
But can you do so easily with a black-listed ID ? That's the whole point.
The boarding pass he sends comprises a valid QR code. It is a theatre all the way. I agree that the system could be secure, but it is not.
20 years ago they were saying "We are 40 years behind". Now they say that ITER will be achieved in 20 years. Most spectators find it too long and fail to see the difference between "40 years in the future" and "20 years in the future". They just see it as "Not here yet."
I read it as "Georges Lucas will stop rapping the Star Wars franchise." Honestly, whoever continues it, it can't be worse. Disney is the company who owns Marvel. They are not doing a too bad job I think.
Don't overestimate the TSA. Bruce Schneier has the habit of meeting journalists who want to interview him inside the "secure" part of the airport and sending them fake boarding pass to print themselves. He thinks it helps him make his point about how this is all a "security theater".
Tesla was probably the most competent engineer working for Edison. The latter refused to honor a deal he made with Tesla regarding AC generators, starting a feud between them. They are now regarded as strong opposites. Edison was a very big patent troll who ended up wealthily living out of inventions made by others but commercialized by him. Tesla was too busy inventing the foundation of the electrical century to fight in the patent system and ended up dying poor.
Some people think the story shows a flaw in the system. I think it shows a flaw in Tesla. If he wasn't good at the business side, he should have hired someone who was.
Tesla was a good engineer and a poor salesman, Edison was a poor engineer and a good salesman. Edison was retributed, I think that this is a flaw in society.
Tesla invented many of the electric devices we are still using today. All the devices necessary for an AC grid, AC electric motors, radio remote control, and several other things. Our societies retribute more highly people who know how to exploit commercially an invention than people who invent it, who can die in poverty. Saying this is a flaw in Tesla's side is like saying that a dyslexic can't be a good scientist because of poor writing skills.
On the societal bugs that should be corrected is the ability of people like Edison to hinder innovation. You know why Hollywood appeared on the West coast, right? On the East coast, Edison's company was suing anyone using his patented recording devices without paying huge fees into oblivion. He actually prevented the apparition of big movie studios on the East coast through this silliness.
Either way, Bell Labs were very far from being a classical private R&D unit that either protect its inventions through secrecy or patents.
Very few people are working on anything of merit "for free"
Open your eyes, Anonymous Coward.
Actually when I searched on the three items, I only expected one of them to be invented through public funding, as I thought Sony had a bigger role in the discovery of transistors. So I am happy that you give some balance to the list.
This is not because this system has allowed great things that it is exempt from any criticism or that alternatives can not exist. Half of the achievements of the 20th century was publicly funded, let's not forget about that. Corporation are not the only way to make things happen.
Look at Bletchley park, look at the NASA. Look at the Bell Labs, which are an hybrid entity of public obligations and private funds and which invented Unix, C, and radioastronomy amongst other things.
Great things can be done through capitalism, free entrepreneuship and competitions, but let's not assume that this is the only way.
By the way, let's review the invention that you attribute to corporations :
So be careful with the examples you choose and realize that the computer revolution started as a governmental effort to crack German code, continued in the US as a Navy project, was given its best tools by the Bell Labs, an entity whose structure would make most business angels cringe and that software development is now driven in big part by a bunch of OSS idealists that often work on it for free.
Internet itself started as a university and military project. It was heavily funded by the government (Hello, M.Gore) before corporations could understand the interest of this thing. Afterwards, they tried very hard to break and control it, unsuccessfully. (Look at AOL, look at what MSN was supposed to be at first)
I don't deny that capitalism or even corporatism can drive innovation, but if you want examples, computer science is not the best place to get them. The feeling I get is that groundbreaking innovations are usually publicly funded while incremental innovations are made by corporations.
Actually, if the kickstarter had been made factoring in a salary, it could have been both free AND for profit.
Otherwise, look into a roleplaying game that was known to be commercial but also released under creative commons : Eclipse Phase. They sell the hardcover book, they sell the PDF, but you can distribute it freely. It is not hard to find, yet they manage to make a living this way.
CC-nc may be the thing you are looking for...
.Net is a good technology. I like it and I say it as an OSS guy working most of the time in linux. The problem is not with .Net per se, it is with the notion that it is made to be easier to use by beginners, which wouldn't be a problem if companies did not believed that this made beginners suddenly able to make good code.
Except when they are not. Responsible use of psychotropic is not unheard of. See coffee and see alcohol. Two abusable substances but that can be used responsibly.
Just like the GPL but also closes the loophole that allows you to use an open source tool in SAS without giving back. I would investigate this licence. Also, map maker usually put distinctive voluntary mistakes in their maps to prove when data has been copied.
Everytime a stock is suspended because of a sudden event (that, the death of Steve Jobs) is actually a reminder that trading decisions need more than a few nanoseconds to be taken. The timestep on trade order is so fast that when a new important information arrives, the stock is suspended for a few hours. Now tell me : why isn't the timestep of a few hours? Stock trading stops on night and week ends. Why does it need a 1 ns timestamp during weekdays?
It was probably made as a joke, but one bitcoin option may be viable : the Iranian government could start their own blockchain. That way, all the initial and easy coins would start on their accounts.
They outsourced the printing of their bills? To a non-allied country? And they are unable to print them locally? Are we talking about the same country? The Iran I know has a nuclear and a space program...
... therefore I never wasted time learning about ethics, laws or pain management. I propose his idea is dumb and we use his organs for experiments.