I thought it was interesting that they were using time division *between* pulses instead of binary.
The brain does process on a continual basis so it makes sense. I don't know if time-division multiplexing neurons is something every neuroscientist knows about but I thought it was at least noteworthy.
I think the biggest thing we humans will learn from this foray into self-driving cars is that human behavior is much more complex than we have the ability to replicate artificially.
Autonomous vehicles definitely have a place on the roads, in commercial trucking. It's not as sexy and those Cali billionaires funding self-driving car research won't like it, but that's the real usable value in the tech. In 20 years, I can definitely see US highways teeming with caravans of self-driving, electric powered semi-trucks barrelling down a designated lane of the interstate.
Many aren't going to like it, but the simple fact is, driving a car around town is something illiterate humans can do, but programing a car to do it is not possible practically
"Tech entrepreneurs" of whatever gender are mostly just rich/connected people with an idea for an app and either are personal friends with or hire someone to actually make the beast.
90% of "tech startups" are "apps" of some time or have them as a major part of what they do.
It was different back in the day.
In the US, typically the person with the money wanted to be the "investor" and the "entrepreneur" was the same as the inventor or coder.
Old-school rich people showed off by being able to choose the right person to invest in, nowadays the new-school rich show off by *being* the person at the top of the investment, at least publicly.
I don't usually flatly agree w/ something Thiel says (he never has grown out of his Ayn Rand phase), but this time I do.
Wind, solar, all the others...they are awesome and let's keep dumping cash into R&D for those...all of it.
But also do nuclear.
We have a long, long way to go before we can power our cities with renewables 100%. Nuclear has been retarded by 4 decades of fear-mongering...nuclear is safe when done correctly. The 3 Mile Island disaster killed no one and displaced only a small ammount of people...it wasn't anything like Chyrnoble.
It's 40 years later and we can make reactors that are safer by orders of magnitude than the 100s we've been using for decades that have been working perfectly.
somehow the US and UK will outlaw all phones that don't have back doors, and Blackberry will become the only legal smartphone and... PROFIT!!!!
Interesting comment, made me think...
So, thinking of this as a phone specifically enabled with spying capabilities as a feature you're right, the logical customer for such a phone is an oppressive government.
I can think of several totalitarian governments that would love a phone with baked-in spyware!
What's your fondest memory of Bill Gates Blue Screen-of-death that could?
i liked it when it actually helped me do something productive and worked with no malfunctions, which mostly happened when doing database analysis with some kind of spreadsheet or relational database software
Also, the technology is at a level where things are either too easy to copy (every other company could bring one to market quickly, most have VR prototypes now) -or- it is too expensive and requires too much adaptation to get anyone interested.
Part of the hype comes from the sheer number of hobbyist/techies out there now willing to throw down on a Kickstarter for something like this. That's not good or bad that's just a fact...there are just more potential "early adopters" who will use things like Occulus on just a few games/applications after much tinkering and be happy.
Google's Cardboard is good example at the zero sum economic forces making this whole "VR revolution" thing essentially 'DOA': https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
“You might try to eliminate war by eliminating the conditions that cause it, like poverty and racial hatred and religious animosity. This is kind of la-la land, but it really may be the only stable long-term solution.” It’s what Haldeman calls “the inescapable tautology.”
“When war is unthinkable, it will stop.”
I think war, in a broader sense is capable of being practically eliminated.
Depending on what definition you use, I think in our lifetimes we might see the reduction of armed conflict to what might be considered today "really bad gang war."
The Mexican drug gangs are a good example. They are the future of warfare in that the facets of their conflicts will be the most we will get to "war" in the future.
So it depends on how you look at it, but I think war of the future will be closer to what we consider law enforcement.
TFA is a good article, but The "Start Button" was really a non-innovative, pedestrian multi-function, customizable menu button.
I always marvel that people write thinkpieces about "The Start Button" like it was some big tech innovation.
The "Start Button" was, essentially, just like any other "Menu" option in computing every used, it just used a different word. And to that end, ontologically speaking, "Start" was one of the most patronizing, over-simplified, dumbed down choices they could have made and still made it to production.
imho, it's not a bit half-baked, it's all the way...*this idea is awful*
my first thought was, in order to detect on females you have to have intercourse first, which kind of defeats the purpose...also, checking the color (i can just see the antics w/ attempting to use a cell phone light...) is also going to be more awkward than any of the alternatives
these ideas never leave the concept stage
if something like a condom can indicate this, just make a test swab or something...it's already awkward having to stop and turn on the light to check the color...
Slashdot Mirror
I thought it was interesting that they were using time division *between* pulses instead of binary.
The brain does process on a continual basis so it makes sense. I don't know if time-division multiplexing neurons is something every neuroscientist knows about but I thought it was at least noteworthy.
Yours :P
Airstrip One.
I think the biggest thing we humans will learn from this foray into self-driving cars is that human behavior is much more complex than we have the ability to replicate artificially.
Autonomous vehicles definitely have a place on the roads, in commercial trucking. It's not as sexy and those Cali billionaires funding self-driving car research won't like it, but that's the real usable value in the tech. In 20 years, I can definitely see US highways teeming with caravans of self-driving, electric powered semi-trucks barrelling down a designated lane of the interstate.
Many aren't going to like it, but the simple fact is, driving a car around town is something illiterate humans can do, but programing a car to do it is not possible practically
"Tech entrepreneurs" of whatever gender are mostly just rich/connected people with an idea for an app and either are personal friends with or hire someone to actually make the beast.
90% of "tech startups" are "apps" of some time or have them as a major part of what they do.
It was different back in the day.
In the US, typically the person with the money wanted to be the "investor" and the "entrepreneur" was the same as the inventor or coder.
Old-school rich people showed off by being able to choose the right person to invest in, nowadays the new-school rich show off by *being* the person at the top of the investment, at least publicly.
The greater point is that renewables can't power nearly enough of a city to be the sole solution now.
I think that US companies should be clamoring to open the Chinese market for these things.
imho, personally, the idea of China with nuclear reactors everywhere is a bit disconcerting, but they are the perfect target market
They are the world's worst polluter and only getting worse...nuclear is the best option by far, but it's just not been marketed for their needs.
A company could make trillions.
Why not both?
At best a major city like Chicago or Berlin could get probably 10% of it's power from renewables.
Until we make up that 90% (which will be awhile even with the best R&D) nuclear is clearly the best choice.
I don't usually flatly agree w/ something Thiel says (he never has grown out of his Ayn Rand phase), but this time I do.
Wind, solar, all the others...they are awesome and let's keep dumping cash into R&D for those...all of it.
But also do nuclear.
We have a long, long way to go before we can power our cities with renewables 100%. Nuclear has been retarded by 4 decades of fear-mongering...nuclear is safe when done correctly. The 3 Mile Island disaster killed no one and displaced only a small ammount of people...it wasn't anything like Chyrnoble.
It's 40 years later and we can make reactors that are safer by orders of magnitude than the 100s we've been using for decades that have been working perfectly.
Interesting comment, made me think...
So, thinking of this as a phone specifically enabled with spying capabilities as a feature you're right, the logical customer for such a phone is an oppressive government.
I can think of several totalitarian governments that would love a phone with baked-in spyware!
"Renew! Renew! RENEW!!!"
Mine was Windows 3.1?@#?$w1
Before that we used PC's with DOS
iirc our school couldn't afford a computer with enough RAM to have a GUI OS
i liked it when it actually helped me do something productive and worked with no malfunctions, which mostly happened when doing database analysis with some kind of spreadsheet or relational database software
from a purely hardware perspective, i'll allow it
the Zune was made to take full advantage of all digital media has to offer...particularly video
granted, with enough effort you can get the same functionality on an ipod, but still the hardware of the Zune is solid
of course M$ ruined it, as they do with any good idea, but i can see why a person would really find one useful
"If you laid them end to end, they would still never reach a conclusion"
so this dude asked his Canadian friend
i don't see a problem with a ".bro" file extention any more than having a street address that is 666
if you ask a Canadian 'feminist' about whether *anything* could be offensive they will answer in the affirmative
VR is "Dead on Arrival"
It is DOA because the demand is mostly hype.
Also, the technology is at a level where things are either too easy to copy (every other company could bring one to market quickly, most have VR prototypes now) -or- it is too expensive and requires too much adaptation to get anyone interested.
Part of the hype comes from the sheer number of hobbyist/techies out there now willing to throw down on a Kickstarter for something like this. That's not good or bad that's just a fact...there are just more potential "early adopters" who will use things like Occulus on just a few games/applications after much tinkering and be happy.
Google's Cardboard is good example at the zero sum economic forces making this whole "VR revolution" thing essentially 'DOA': https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
consumer Rift headset, launching in Q1 2016
i just don't think this will happen
I think war, in a broader sense is capable of being practically eliminated.
Depending on what definition you use, I think in our lifetimes we might see the reduction of armed conflict to what might be considered today "really bad gang war."
The Mexican drug gangs are a good example. They are the future of warfare in that the facets of their conflicts will be the most we will get to "war" in the future.
So it depends on how you look at it, but I think war of the future will be closer to what we consider law enforcement.
hilarious
TFA is a good article, but The "Start Button" was really a non-innovative, pedestrian multi-function, customizable menu button.
I always marvel that people write thinkpieces about "The Start Button" like it was some big tech innovation.
The "Start Button" was, essentially, just like any other "Menu" option in computing every used, it just used a different word. And to that end, ontologically speaking, "Start" was one of the most patronizing, over-simplified, dumbed down choices they could have made and still made it to production.
their deal with Microsoft prevents them from getting back into the phone business until Q4 2016, so we won't be seeing Nokia phones soon either way.
New phones typically take years to develop and bring to market. I don't think Q4 2016 is prohibitive at all.
That's about a year...even if Nokia started today designing a new phone it would be kind of amazing if they had it ready to go to market by Q4 2016.
They say "You have to go away to come back" and Nokia definitely went away so....
thank you for capturing my thoughts on this so succinctly...
it's an **awful idea**
the idea might be a bit half-baked
imho, it's not a bit half-baked, it's all the way...*this idea is awful*
my first thought was, in order to detect on females you have to have intercourse first, which kind of defeats the purpose...also, checking the color (i can just see the antics w/ attempting to use a cell phone light...) is also going to be more awkward than any of the alternatives
these ideas never leave the concept stage
if something like a condom can indicate this, just make a test swab or something...it's already awkward having to stop and turn on the light to check the color...
But Microsoft is the one who dictates what technology Samsung must play nice with...
The difficulty is first with Microsoft, and Samsung's 'fix' wouldn't be necessary without it.
This isn't the first time an OEM has compromised the security of its users.
Blame has to go to Microsoft *first*...it's illogical to blame the cart for something the horse chose to do.