Even so, I can see some medical uses for this, for people with disabilities. Though nothing like what you see in 'Ghost in the Shell'.
I see another 50 years of research with this and still not getting very far in terms of replicating complex brain function.
Complex neural interfaces are being developed for things like vision for the blind, and of course cochlear implants - for the most part, the existing wetware adapts and learns to interpret the signals from the machine.
I do see researchers playing with these and demonstrating some cool proofs of concept, interesting control systems built out of a handful of neurons, etc. but something complex like language processing is quite a ways off.
The problem is not providing such components, nor get them to work like the original
I don't know, I see a major problem simulating dendritic growth and pruning... even if you have 10,000 of these things on a chip to emulate a tiny little brain structure, how do you emulate the growth and pruning of the interconnections? If you build a cross-switch matrix, it gets big at least O N^2...
unless you believe they're going to set the world on fire with Nokia, or Kinect, or something else they haven't advertised yet... I don't (believe), and that's why I'm not invested in MS.
you need to invest in Sony then...
Man, I didn't think there was a tech company more evil than Microsoft, but now that you mention it....
Haven't there been some pretty fat dividends on occasion?
Yes, and when they do the stock immediately falls by the proportionate amount. But IBM pays higher dividends plus goes, up, up, up. Anybody who has held Microsoft instead is just plain gullible.
Hey, personal disclosure here, I do not and have never held Microsoft stock... but history shows plenty of worse investments out there. If you're holding MSFT today, you'd probably also be interested in WalMart, ConocoPhillips, and any other giant with no obvious room for growth - you never know when they'll turn the world on it's head, but more likely they'll just keep paying about 3% per year.... if it's the 3% per year you're interested in, some of these same huge companies issue bonds that pay about that.
I totally agree, I haven't used a commercial bank in over 15 years, and then only briefly.
I can't really fathom how brick and mortar commercial banks continue to exist, but it's a proven business model, like the corner drugstore - across the street from the other corner drugstore, it reliably makes money for the investors, so they continue to build them. They just don't make any money from me, at least not as a willing customer.
Yeah, I had the (6502 based) Atari 800 when I was about 14, and I never could (and still can't) understand who would ever want Harvard Architecture, or the insane segmented addressing of the 80286....
Who the hell has a flat stock price and reliable 20 percent dividends? Please tell me so I can hand them all my money.
Me too. Although, you should remember that past performance is no guarantee of future returns....
I spotted PG (Proctor & Gamble) in the late 1990s, and their 10 year performance at that point was impressively reliable... now I'm kinda glad I didn't have any money to invest in it at the time.
I'm just saying, that I'd be happy with fat dividends, or growth... MS has been paying 3% lately, not too fat, but I was remembering their one-time 15%-ish dividend in 2004, if they did that every year, I'd buy a chunk of their stock. I have held a chunk of O for about 10 years now... it has been good to me, better than a lot of the "growth" stocks.
On a good day, Wifi (802.11a/b/g/n) can travel about 900 feet between devices. Even with a directional antenna and some good hardware, you're looking at a maximum of about one mile transmitting distance between devices... Not sure how you could have any kind of sustainable network within these limited parameters.
Roll it out in ultra-dense urban areas, airports, and other places that Apple customers travel. It will never serve the sticks, and it won't need to serve the sticks, iPhone penetration in rural hillbilly America is still limited at best.
Applauding Jobs for anything is just nauseating. He hit a niche in the market and made it work for him, he stuck with a philosophy that happened to resonate with a big pile of discretionary income in the U.S. That's it. Bauhaus did it first and did it a lot more daringly than Apple did. I don't begrudge him his success, but I don't put his genius up there with Einstein, Feynmann, or da Vinci. I'd more name his vision of Apple the Porsche or Gucci of tech.
Difference being, its other services didn't require BILLIONS in infrastructure to execute.
I'm sure it would have been different, but it also would have been hobbled in a lot of places (the Florida Keys come to mind, tower space there is impossible to come by and the county won't let any new towers be built.)
Even then, its clear he had no idea of the enormous size of the task at hand.
Even now, its clear you have no idea of the enormous size of HIS ego. Just look at that market cap, just look at it! It was a mandate from the people to push HIS visions to new horizons....
I was thinking of the $3 payout in 2004, yeah, MS is not a growth company, unless you believe they're going to set the world on fire with Nokia, or Kinect, or something else they haven't advertised yet... I don't (believe), and that's why I'm not invested in MS.
Play that AAPL chart from 1988 through 1998 and tell me how smart you would feel in December of 1998 after 10 years of loyal investing?
Any idiot can play history back and point out what you should have done. I worked at a publicly traded company that "grew" from 6 to 240 in a space of less than 2 years. The trick is in picking the bottom and the top _when_ it's happening, not after the fact.
A reliable 10% return will beat 90% of the stocks you can name today. They have an annual tradition in Texas called the "running of the bulls" where they stripe off a pasture and measure the "deposits" left by the horned male bovines and invest according to their percentages. The bulls regularly out-perform the previous year's best analysts on Wall Street.
I'm an investor, I care about DI/DO - dollars in / dollars out. Dividends matter. Give me a flat stock price and reliable 20% dividends and I don't care at all about growth.
I'm getting to be on the fence about this - maybe one Raspberry Pi story a week would be enough (same for any other nerd-worthy topics), what's the point of editors if they just re-post everything that comes their way? Heck, they even posted one of my submissions recently.
Haven't there been some pretty fat dividends on occasion? I really wish the Y! charts would include an option to represent present value of a DRIP investment at the beginning of the period.
Why not get a Raspberry Pi and be done? If you want to play at making computer systems, I'd recommend getting into the Altera / Nios design software... I'm working on a triple core system right now with each core customized (by our team) to a particular task...
...that we landed on the MOON before the invention of microprocessors! Now that's scary.
Mostly scary if you're the guy in the rocket capsule steering it by hand. Kind of comforting when you think about the accuracy of enemy ICBM targeting capabilities.
There are encoding schemes that allow arbitrary precision on any sized processor. The Atari 800 series running on 8 bit 6502s used a BCD encoding, it is a little slower, but fractional results are more predictable than binary representations. You can implement something like that to an arbitrary number of digits... as many bits as you have memory for (and time to wait for processing).
The Matrix was a pretty twisted and mostly bad concept, but I give them credit for one thing: We can't predict what machine intelligence will do, any more than tuna fish could have predicted fish farming. What do the whales think of us? They've been watching us for tens of thousands of years, all of a sudden we start crossing the ocean instead of staying near shore and then we start being a voracious predator of theirs for a few hundred years, when they are close to extinction, we back off, mostly, but screw up their habitat with traffic and pollution - on second thought, that's more or less what American Indians went through too.
Anyway, if you think some crazy person in an asylum is unpredictable, remember that they are much more like you than a silicon brained being will ever be.
In the early days of CDs, a brick-wall analog filter was relatively cheap compared to doubling the bitrate of the laser... of course, that's all turned on its head now.
I was four in 1971... you could still get lead in your gasoline, you could dream of being an astronaut when you grew up, you could imagine surviving an all out thermonuclear war, jet travel was still expensive for most people, and nobody had the faintest idea what caused ulcers...
I mentioned Kurzweil mostly because he's pushing the idea that, due to exponential progress, people will live forever, real soon now. He is kinda quiet about how much money (power, whatever) you're going to need to do it. Personally, I think this sums up the future a little better:
Slashdot Mirror
Even so, I can see some medical uses for this, for people with disabilities. Though nothing like what you see in 'Ghost in the Shell'.
I see another 50 years of research with this and still not getting very far in terms of replicating complex brain function.
Complex neural interfaces are being developed for things like vision for the blind, and of course cochlear implants - for the most part, the existing wetware adapts and learns to interpret the signals from the machine.
I do see researchers playing with these and demonstrating some cool proofs of concept, interesting control systems built out of a handful of neurons, etc. but something complex like language processing is quite a ways off.
The problem is not providing such components, nor get them to work like the original
I don't know, I see a major problem simulating dendritic growth and pruning... even if you have 10,000 of these things on a chip to emulate a tiny little brain structure, how do you emulate the growth and pruning of the interconnections? If you build a cross-switch matrix, it gets big at least O N^2...
unless you believe they're going to set the world on fire with Nokia, or Kinect, or something else they haven't advertised yet... I don't (believe), and that's why I'm not invested in MS.
you need to invest in Sony then...
Man, I didn't think there was a tech company more evil than Microsoft, but now that you mention it....
Haven't there been some pretty fat dividends on occasion?
Yes, and when they do the stock immediately falls by the proportionate amount. But IBM pays higher dividends plus goes, up, up, up. Anybody who has held Microsoft instead is just plain gullible.
Hey, personal disclosure here, I do not and have never held Microsoft stock... but history shows plenty of worse investments out there. If you're holding MSFT today, you'd probably also be interested in WalMart, ConocoPhillips, and any other giant with no obvious room for growth - you never know when they'll turn the world on it's head, but more likely they'll just keep paying about 3% per year.... if it's the 3% per year you're interested in, some of these same huge companies issue bonds that pay about that.
I totally agree, I haven't used a commercial bank in over 15 years, and then only briefly.
I can't really fathom how brick and mortar commercial banks continue to exist, but it's a proven business model, like the corner drugstore - across the street from the other corner drugstore, it reliably makes money for the investors, so they continue to build them. They just don't make any money from me, at least not as a willing customer.
Yeah, I had the (6502 based) Atari 800 when I was about 14, and I never could (and still can't) understand who would ever want Harvard Architecture, or the insane segmented addressing of the 80286....
Market cap is beauty contest, and nothing more.
It turns into wealth & power when you diversify your holdings.
That's a Rockwell chip. Mot was 6800.
True, that, but it was also the chip in the Apple II.
Who the hell has a flat stock price and reliable 20 percent dividends? Please tell me so I can hand them all my money.
Me too. Although, you should remember that past performance is no guarantee of future returns....
I spotted PG (Proctor & Gamble) in the late 1990s, and their 10 year performance at that point was impressively reliable... now I'm kinda glad I didn't have any money to invest in it at the time.
I'm just saying, that I'd be happy with fat dividends, or growth... MS has been paying 3% lately, not too fat, but I was remembering their one-time 15%-ish dividend in 2004, if they did that every year, I'd buy a chunk of their stock. I have held a chunk of O for about 10 years now... it has been good to me, better than a lot of the "growth" stocks.
On a good day, Wifi (802.11a/b/g/n) can travel about 900 feet between devices. Even with a directional antenna and some good hardware, you're looking at a maximum of about one mile transmitting distance between devices... Not sure how you could have any kind of sustainable network within these limited parameters.
Roll it out in ultra-dense urban areas, airports, and other places that Apple customers travel. It will never serve the sticks, and it won't need to serve the sticks, iPhone penetration in rural hillbilly America is still limited at best.
Applauding Jobs as a visionary for an idea that failed on technical and financial merit is kinda stupid.
Recommended viewing: The Aviator
Applauding Jobs for anything is just nauseating. He hit a niche in the market and made it work for him, he stuck with a philosophy that happened to resonate with a big pile of discretionary income in the U.S. That's it. Bauhaus did it first and did it a lot more daringly than Apple did. I don't begrudge him his success, but I don't put his genius up there with Einstein, Feynmann, or da Vinci. I'd more name his vision of Apple the Porsche or Gucci of tech.
Difference being, its other services didn't require BILLIONS in infrastructure to execute.
I'm sure it would have been different, but it also would have been hobbled in a lot of places (the Florida Keys come to mind, tower space there is impossible to come by and the county won't let any new towers be built.)
Even then, its clear he had no idea of the enormous size of the task at hand.
Even now, its clear you have no idea of the enormous size of HIS ego. Just look at that market cap, just look at it! It was a mandate from the people to push HIS visions to new horizons....
I was thinking of the $3 payout in 2004, yeah, MS is not a growth company, unless you believe they're going to set the world on fire with Nokia, or Kinect, or something else they haven't advertised yet... I don't (believe), and that's why I'm not invested in MS.
3% is 2x what my credit union pays in an IRA, which is itself 3x what most banks pay. Poor, but there's a risk/reward thing to consider.
Play that AAPL chart from 1988 through 1998 and tell me how smart you would feel in December of 1998 after 10 years of loyal investing?
Any idiot can play history back and point out what you should have done. I worked at a publicly traded company that "grew" from 6 to 240 in a space of less than 2 years. The trick is in picking the bottom and the top _when_ it's happening, not after the fact.
A reliable 10% return will beat 90% of the stocks you can name today. They have an annual tradition in Texas called the "running of the bulls" where they stripe off a pasture and measure the "deposits" left by the horned male bovines and invest according to their percentages. The bulls regularly out-perform the previous year's best analysts on Wall Street.
Dividends are not growth.
Learn stock basics.
I'm an investor, I care about DI/DO - dollars in / dollars out. Dividends matter. Give me a flat stock price and reliable 20% dividends and I don't care at all about growth.
I'm getting to be on the fence about this - maybe one Raspberry Pi story a week would be enough (same for any other nerd-worthy topics), what's the point of editors if they just re-post everything that comes their way? Heck, they even posted one of my submissions recently.
Haven't there been some pretty fat dividends on occasion? I really wish the Y! charts would include an option to represent present value of a DRIP investment at the beginning of the period.
Why not get a Raspberry Pi and be done? If you want to play at making computer systems, I'd recommend getting into the Altera / Nios design software... I'm working on a triple core system right now with each core customized (by our team) to a particular task...
...that we landed on the MOON before the invention of microprocessors! Now that's scary.
Mostly scary if you're the guy in the rocket capsule steering it by hand. Kind of comforting when you think about the accuracy of enemy ICBM targeting capabilities.
There are encoding schemes that allow arbitrary precision on any sized processor. The Atari 800 series running on 8 bit 6502s used a BCD encoding, it is a little slower, but fractional results are more predictable than binary representations. You can implement something like that to an arbitrary number of digits... as many bits as you have memory for (and time to wait for processing).
The Matrix was a pretty twisted and mostly bad concept, but I give them credit for one thing: We can't predict what machine intelligence will do, any more than tuna fish could have predicted fish farming. What do the whales think of us? They've been watching us for tens of thousands of years, all of a sudden we start crossing the ocean instead of staying near shore and then we start being a voracious predator of theirs for a few hundred years, when they are close to extinction, we back off, mostly, but screw up their habitat with traffic and pollution - on second thought, that's more or less what American Indians went through too.
Anyway, if you think some crazy person in an asylum is unpredictable, remember that they are much more like you than a silicon brained being will ever be.
In the early days of CDs, a brick-wall analog filter was relatively cheap compared to doubling the bitrate of the laser... of course, that's all turned on its head now.
I was four in 1971... you could still get lead in your gasoline, you could dream of being an astronaut when you grew up, you could imagine surviving an all out thermonuclear war, jet travel was still expensive for most people, and nobody had the faintest idea what caused ulcers...
I mentioned Kurzweil mostly because he's pushing the idea that, due to exponential progress, people will live forever, real soon now. He is kinda quiet about how much money (power, whatever) you're going to need to do it. Personally, I think this sums up the future a little better:
http://dilbert.com/strips/comic/2009-02-24/