There are so many underappreciated varieties. Filius Blue peppers are typically grown as an ornamental plant, but mildly hot yet extremely flavorful, perfect for salads.
IIRC Max Tegmark polled AI researchers around the world (see his book Life 3.0), median date for strong AI was guessed to be 2050. Not really FUD since *when* it happens it will be more significant to civilization arguably than fire, and as another poster said with something so existential it's best to be conservative.
A common retort on Slashdot these days is "X is a private company, they can do whatever they want" and "free speech doesn't extend to privately owned companies". While true, it doesn't address an increasingly pervasive problem. These online forums owned by private companies are often the only way to share information and communicate online. At what point does a private company's policy equate to government level censorship, and what does that mean for free society?
The uploaded simulated brain is fully conscious and living, but unfortunately only 10% can be uploaded with a high error rate, so approximately 90% fatal.
It's a shame, really. Should be laws against exporting of certain technologies IMO. The MBA spreadsheet warriors love these agreements to boost short term profits, while long term the company completely fails.
The Shanghai maglev was purchased from Germany, China just built the track:
"The train set was built by a joint venture of Siemens and ThyssenKrupp from Kassel, Germany and based on years of tests and improvements of their Transrapid maglev monorail."
I'm not really disagreeing with you, just pointing out that direct genetic manipulation via CRISPR or other means is not at all similar to selective breeding. I actually tend to think that perhaps putting natural fish based antifreeze in crops may not be such a bad thing and will lead to a greater abundance of hardier and more nutritious crops to help feed the world. However, we aren't even on the cusp of fully realizing the ramifications of genetic engineering of complex organisms and such "simple" things may have far-reaching unintended consequences; we should proceed cautiously (case in point, CRISPR was just recently discovered, and seemingly every few years our understanding of basic genetics is drastically altered, i.e. junk genes, RNAi, etc.). Genetic engineering and CRISPR is like any other tool enabled by science, neither inherently good nor bad (see: nuclear power).
I'm for GMO generally, but your analogy is not correct. I can't make glowing tomatoes through selective breeding, but with CRISPR I can insert jellyfish genes, natural antifreeze from fish, insecticides, etc.
Further, while Isaacson's book is great, Isaacson wrote it on a tight deadline and didn't get all the facts quite right. Schlender's "Becoming Steve Jobs" is great to read after Isaacson's book, and gives the impression Jobs was more of a victim of paralysis by analysis; he was analyzing all treatments and talking to doctors around the country and missed the time to act. Schlender's book also dispels a lot of the myths about Jobs, such as the sociopathic asshole myth. A bit true perhaps when he was young, but he cared a great deal about his employees as demonstrated by countless examples in the book. His passion did completely remove patience early in his career though, which is why he came off as an ass to many.
Pretty far off the mark... One thing very easy for Musk, especially given his nerd fanbase, is the ease at which he can hire the absolute best for any given task. If he were to announce tomorrow he'd like to get into blenders, 1000 applicants in the blender industry would salivate at the prospect of jumping ship. Very likely between Tesla and OpenAI, he already has the best AI researchers. Note I'm not saying whether or not any of this AI fear is founded, just that your argument of him doing this to get sneak peaks at others' work is a bit ridiculous.
For a scathing commentary on fusion and why it may never be commercially viable, read "The Trouble with Fusion" by Lidsky (1985 MIT Tech Review Article).
IIRC he was in charge of MIT's fusion program and got booted for this article and his views. He's absolutely correct though. We need to rethink our approach and tokamaks may never compete with fission.
Worth elaborating that these are just designs, no one has built a lithium blanket reactor since all fusion experiments are not yet made for power generation. DEMO will very likely have a lithium blanket, slated for design/construction after ITER. Also, not a hybrid reactor - lithium doesn't split and produce energy (elements up to iron only give energy by fusion, after by fission), and it's not a chain reaction. The reason for using lithium is mainly to capture fast neutrons, and get decay products that produce tritium, a hydrogen isotope used in the fusion reaction. Essentially once you have a working reactor you need lithium blankets to create enough tritium to keep running, otherwise you need a fission reactor to produce tritium.
A lot of great fusion designs rely on very high fields ~20 T or larger, this has been known for a while. The superconducting technology is now just getting there so some exciting possibilities are becoming realities. Still, not a walk in the park designing large magnets with high temperature superconductor (HTS). HTS joining of cables (splicing) is very tricky as many are powder-in-tube, so for various reasons an internal splice in a solenoid is a trick (that I have not seen demonstrated). It can be figured out though. Right now the biggest hindrance is cost, most HTS requires silver in the powder tube for chemistry reasons, making the cost very high - thousands of USD per meter.
As other posters have mentioned high magnetic field allows reducing the volume, higher densities, maybe even newer modes. As an engineer however one thing I always see in many of these new designs is a lack of respect for radiation damage on the superconductors; they can't handle high radiation so while it's tempting to put them as close to the plasma region for increased densities etc., you need a reasonable balance. The lockheed design was very guilty of this.
Well, a capitalist autocracy before. They were going in the right direction until Xi Jinping took power. I guess my point is you could have some confidence in your investments there until recent years; now I wouldn't dare do anything with the country.
Alibaba is a great company and I do admire Jack Ma, but who in their right mind would invest in China after Xi Jinping went full dictator? Somehow I don't worry about Google and Facebook. Between the dictatorship, massive wealth disparity, and human rights violations I expect the whole system to collapse. Investing in any AI companies in China, or any promising company in China for that matter, I believe would be akin to investing in Russia in 1916.
While many things are wrong with China, simplified Chinese characters are not one of them. I would much prefer to learn simplified writing than traditional. Anyone upset with simplified characters (Taiwan) is exhibiting the same protectionism given to cursive and (in France) the French language. However easier is always better - lets more of those poor pheasants learn writing and integrate with society. Korea had a similar epiphany centuries ago, much to their benefit.
“What Orwell feared were those who would ban books. What Huxley feared was that there would be no reason to ban a book, for there would be no one who wanted to read one. Orwell feared those who would deprive us of information. Huxley feared those who would give us so much that we would be reduced to passivity and egotism.
Orwell feared that the truth would be concealed from us. Huxley feared the truth would be drowned in a sea of irrelevance. Orwell feared we would become a captive culture. Huxley feared we would become a trivial culture, preoccupied with some equivalent of the feelies, the orgy porgy, and the centrifugal bumble puppy.
As Huxley remarked in Brave New World Revisited, the civil libertarians and rationalists, who are ever on the alert to oppose tyranny, “failed to take into account man’s almost infinite appetite for distractions.”
In 1984, people are controlled by inflicting pain. In Brave New World, they are controlled by inflicting pleasure. In short, Orwell feared that what we fear will ruin us. Huxley feared that our desire will ruin us.”
Neil Postman, Amusing Ourselves to Death: Public Discourse in the Age of Show Business
I just tried looking at Chicago to Boston for a weekend in May, looks like $15k. Looks like while they claim to be cheaper than chartered private jets, it's really not. Hell, I can pay a private pilot far less than this! Not really setting a high bar for Uber here.
Slashdot Mirror
It's no longer evolution so much as selective breeding.
There are so many underappreciated varieties. Filius Blue peppers are typically grown as an ornamental plant, but mildly hot yet extremely flavorful, perfect for salads.
IIRC Max Tegmark polled AI researchers around the world (see his book Life 3.0), median date for strong AI was guessed to be 2050. Not really FUD since *when* it happens it will be more significant to civilization arguably than fire, and as another poster said with something so existential it's best to be conservative.
A common retort on Slashdot these days is "X is a private company, they can do whatever they want" and "free speech doesn't extend to privately owned companies". While true, it doesn't address an increasingly pervasive problem. These online forums owned by private companies are often the only way to share information and communicate online. At what point does a private company's policy equate to government level censorship, and what does that mean for free society?
Sounds like the Saudi Howard Hughes!
The uploaded simulated brain is fully conscious and living, but unfortunately only 10% can be uploaded with a high error rate, so approximately 90% fatal.
It's a shame, really. Should be laws against exporting of certain technologies IMO. The MBA spreadsheet warriors love these agreements to boost short term profits, while long term the company completely fails.
The Shanghai maglev was purchased from Germany, China just built the track:
"The train set was built by a joint venture of Siemens and ThyssenKrupp from Kassel, Germany and based on years of tests and improvements of their Transrapid maglev monorail."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
I'm not really disagreeing with you, just pointing out that direct genetic manipulation via CRISPR or other means is not at all similar to selective breeding. I actually tend to think that perhaps putting natural fish based antifreeze in crops may not be such a bad thing and will lead to a greater abundance of hardier and more nutritious crops to help feed the world. However, we aren't even on the cusp of fully realizing the ramifications of genetic engineering of complex organisms and such "simple" things may have far-reaching unintended consequences; we should proceed cautiously (case in point, CRISPR was just recently discovered, and seemingly every few years our understanding of basic genetics is drastically altered, i.e. junk genes, RNAi, etc.). Genetic engineering and CRISPR is like any other tool enabled by science, neither inherently good nor bad (see: nuclear power).
I'm for GMO generally, but your analogy is not correct. I can't make glowing tomatoes through selective breeding, but with CRISPR I can insert jellyfish genes, natural antifreeze from fish, insecticides, etc.
Further, while Isaacson's book is great, Isaacson wrote it on a tight deadline and didn't get all the facts quite right. Schlender's "Becoming Steve Jobs" is great to read after Isaacson's book, and gives the impression Jobs was more of a victim of paralysis by analysis; he was analyzing all treatments and talking to doctors around the country and missed the time to act. Schlender's book also dispels a lot of the myths about Jobs, such as the sociopathic asshole myth. A bit true perhaps when he was young, but he cared a great deal about his employees as demonstrated by countless examples in the book. His passion did completely remove patience early in his career though, which is why he came off as an ass to many.
Also Craigslist just dropped the personals according to CNN.
Pretty far off the mark... One thing very easy for Musk, especially given his nerd fanbase, is the ease at which he can hire the absolute best for any given task. If he were to announce tomorrow he'd like to get into blenders, 1000 applicants in the blender industry would salivate at the prospect of jumping ship. Very likely between Tesla and OpenAI, he already has the best AI researchers. Note I'm not saying whether or not any of this AI fear is founded, just that your argument of him doing this to get sneak peaks at others' work is a bit ridiculous.
For a scathing commentary on fusion and why it may never be commercially viable, read "The Trouble with Fusion" by Lidsky (1985 MIT Tech Review Article).
http://orcutt.net/weblog/wp-co...
IIRC he was in charge of MIT's fusion program and got booted for this article and his views. He's absolutely correct though. We need to rethink our approach and tokamaks may never compete with fission.
Worth elaborating that these are just designs, no one has built a lithium blanket reactor since all fusion experiments are not yet made for power generation. DEMO will very likely have a lithium blanket, slated for design/construction after ITER. Also, not a hybrid reactor - lithium doesn't split and produce energy (elements up to iron only give energy by fusion, after by fission), and it's not a chain reaction. The reason for using lithium is mainly to capture fast neutrons, and get decay products that produce tritium, a hydrogen isotope used in the fusion reaction. Essentially once you have a working reactor you need lithium blankets to create enough tritium to keep running, otherwise you need a fission reactor to produce tritium.
A lot of great fusion designs rely on very high fields ~20 T or larger, this has been known for a while. The superconducting technology is now just getting there so some exciting possibilities are becoming realities. Still, not a walk in the park designing large magnets with high temperature superconductor (HTS). HTS joining of cables (splicing) is very tricky as many are powder-in-tube, so for various reasons an internal splice in a solenoid is a trick (that I have not seen demonstrated). It can be figured out though. Right now the biggest hindrance is cost, most HTS requires silver in the powder tube for chemistry reasons, making the cost very high - thousands of USD per meter.
As other posters have mentioned high magnetic field allows reducing the volume, higher densities, maybe even newer modes. As an engineer however one thing I always see in many of these new designs is a lack of respect for radiation damage on the superconductors; they can't handle high radiation so while it's tempting to put them as close to the plasma region for increased densities etc., you need a reasonable balance. The lockheed design was very guilty of this.
Well, a capitalist autocracy before. They were going in the right direction until Xi Jinping took power. I guess my point is you could have some confidence in your investments there until recent years; now I wouldn't dare do anything with the country.
Alibaba is a great company and I do admire Jack Ma, but who in their right mind would invest in China after Xi Jinping went full dictator? Somehow I don't worry about Google and Facebook. Between the dictatorship, massive wealth disparity, and human rights violations I expect the whole system to collapse. Investing in any AI companies in China, or any promising company in China for that matter, I believe would be akin to investing in Russia in 1916.
While many things are wrong with China, simplified Chinese characters are not one of them. I would much prefer to learn simplified writing than traditional. Anyone upset with simplified characters (Taiwan) is exhibiting the same protectionism given to cursive and (in France) the French language. However easier is always better - lets more of those poor pheasants learn writing and integrate with society. Korea had a similar epiphany centuries ago, much to their benefit.
“What Orwell feared were those who would ban books. What Huxley feared was that there would be no reason to ban a book, for there would be no one who wanted to read one. Orwell feared those who would deprive us of information. Huxley feared those who would give us so much that we would be reduced to passivity and egotism.
Orwell feared that the truth would be concealed from us. Huxley feared the truth would be drowned in a sea of irrelevance. Orwell feared we would become a captive culture. Huxley feared we would become a trivial culture, preoccupied with some equivalent of the feelies, the orgy porgy, and the centrifugal bumble puppy.
As Huxley remarked in Brave New World Revisited, the civil libertarians and rationalists, who are ever on the alert to oppose tyranny, “failed to take into account man’s almost infinite appetite for distractions.”
In 1984, people are controlled by inflicting pain. In Brave New World, they are controlled by inflicting pleasure. In short, Orwell feared that what we fear will ruin us. Huxley feared that our desire will ruin us.”
Neil Postman, Amusing Ourselves to Death: Public Discourse in the Age of Show Business
I'm thinking he works for United Launch Alliance, go easy on him.
I just tried looking at Chicago to Boston for a weekend in May, looks like $15k. Looks like while they claim to be cheaper than chartered private jets, it's really not. Hell, I can pay a private pilot far less than this! Not really setting a high bar for Uber here.
Looks like the chassis is metal but the frame is ash:
https://www.classicdriver.com/...
My guess is he's referring to the future plans with the BFR, not one of the falcon variants.
Do you recall the title to the book?