A spokesman for the Empire of Japan announced the successful launch of the last power-sat in their highly successful Laser Power Satellite System. The system, which provides 98% of Japan's power, has been extended to allow them to provide power to any point on the globe. "We can focus 10 terawatts of laser energy to any point on the earth. The market for our space based power is unlimited and unstoppable." said Energy Minister Hirohito.
POLITICS:
U.S. Trade Secretary Jenna Bush announced that all trade sanctions against the newly reformed Empire of Japan would be removed. "The Japanese are old and trustworthy friends of the United States. The restoration of the Empire should not be seen as an aggressive anti-democratic move. Instead, it should be seen as an old and honorable society returning to its cultural roots. We applaud them."
FASHION:
The World Fashion Expo in New York provided a peak at this year's hot fashions. For the second year in a row, chrome and silver were the materials of choice. The new fashion accessory for this year is mirror-silvered umbrellas. Elite fashion designer Mano had this to say about the trend- "Shiny Shiny Shiny. Is beautiful and functional, No?"
As you have aptly demonstrated, you don't need a degree to do programing work. So why do you want the degree?
You obviously don't want the degree for the knowledge. What you want are credentials. Unfortunately, a degree is considered a magic ticket in our society. You can only get so far without it. So I do understand your desire to get it over with as quickly as possible.
You are making a mistake that so many other engineers, scientists, and techies make concerning college. Namely, there is more to college than your major. You seem to think that you currently DO know enough to progress in your career because of your work experience and your self-study of the field. There is a very good reason that all university degrees require a spectrum of coursework for a bachelor's degree. It provides balance.
If all you know is CS, then that is all you will be. You are 5 years into a 40+ year career. The skills and knowledge you will need as you go are going to change dramatically as you go. If you stay with a company, then your need for subjects like english and business are going to increase and your need for your technical skills will decrease. Exposure to the arts and the sciences is increasingly valuable because it gives you debth and understanding of the world around you. It makes it easier to communicate and relate to those outside your niche. A knowledge of history is useful, if for no other reason, than to teach you that there are patterns and themes to life at both the personal and societal level.
If all you want is a pass to the next level of the game, I am sure you will find some way to get that piece of paper in about a year.
But if you want more; if you want breadth of knowledge and scope and debth, don't cheat yourself. Take and enjoy every course you need for your degree. You never know what piece is the key to what you really need.
I have a good friend who worked on MIRACL at the WSMR HELSTF site for many years. He tells great stories about things that happened out there. A few examples:
- They once declassified an obsolete drum drive by running over it 3 times with an APC (security said it had to be 3 times...)
- MIRACL is a deuturium-flouride chemical laser (basically a specially designed rocket engine). They stored the deuturium as heavy water in a holding pond. During bird migration season, an unusual number of ducks would swim in the pond. It turns out that the ducks liked the heavy water. They floated just a little bit higher due to the higher water density.
- A moth was once caught in one of the side-lobes of the main beam during a routine shot. The resulting ball of plasma blew a basketball sized hole through a heavy electronics rack several feet away.
But my favorite was:
A couple of times a year VIP's would decend on the facility to review it (HELSTF was constantly under threat of being shut down). The Congress critters and Pentagon brass would always bring along an entourage of "experts" - laser physics phd's, consultants, etc. The project manager had to assign two engineers just to watch these "experts" as they walked through the facility. They had a bad habit of "adjusting" anything with a knob, wheel, button, or switch. In a couple of cases when they didn't catch the "adjustments", it actually caused tests to fail WHILE THE VIPS WERE THERE - a very bad thing when your funding is iffy. My buddy made a suggestion and they implemented it. After that no more problems with undocumented "adjustments". My friend built a couple of "twiddle boxes" - working dials, lights, readouts, the whole works. They very prominently placed these devices on racks in the control areas. When the tour groups would go through, the manager would point to the faux-boxes as the system controls and data recording interfaces. Presto, no more problems with "adjustments" to the real system.
it would be as if my electric company were billing me for every circuit in my house instead of just the 200 A service to the meter!
Actually, many electric companies do multi-circuit billing. If you have an electric water heater, then you probably pay an additional fee and may even have a seperate meter for the water heater circuit.
They are not billing you for every circuit and device, but I bet they would do it if they could. Hmmm, maybe that is how we will finally get "smart houses" - as a trojan horse for the electric company.
I listened to CNN sporadically today. Several times, I heard the CNN talking heads report on this Nobel award. Each time they only reported the names of the winners and that it was for "research in low temperature gases".
In each case, the 2nd news-reader (don't call these clowns reporters, please) turned to the 1st news-reader and made some lame comment about "boy is THAT way over my head (wink wink giggle)". They didn't mention the term "Bose-Einstein Condensate" nor did they attempt to explain WHY the BEC work would be worthy of a Nobel Prize.
Is it any wonder why the level of science illiteracy in the USA is so high?
GenX'ers are more creative and independent and
fully tech savy.
You ARE kidding, right? Just because a few million kids learned to download mp3s and surf the web, you are more tech savy than earlier generations? I have news for you, EVERY generation has had their tech-savy core. That core is always surrounded by a larger but less knowledgeable group of enthusiasts. The technology varies by generation. In the 20s it was AC electricity, in the 30s it was radio, the 40s were automobiles & aircraft, the 50s were TV, the 60's were transistor electronics and space tech, the 70s were integrated circuit electronics, the 80s were personal computers, the 90s were the Internet.
In each generation for the last one hundred years there was a core technology which transformed people's quality of life. In each generation, there are new and interesting technologies which capture the imagination of that generation. In each generation, there existed a core of young and enthusiastic developers and early users of that technology. The only thing changing is the technology.
It is arrogance, hubris, and ignorance of the highest order to assume that THIS generation is more "tech savy" than earlier generations.
Those who ignore history, are doomed to sound foolish.
Nope. At least one other species uses slaves. From the Ant Farm FAQ :
Some (ant) species even use
aphids, as if they were their cows, for their juice from plants.
I remember vividly a nature program, broadcast many years ago, on South American ants. The program showed them herding aphids and using them to farm fungus beds inside the ant colony. The aphids apparently were captive, and as far as the reseachers could tell, lived their whole lives inside the colony.
Humans didn't invent slavery, we just rediscovered it.
Would an AI re-invent slavery? Almost certainly, unless we give them a strong moral sense. The good news is that we are lousy candidates for slavery by AI masters: we are too slow and fragile. Bets that if they do have slaves it will be other AIs.
Most people recommend that you start with The Hobbit and then continue on with the Lord of the Rings trilogy (Fellowship of the Ring, Two Towers, Return of the King). They are separate stories, though they are closely coupled. If you don't normally like fantasy, then I suggest you defer reading The Hobbit until after reading the trilogy (if you finish it at all). Why? Two reasons: a) The Hobbit is mostly backstory to the larger and more epic story in the trilogy. While helpful, it is not really necessary for reading the Lord of the Rings. b) The Hobbit was originally written by Tolkein for his children. The storytelling style is very much in the mode of a children's fairy tale. It is a ripping good yarn and well worth the time for adults, but its distinctly juvenile style can seem a little "cute" at times. Please note that a little of this style rubs off on the first few chapters of Fellowship. The style seems to "mature" rapidly as the principles get farther from home, so it may be seen more as a literary device than anything.
2nd Do read the books before Fellowship is released in the theaters.
From all that I have read Peter Jackson and his team are doing superb job of adapting the story to the screen, but it is STILL an adaptation. There is a depth and breadth to Tolkien's prose that cannot be captured on film no matter how good the director or the production. This richness comes from Tolkien himself. He was one of the premier philologists (historian of languages) of his time. He had a decades long fascination with creating languages and mythologies/histories to describe them. From these deep roots grew Lord of the Rings. No author before or since has been able to match the scope and depth of this story. To do so would take the two things Tolkien had: genius and a long lifetime of hard study.
3rd Remember, Lord of the Rings was not written yesterday.
Why is this important? Sometimes readers dismiss perfectly good books because they consider the style or the story archaic. If you do really enjoy SF, like Babylon 5, then you should give Tolkien a chance. You will recognize some very familiar themes and stories and characters. No author writes in a vacuum. Epic fiction, whether it is Beowulf or LOTR or Babylon 5, has similar themes. Later authors will often borrow and reshape much older stories, if only subconciously. Tolkien drew on the mythologies of Beowulf and the Der Ring des Nibelungen, and created a world. Strazynski drew on Tolkien and Doc Smith and a dozen other sources to expressed his own ideas about the future. All I am trying to say is that you will see familiar faces, if in a different form, if you choose to make the journey. It is worth it.
I would love to buy this module. I have both an Apple Airport base-station and a Handspring Visor. Why I won't buy it: $299 + tax + shipping. This thing costs as much as my Visor and more than my Airport. When it hits $150 or lower, call me.
Until then, I will just get by with irregular syncing.
The Reality: Some innovations are being explored in the textile industry. Some of these are very good ideas (sports socks that absorb bacterial odors). Some of these are very bad ideas (a jacket with built in cell phone and mp3 player. where do I put the batteries? what if I want to wear a different jacket?)
The one thing that intrigues me about the article is not that big companies like DuPont are exploring new "smart" textiles, it is that the popular media has absorbed the idea that molecular nanotechnology is coming and is going to be a Big Thing. The idea of smart clothing is no surprise to anyone who read Drexler's ENGINES OF CREATION back in the late 80's, or for that matter anyone who reads a fair amount of SF, or has the least bit of technical knowledge and imagination. I find it simply fascinating and funny that popular culture is "discovering" these ideas many decades after they were first proposed.
What is even funnier is that the jounalists and speculators are making the same innane impractical speculations they have always made. Baby pajamas with a built in cell phone? Get a life. Remember these are the successors of those visionaries in the 50's and 60's who said we all would be driving nuclear cars, flying personal helicopters, and using too-cheap-to-meter electricity by now. Yeah, right.
There were many good ideas mentioned in the article. I hope that Nano-Tex, et. al. are able to bring out some of these products: Bio-monitoring clothing, color/pattern changing cloth, variable permiability cloth, etc.
Just do us all a favor. Leave the cell phones out of it.
Yes. They are paying NM a whole $100k. If New Mexico only spent $100,000 so far, they were not really players in the case. That little money couldn't buy much legal representation, even in a cash strapped (read "poor") state like New Mexico.
Microsoft probably makes 100 times that amount off of sales to NM schools in a year. Talk about a good deal. For a measley $100k, they get to buy the first rock in the avalanche. Microsoft is going to walk away from this case with little or no impact to their business. Too bad.
I am one of Scott's fans who is a prime candidate for sending him a mico-payment. I visit his web site at least a couple of times a month. I have read most of his site. I own copies of UNDERSTANDING COMICS and REINVENTING COMICS. I thoroughly enjoy not only his art, but his activism and ideas. His work on web-based art is revolutionary. He deserves an income at least as high as most CEOs. I feel I owe him money.
I have not paid him yet. Why?
Several reasons. One is simple sloth. Another is that I have never done micro-payments and am not sure which system to choose. Those are the lame reasons.
The real reason, the one that has been holding me up for a couple of months is that he chose a micropayment system that REQUIRES me to give Amazon.com my credit card number. They keep it on file and active. I am just not comfortable with the risk. From time to time, I have bought things online: a DIMM here, software there. These purchases have been few and far between. I know that online commerce is about as safe as in person transactions (safer in some cases). I just cannot shake the idea that they are going to keep my credit card on file.
It isn't just the risk of crackers or abusive employee's (probably miniscule). It is the idea that this "wallet" that I would set up with Amazon is not really money, but credit. I don't want credit. I want online money. Credit cards have burned me several times in my life: everything from my step-kids "borrowing" my card number (from an old bill) to buy something online, to merchant fraud, to credit card mis-charges. I have credit cards, but I don't LIKE credit cards.
Scott's chosen payment system requires me to have a credit card. I just don't want to support it.
So Scott, it is up to you. If you will accept PayPal, I will sign up today. If you will accept a check, just give me a P.O. box and it will be in the mail.
I want to support you. I want to support all the art I like, be it music, games, movies, or books. The potential explosion of art and artistry worldwide would be staggering if micropayments can be made to work. Unfortunately, to work it must FEEL as easy and as safe as tipping a waiter or dropping coins in a street performer's hat. Credit card based systems will not do that.
So Scott, help me out. I want to give you money. How do I do it?
The DC-X flights were even more amazing in person.
I went to several of the test flights. I saw the "box" manuever flight as well as the "swoop" flight. The "swoop" flight showed that the DC-X could launch, hover, move down range, swing itself nose down and then "swoop" its nose back up using a really wild 180 degree corkscrew manuever (a little trick needed for putting a "real" Delta Clipper spaceship into the proper orientation after reentry but before landing). There can be no other description of what I saw:
A rocket danced across the desert sky.
Then NASA killed it.
I think that the Air Force should forget about reviving the X-33 (which was a crappy design from the outset) and instead rebuild the DC-X team and do it again. Only, they need to finish the job this time.
IV
Re:Hovercraft design questions
on
What is 'IT'?
·
· Score: 1
But two important questions needs to be answered. 1. Power Source. The article mentions the current product that "IT" will overtake as being dirty. So what kind of clean, safe and small type of power source could fit into and adequately power a personal craft of this type?
Other articles about Kamen have reported that his company has developed a small prototype Stirling-cycle electrical generator. Since Stirling engines can use efficient multi-fuel external combustion. A practical Stirling generator would be light weight, efficient, and clean. He could use his own generator to power his device.
2. Abilities. The article say that the "IT" will run afoul of some existing laws and that cities will need to be modified to work well with "IT". Do you think that it will be able to fly? Or traverse water? I think that if it could fly it would negate the 'safer' argument, but if I could commute across the Hudson River with it... Maybe we'll need to add landing pads to our balcony.
Kamen is basically a control systems expert. He is also a helicopter pilot (a hobby). His iBot wheelchair is smart enough to climb stairs, balance on two wheels, and even run on a sandy beach. He and his team have shown themselves to be capable of almost arbitrarily increasing the safety and reliability of vehicles they create by using sensor integration and complex control processors.
Automating a flying machine is much simpler than a ground vehicle. Full autopilots for aircraft have been around for years. Kamen has demonstrated several times with several products that he take an existing product and make it smaller, smarter, safer, more user friendly, and efficient. If IT really is a vehicle of some sort, then you can bet that it will be safe and as idiot-proof as is humanly possible.
IV
Re:What IT Is And Isn't
on
What is 'IT'?
·
· Score: 2
My bet says it's some sort of super-clean, super-cool transportation. And since it was "turned on", it has something electrical.
How come people are so interested in going into space? It's mindblowing cold, HUGE as in defining the word, and generally really hostile towards us humans!
Besides the three good reasons you just listed (useful extremes of Heat &Cold, room to safely construct huge instruments & artifacts, the challenge to adapt & survive) there are many good reasons for humanity to leave the Earth's surface. Many good and useful things can be accomplished by leaving the security of Earth. I will not belabor them. There are many good books and articles on the subject. A few of the books are THE THIRD INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION by G. Harry Stine, MINING THE SKY by John S. Lewis, HIGH FRONTIER by Gerard O'Neill. There are many others.
The practical reasons for going to space are many: knowledge of the Earth and her surroundings, almost boundless untapped energy and material resources, a challenging frontier to inspire. Certainly no serious case can be made that pursuit of space exploration and development will harm mankind in any substantive way. The most casual examination of the facts makes it obvious that a sea of almost unlimited prosperity surrounds our little blue marble of a world. Space pointedly destroys the zero sum game for humanity. Some people see this and know that the cold, and the vast emptiness, and the general hostility to humanity are the painful challenges that will attend the birth of something wonderful. Some people see. Most do not.
What is the point of going there?
The first successful hot air balloon flight took place in 1783, during Benjamin Franklin's stay in Paris. Watching from his hotel, he heard bystanders scoffing at the new device and asking "What good is it?", to which he retorted "What good is a newborn baby?"
And before people get started. I'm for progress, inventions and the attitude: "we'll do it because we can". But on the other hand I think we have to be a bit realistic sometimes (as a race that is).... and I do happend to think that even the wildest and most amazing projects should be evaluated based on questions like: "what can we gain as a race in doing so", or "would we gain more using the money on earth instead".
First a point of order. Humanity as a group has done nothing to date. Various individuals and groups are responsible for the achievements normally attributed to human kind. We do not operate as a race. That individuals are capable of taking responsiblility for the ultimate fate of humanity is the key to our future. "As a race" we have done nothing for our race. As individuals and in groups, we have lifted ourselves from the life of mere animals.
What do we gain? What we gain is the future of not just humanity, but all life. What we gain is the chance to better our knowledge and quality of life in the short term (the next few hundred years). In the long term, the single greatest effect of humanity expanding into space will be the Greening of the solar system. Life will expand out from this fragile birth-world. With luck, the life will spread beyond our little solar system. To date, we know of no life outside of this planet. We humans are the best chance that earthly life has to spread beyond this world. If we fail, then all life will eventually perish. When the Sun eventually dies, earthly life will become utterly extinct. The Sun will die. Humanity need not die. Life need not die.
Life may yet live on if we have the will.
IV
Re:Reproduction crippling can be a good thing.
on
Golden Rice
·
· Score: 1
I'd like to believe that in future more and more food will be available organically but this is unlikely to be the case if GM strains of crops are allowed to spread their seeds naturally - if organic crops get contaminated it will cripple the organic farmers!
The only way the so called organicly grown foods will become more available is if a) the demand for such foods increases b) organic farmers find ways to increase crop yields per acre. Since the whole organic food movement started as a response to the use of pesticides and (to a lesser extent) the use of man-made fertilizers, then there is no practical way for organic farmers to increase their crop yields.
Given this, so called organic foods are doomed to either low volume "status" foods or they must consume greater and greater tracts of arable land. The third alternative is for organic farmers to adopt genetically enhanced foods. Specifically foods that have been/will be engineered for nitrogen fixation, drought resistance/low water needs, and increased yields. Without those enhancements organic farmers will be forced to farm lands until the land is dead. The whole reason modern farming exists is to avoid this problem.
Any objections to the use of all genetically engineered foods, as opposed to objecting to specific foods for specific reasons, is the worst kind of elitist arrogance and fearmongering. The idea that genetically modified crops are going to "contaminate" and "cripple" organic farmers is just another way of propagating the "technology/science is bad...natural is good" meme.
Yes there is a very real possibility that genetically engineered crops will spread their modifcations to wild plants via cross-pollination. This should be one of the main factors considered before a gene-modified plant is approved for release. However, I challenge you to go to your favorite organic food store and find any staple food there that hasn't been gene-modified already, by thousands of years of cross- breeding. Corn? No that is the end result of breeding a wild grass called Maize. Rice? Same thing. Wheat? Yup, that too. Potatoes? Sorry, they have been bred to be blight resistant. Tomatoes? Yeah, which of the 2000 different varieties that have been bred for color, juiciness, size, etc.
The point is, there is nothing inherently bad about genetically modified foodstuffs. There are dangers, but they are manageable with thought, time, and testing. Their payoff however could make the Green Revolution look like a failed harvest.
IV
2010 Nobel Peace Prize goes to...
on
Golden Rice
·
· Score: 2
Dr. Ingo Potrykus, for his contributions to the health and welfare of millions worldwide. His development of Golden Rice has saved the lives of countless millions of children worldwide. The development of Golden Rice allowed millions of people to live healthier lives. Golden Rice has been adopted worldwide as the main staple food for all of mankind. Everyday billions of human beings consume vast amounts of Golden Rice.
As a result of 10 years of eating beta-carotene enhanced rice, the majority of human beings are now healthy, disease-free, and... orange.
As a resident of Denton County, Texas I find this particular Slashdot piece and its timing very interesting.
Two days ago I realized that I could not find my voter registration card. I needed the precinct information to find out my polling place for the elections on Tuesday. No problem, just go online and do a few searches and voila! I found the Denton County Voter Registration Database. I put in my name and date of birth and quickly got my voter information. I then skipped over and looked up the precinct map and found my polling place. Total elapsed time 5 minutes. Result: happy voter.
This morning I was shocked to read the Slashdot post about Dr. Evil and his diabolical plan to destroy the privacy rights of Denton County residents! After all, I had innocently used that SAME site to find information that I needed to be a responsible citizen, and I didn't even realize how exposed I was! My privacy was shattered! How dare anyone make my home address and gender easily available to ANYONE who knows the year I was born (yet another reason to lie about your age!) Yesterday I felt safe and secure. Today I feel... vulnerable.
After all, someone might use this fiendish web site in combination with the Phone Book (another devilish anti-privacy device) to actually obtain my telephone number! The horror!
In all seriousness, yes I am concerned about my both my online and offline privacy. I fully intend to contact my county officials and talk to them about Denton County's privacy policies, and about the web site in particular. The site could be more secure without limiting legitimate use. As a test, I did a search on "John Smith, 1950" and got instant access to a couple of voters' registration information. Should I have the ability to get that information about someone else? Probably not. Is having that information harmful to them? Probably not.
The bottom line is that we are still in "untamed frontier" days of the information age. People (government people included) are not always aware of the full consequences of their public actions. Vigilence and Courtesy are our best weapons to protect our interests and to keep society healthy.
Theoretically mini nuclear plants would be efficient and "emission-less". Of course that is only if you don't mind the radioactive rods in your backyard.
I would LOVE to have a Radio-isotopic electric generator in my backyard. Say about a 10kW model. The Russians used to have a space rated system which was a so called "10x10x10" system: weighing 10,000 lbs, producing 10kW continuous, producing for 10 YEARS. Actually it generated electricity for much longer, but the output dropoff was about 10% every ten years (amazing the number of 10s associated with it).
It was fail safe. It was designed to survive orbital reentry intact. No radioactive emmissions above background could be detected outside of its case (thus completely sealed). No periodic service was required. At the end of its useful life, you could just drop it in hole and cover it in concrete and forget about it. By the time the case breached, the radioactivity of the unit would be negligible.
I believe Sandia Labs in Albuquerque got their hands on one of these babies around 1990 or so. The Russians had already been using these things for 20 years. It tested out fine.
Now for the bad news, yet another 10: it cost in 1990 $10 million (US). Sigh.
OK, MacOS X on the whole looks pretty nice, but there`s one thing I simply don`t understand: why are they using BSD on mach? I mean, I do not understand the benefit mach gives them.
Pardon me while I get pedantic for a minute. No offense is intended.
One thing that people keep forgetting about Apple is that they are a hardware company. Heck, even Apple forgot that for a while and almost died as a result. Since Apple is in the business of designing, building, and selling non-commodity hardware (lets face it, intel/AMD boxen are commodity items), they are in the position of being in complete control of how the box works. Which means everything in the OS and apps should be tweaked down as hard as possible to get the best performance, right?
Wrong. Apple is in this for the long haul. Several times in their history they have had to completely redesign both their hardware and their software, while also maintaining that illusive requirement of Backward Compatability for the masses of Mac faithful (heck I know people whose primary home machine is STILL a MacPlus, and they are fellow techies!). That means that Apple is basically in a state of constant porting of their OS to whatever new hardware they decide to manufacture. Remember, Apple is trying to create a stable and flexible software system that supports their bread & butter sales: hardware. (yes, I know it is a bit more muddy situation than that, but that is closer to the truth than any other assessment).
A microkernal architecture does make porting a little easier by abstracting the OS interface to the hardware. Yes it slows things down a little, but not that much. You also get lots of nice advantages. Think of it as contingency planning:
- Apple might have to move off of the AIM PPC design to something else (a very real possibility if Motorola can't bump past 500mhz G4s very soon)
- They might choose to attempt a raid on part of an Wintel/Lintel/Sun/SGI market segment (I doubt it, but they might) and need to port over to some other architecture while still maintaining code compatibility with the MacOSX main branch
- They developed OSX with the promise that it would run on G3 machines or better (boy was there alot of grumbling about THAT. Mac people keep and use their machines a LONG time). Some of those machines are now 1&1/2 generations out of date (2+ years). It just makes it simpler to abstract not only the microkernal, but everything in the new OS that they can (which is what they have done)
- They need to plan for the unknown. They don't know what the future holds techwise. They want to make sure they can maximize their response as quickly as possible (say for example if USB2 supplants Firewire/IEEE-1394).
There are lots of other good business reasons as well. One is that by abstracting to a microkernal, they don't have to exhaustively test every stinking OS upgrade on every type of OSX legacy machine. They can instead pound the heck out of their currently manufactured machines and then do restricted testing on legacy machines. Since the microkernal is identical on the machines and the microkernal gets exhaustively tested on all machines (a much smaller job), it eliminates a whole class of hardware unique bugs. That saves both time and money testing as well allows them to bring more features to market faster.
Another reason is security. How many potential security holes can you plug by not letting ANY software, including the OS, touch the hardware? The answer, alot. Apple has a tradition of this sort of abstraction. How many older MacOS developers bypassed the ToolBox API to talk directly to the hardware, only to find that in the next machine their software broke? The answer: many. If Apple tells you "don't rely on attribute X being there in the future" then don't expect it to be there. Additionally, the various flavors of BSD are considered by many to be the most secure OS on the planet. Using a microkernal architecture to take away potential hardware backdoors should make it even more secure.
Anyway, that is my assessment of why they chose the microkernal direction. I could easily be wrong. It could be something much simpler than that: we have this NeXT code, lets use it.
Slashdot Mirror
AP-WORLD NEWSBURST 10 Jan 2019:
BUSINESS:
A spokesman for the Empire of Japan announced the successful launch of the last power-sat in their highly successful Laser Power Satellite System. The system, which provides 98% of Japan's power, has been extended to allow them to provide power to any point on the globe. "We can focus 10 terawatts of laser energy to any point on the earth. The market for our space based power is unlimited and unstoppable." said Energy Minister Hirohito.
POLITICS:
U.S. Trade Secretary Jenna Bush announced that all trade sanctions against the newly reformed Empire of Japan would be removed. "The Japanese are old and trustworthy friends of the United States. The restoration of the Empire should not be seen as an aggressive anti-democratic move. Instead, it should be seen as an old and honorable society returning to its cultural roots. We applaud them."
FASHION:
The World Fashion Expo in New York provided a peak at this year's hot fashions. For the second year in a row, chrome and silver were the materials of choice. The new fashion accessory for this year is mirror-silvered umbrellas. Elite fashion designer Mano had this to say about the trend- "Shiny Shiny Shiny. Is beautiful and functional, No?"
As you have aptly demonstrated, you don't need a degree to do programing work. So why do you want the degree?
You obviously don't want the degree for the knowledge. What you want are credentials. Unfortunately, a degree is considered a magic ticket in our society. You can only get so far without it. So I do understand your desire to get it over with as quickly as possible.
You are making a mistake that so many other engineers, scientists, and techies make concerning college. Namely, there is more to college than your major. You seem to think that you currently DO know enough to progress in your career because of your work experience and your self-study of the field. There is a very good reason that all university degrees require a spectrum of coursework for a bachelor's degree. It provides balance.
If all you know is CS, then that is all you will be. You are 5 years into a 40+ year career. The skills and knowledge you will need as you go are going to change dramatically as you go. If you stay with a company, then your need for subjects like english and business are going to increase and your need for your technical skills will decrease. Exposure to the arts and the sciences is increasingly valuable because it gives you debth and understanding of the world around you. It makes it easier to communicate and relate to those outside your niche. A knowledge of history is useful, if for no other reason, than to teach you that there are patterns and themes to life at both the personal and societal level.
If all you want is a pass to the next level of the game, I am sure you will find some way to get that piece of paper in about a year.
But if you want more; if you want breadth of knowledge and scope and debth, don't cheat yourself. Take and enjoy every course you need for your degree. You never know what piece is the key to what you really need.
Good luck.
I.V.
I have a good friend who worked on MIRACL at the WSMR HELSTF site for many years. He tells great stories about things that happened out there. A few examples:
...)
- They once declassified an obsolete drum drive by running over it 3 times with an APC (security said it had to be 3 times
- MIRACL is a deuturium-flouride chemical laser (basically a specially designed rocket engine). They stored the deuturium as heavy water in a holding pond. During bird migration season, an unusual number of ducks would swim in the pond. It turns out that the ducks liked the heavy water. They floated just a little bit higher due to the higher water density.
- A moth was once caught in one of the side-lobes of the main beam during a routine shot. The resulting ball of plasma blew a basketball sized hole through a heavy electronics rack several feet away.
But my favorite was:
A couple of times a year VIP's would decend on the facility to review it (HELSTF was constantly under threat of being shut down). The Congress critters and Pentagon brass would always bring along an entourage of "experts" - laser physics phd's, consultants, etc. The project manager had to assign two engineers just to watch these "experts" as they walked through the facility. They had a bad habit of "adjusting" anything with a knob, wheel, button, or switch. In a couple of cases when they didn't catch the "adjustments", it actually caused tests to fail WHILE THE VIPS WERE THERE - a very bad thing when your funding is iffy. My buddy made a suggestion and they implemented it. After that no more problems with undocumented "adjustments". My friend built a couple of "twiddle boxes" - working dials, lights, readouts, the whole works. They very prominently placed these devices on racks in the control areas. When the tour groups would go through, the manager would point to the faux-boxes as the system controls and data recording interfaces. Presto, no more problems with "adjustments" to the real system.
I.V.
Actually, many electric companies do multi-circuit billing. If you have an electric water heater, then you probably pay an additional fee and may even have a seperate meter for the water heater circuit.
They are not billing you for every circuit and device, but I bet they would do it if they could. Hmmm, maybe that is how we will finally get "smart houses" - as a trojan horse for the electric company.
I.V.
IV
I listened to CNN sporadically today. Several times, I heard the CNN talking heads report on this Nobel award. Each time they only reported the names of the winners and that it was for "research in low temperature gases".
In each case, the 2nd news-reader (don't call these clowns reporters, please) turned to the 1st news-reader and made some lame comment about "boy is THAT way over my head (wink wink giggle)". They didn't mention the term "Bose-Einstein Condensate" nor did they attempt to explain WHY the BEC work would be worthy of a Nobel Prize.
Is it any wonder why the level of science illiteracy in the USA is so high?
IV
You ARE kidding, right? Just because a few million kids learned to download mp3s and surf the web, you are more tech savy than earlier generations? I have news for you, EVERY generation has had their tech-savy core. That core is always surrounded by a larger but less knowledgeable group of enthusiasts. The technology varies by generation. In the 20s it was AC electricity, in the 30s it was radio, the 40s were automobiles & aircraft, the 50s were TV, the 60's were transistor electronics and space tech, the 70s were integrated circuit electronics, the 80s were personal computers, the 90s were the Internet.
In each generation for the last one hundred years there was a core technology which transformed people's quality of life. In each generation, there are new and interesting technologies which capture the imagination of that generation. In each generation, there existed a core of young and enthusiastic developers and early users of that technology. The only thing changing is the technology.
It is arrogance, hubris, and ignorance of the highest order to assume that THIS generation is more "tech savy" than earlier generations.
Those who ignore history, are doomed to sound foolish.
IV
A: "Its a Game Machine."
B: "Its a Digital Recorder."
A: "Game Machine!"
B: "Digital Recorder!!!"
MS: "Its a Game Machine AND a Digital Recorder!"
Sound familiar?
IV
Have you ever heard Clarke's 3rd Law?
"Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic."
Infovore's corrolary:
A sufficiently advanced Nanotechnology + a sufficiently advanced AI = Unstoppable Grey Goo.
I agree with Hawkings and Vinge. We need IA to hold back AI.
IV
defaultValue
Nope. At least one other species uses slaves. From the Ant Farm FAQ :
Some (ant) species even use aphids, as if they were their cows, for their juice from plants.
I remember vividly a nature program, broadcast many years ago, on South American ants. The program showed them herding aphids and using them to farm fungus beds inside the ant colony. The aphids apparently were captive, and as far as the reseachers could tell, lived their whole lives inside the colony.
Humans didn't invent slavery, we just rediscovered it.
Would an AI re-invent slavery? Almost certainly, unless we give them a strong moral sense. The good news is that we are lousy candidates for slavery by AI masters: we are too slow and fragile. Bets that if they do have slaves it will be other AIs.
If we are lucky, we will be pets.
IV
Most people recommend that you start with The Hobbit and then continue on with the Lord of the Rings trilogy (Fellowship of the Ring, Two Towers, Return of the King). They are separate stories, though they are closely coupled. If you don't normally like fantasy, then I suggest you defer reading The Hobbit until after reading the trilogy (if you finish it at all). Why? Two reasons: a) The Hobbit is mostly backstory to the larger and more epic story in the trilogy. While helpful, it is not really necessary for reading the Lord of the Rings. b) The Hobbit was originally written by Tolkein for his children. The storytelling style is very much in the mode of a children's fairy tale. It is a ripping good yarn and well worth the time for adults, but its distinctly juvenile style can seem a little "cute" at times. Please note that a little of this style rubs off on the first few chapters of Fellowship. The style seems to "mature" rapidly as the principles get farther from home, so it may be seen more as a literary device than anything.
2nd Do read the books before Fellowship is released in the theaters.
From all that I have read Peter Jackson and his team are doing superb job of adapting the story to the screen, but it is STILL an adaptation. There is a depth and breadth to Tolkien's prose that cannot be captured on film no matter how good the director or the production. This richness comes from Tolkien himself. He was one of the premier philologists (historian of languages) of his time. He had a decades long fascination with creating languages and mythologies/histories to describe them. From these deep roots grew Lord of the Rings. No author before or since has been able to match the scope and depth of this story. To do so would take the two things Tolkien had: genius and a long lifetime of hard study.
3rd Remember, Lord of the Rings was not written yesterday.
Why is this important? Sometimes readers dismiss perfectly good books because they consider the style or the story archaic. If you do really enjoy SF, like Babylon 5, then you should give Tolkien a chance. You will recognize some very familiar themes and stories and characters. No author writes in a vacuum. Epic fiction, whether it is Beowulf or LOTR or Babylon 5, has similar themes. Later authors will often borrow and reshape much older stories, if only subconciously. Tolkien drew on the mythologies of Beowulf and the Der Ring des Nibelungen, and created a world. Strazynski drew on Tolkien and Doc Smith and a dozen other sources to expressed his own ideas about the future. All I am trying to say is that you will see familiar faces, if in a different form, if you choose to make the journey. It is worth it.
Now go grab a copy and READ!!!
IV
I would love to buy this module. I have both an Apple Airport base-station and a Handspring Visor. Why I won't buy it: $299 + tax + shipping. This thing costs as much as my Visor and more than my Airport. When it hits $150 or lower, call me.
Until then, I will just get by with irregular syncing.
IV
The Hype: Nanotech clothes are coming!!!
The Reality: Some innovations are being explored in the textile industry. Some of these are very good ideas (sports socks that absorb bacterial odors). Some of these are very bad ideas (a jacket with built in cell phone and mp3 player. where do I put the batteries? what if I want to wear a different jacket?)
The one thing that intrigues me about the article is not that big companies like DuPont are exploring new "smart" textiles, it is that the popular media has absorbed the idea that molecular nanotechnology is coming and is going to be a Big Thing. The idea of smart clothing is no surprise to anyone who read Drexler's ENGINES OF CREATION back in the late 80's, or for that matter anyone who reads a fair amount of SF, or has the least bit of technical knowledge and imagination. I find it simply fascinating and funny that popular culture is "discovering" these ideas many decades after they were first proposed.
What is even funnier is that the jounalists and speculators are making the same innane impractical speculations they have always made. Baby pajamas with a built in cell phone? Get a life. Remember these are the successors of those visionaries in the 50's and 60's who said we all would be driving nuclear cars, flying personal helicopters, and using too-cheap-to-meter electricity by now. Yeah, right.
There were many good ideas mentioned in the article. I hope that Nano-Tex, et. al. are able to bring out some of these products: Bio-monitoring clothing, color/pattern changing cloth, variable permiability cloth, etc.
Just do us all a favor. Leave the cell phones out of it.
IV
Microsoft probably makes 100 times that amount off of sales to NM schools in a year. Talk about a good deal. For a measley $100k, they get to buy the first rock in the avalanche. Microsoft is going to walk away from this case with little or no impact to their business. Too bad.
I.V.
I have not paid him yet. Why?
Several reasons. One is simple sloth. Another is that I have never done micro-payments and am not sure which system to choose. Those are the lame reasons.
The real reason, the one that has been holding me up for a couple of months is that he chose a micropayment system that REQUIRES me to give Amazon.com my credit card number. They keep it on file and active. I am just not comfortable with the risk. From time to time, I have bought things online: a DIMM here, software there. These purchases have been few and far between. I know that online commerce is about as safe as in person transactions (safer in some cases). I just cannot shake the idea that they are going to keep my credit card on file.
It isn't just the risk of crackers or abusive employee's (probably miniscule). It is the idea that this "wallet" that I would set up with Amazon is not really money, but credit. I don't want credit. I want online money. Credit cards have burned me several times in my life: everything from my step-kids "borrowing" my card number (from an old bill) to buy something online, to merchant fraud, to credit card mis-charges. I have credit cards, but I don't LIKE credit cards.
Scott's chosen payment system requires me to have a credit card. I just don't want to support it.
So Scott, it is up to you. If you will accept PayPal, I will sign up today. If you will accept a check, just give me a P.O. box and it will be in the mail.
I want to support you. I want to support all the art I like, be it music, games, movies, or books. The potential explosion of art and artistry worldwide would be staggering if micropayments can be made to work. Unfortunately, to work it must FEEL as easy and as safe as tipping a waiter or dropping coins in a street performer's hat. Credit card based systems will not do that.
So Scott, help me out. I want to give you money. How do I do it?
I.V.
I went to several of the test flights. I saw the "box" manuever flight as well as the "swoop" flight. The "swoop" flight showed that the DC-X could launch, hover, move down range, swing itself nose down and then "swoop" its nose back up using a really wild 180 degree corkscrew manuever (a little trick needed for putting a "real" Delta Clipper spaceship into the proper orientation after reentry but before landing). There can be no other description of what I saw:
A rocket danced across the desert sky.
Then NASA killed it.
I think that the Air Force should forget about reviving the X-33 (which was a crappy design from the outset) and instead rebuild the DC-X team and do it again. Only, they need to finish the job this time.
IV
Other articles about Kamen have reported that his company has developed a small prototype Stirling-cycle electrical generator. Since Stirling engines can use efficient multi-fuel external combustion. A practical Stirling generator would be light weight, efficient, and clean. He could use his own generator to power his device.
2. Abilities. The article say that the "IT" will run afoul of some existing laws and that cities will need to be modified to work well with "IT". Do you think that it will be able to fly? Or traverse water? I think that if it could fly it would negate the 'safer' argument, but if I could commute across the Hudson River with it... Maybe we'll need to add landing pads to our balcony.
Kamen is basically a control systems expert. He is also a helicopter pilot (a hobby). His iBot wheelchair is smart enough to climb stairs, balance on two wheels, and even run on a sandy beach. He and his team have shown themselves to be capable of almost arbitrarily increasing the safety and reliability of vehicles they create by using sensor integration and complex control processors.
Automating a flying machine is much simpler than a ground vehicle. Full autopilots for aircraft have been around for years. Kamen has demonstrated several times with several products that he take an existing product and make it smaller, smarter, safer, more user friendly, and efficient. If IT really is a vehicle of some sort, then you can bet that it will be safe and as idiot-proof as is humanly possible.
IV
Ever seen The Rocketeer?
All the hints are there in the article. It is obviously a personal transportation device that:
replaces cars
is fun & appealing
will require/allow city infrastructure changes
is easy to use
would require new laws/regulations
make existing competitors (probably automakers) panic
The article's hints are just to blatant too be anything but some sort of personal autonomous flight pack.
Of course IT could just be the latest version of VIP
IV
Besides the three good reasons you just listed (useful extremes of Heat &Cold, room to safely construct huge instruments & artifacts, the challenge to adapt & survive) there are many good reasons for humanity to leave the Earth's surface. Many good and useful things can be accomplished by leaving the security of Earth. I will not belabor them. There are many good books and articles on the subject. A few of the books are THE THIRD INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION by G. Harry Stine, MINING THE SKY by John S. Lewis, HIGH FRONTIER by Gerard O'Neill. There are many others.
The practical reasons for going to space are many: knowledge of the Earth and her surroundings, almost boundless untapped energy and material resources, a challenging frontier to inspire. Certainly no serious case can be made that pursuit of space exploration and development will harm mankind in any substantive way. The most casual examination of the facts makes it obvious that a sea of almost unlimited prosperity surrounds our little blue marble of a world. Space pointedly destroys the zero sum game for humanity. Some people see this and know that the cold, and the vast emptiness, and the general hostility to humanity are the painful challenges that will attend the birth of something wonderful. Some people see. Most do not.
What is the point of going there?
The first successful hot air balloon flight took place in 1783, during Benjamin Franklin's stay in Paris. Watching from his hotel, he heard bystanders scoffing at the new device and asking "What good is it?", to which he retorted "What good is a newborn baby?"
And before people get started. I'm for progress, inventions and the attitude: "we'll do it because we can". But on the other hand I think we have to be a bit realistic sometimes (as a race that is). ... and I do happend to think that even the wildest and most amazing projects should be evaluated based on questions like: "what can we gain as a race in doing so", or "would we gain more using the money on earth instead".
First a point of order. Humanity as a group has done nothing to date. Various individuals and groups are responsible for the achievements normally attributed to human kind. We do not operate as a race. That individuals are capable of taking responsiblility for the ultimate fate of humanity is the key to our future. "As a race" we have done nothing for our race. As individuals and in groups, we have lifted ourselves from the life of mere animals.
What do we gain? What we gain is the future of not just humanity, but all life. What we gain is the chance to better our knowledge and quality of life in the short term (the next few hundred years). In the long term, the single greatest effect of humanity expanding into space will be the Greening of the solar system. Life will expand out from this fragile birth-world. With luck, the life will spread beyond our little solar system. To date, we know of no life outside of this planet. We humans are the best chance that earthly life has to spread beyond this world. If we fail, then all life will eventually perish. When the Sun eventually dies, earthly life will become utterly extinct. The Sun will die. Humanity need not die. Life need not die.
Life may yet live on if we have the will.
IV
The only way the so called organicly grown foods will become more available is if a) the demand for such foods increases b) organic farmers find ways to increase crop yields per acre. Since the whole organic food movement started as a response to the use of pesticides and (to a lesser extent) the use of man-made fertilizers, then there is no practical way for organic farmers to increase their crop yields.
Given this, so called organic foods are doomed to either low volume "status" foods or they must consume greater and greater tracts of arable land. The third alternative is for organic farmers to adopt genetically enhanced foods. Specifically foods that have been/will be engineered for nitrogen fixation, drought resistance/low water needs, and increased yields. Without those enhancements organic farmers will be forced to farm lands until the land is dead. The whole reason modern farming exists is to avoid this problem.
Any objections to the use of all genetically engineered foods, as opposed to objecting to specific foods for specific reasons, is the worst kind of elitist arrogance and fearmongering. The idea that genetically modified crops are going to "contaminate" and "cripple" organic farmers is just another way of propagating the "technology/science is bad...natural is good" meme.
Yes there is a very real possibility that genetically engineered crops will spread their modifcations to wild plants via cross-pollination. This should be one of the main factors considered before a gene-modified plant is approved for release. However, I challenge you to go to your favorite organic food store and find any staple food there that hasn't been gene-modified already, by thousands of years of cross- breeding. Corn? No that is the end result of breeding a wild grass called Maize. Rice? Same thing. Wheat? Yup, that too. Potatoes? Sorry, they have been bred to be blight resistant. Tomatoes? Yeah, which of the 2000 different varieties that have been bred for color, juiciness, size, etc.
The point is, there is nothing inherently bad about genetically modified foodstuffs. There are dangers, but they are manageable with thought, time, and testing. Their payoff however could make the Green Revolution look like a failed harvest.
IV
As a result of 10 years of eating beta-carotene enhanced rice, the majority of human beings are now healthy, disease-free, and ... orange.
----
IV
Two days ago I realized that I could not find my voter registration card. I needed the precinct information to find out my polling place for the elections on Tuesday. No problem, just go online and do a few searches and voila! I found the Denton County Voter Registration Database. I put in my name and date of birth and quickly got my voter information. I then skipped over and looked up the precinct map and found my polling place. Total elapsed time 5 minutes. Result: happy voter.
This morning I was shocked to read the Slashdot post about Dr. Evil and his diabolical plan to destroy the privacy rights of Denton County residents! After all, I had innocently used that SAME site to find information that I needed to be a responsible citizen, and I didn't even realize how exposed I was! My privacy was shattered! How dare anyone make my home address and gender easily available to ANYONE who knows the year I was born (yet another reason to lie about your age!) Yesterday I felt safe and secure. Today I feel... vulnerable.
After all, someone might use this fiendish web site in combination with the Phone Book (another devilish anti-privacy device) to actually obtain my telephone number! The horror!
In all seriousness, yes I am concerned about my both my online and offline privacy. I fully intend to contact my county officials and talk to them about Denton County's privacy policies, and about the web site in particular. The site could be more secure without limiting legitimate use. As a test, I did a search on "John Smith, 1950" and got instant access to a couple of voters' registration information. Should I have the ability to get that information about someone else? Probably not. Is having that information harmful to them? Probably not.
The bottom line is that we are still in "untamed frontier" days of the information age. People (government people included) are not always aware of the full consequences of their public actions. Vigilence and Courtesy are our best weapons to protect our interests and to keep society healthy.
IV
I would LOVE to have a Radio-isotopic electric generator in my backyard. Say about a 10kW model. The Russians used to have a space rated system which was a so called "10x10x10" system: weighing 10,000 lbs, producing 10kW continuous, producing for 10 YEARS. Actually it generated electricity for much longer, but the output dropoff was about 10% every ten years (amazing the number of 10s associated with it).
It was fail safe. It was designed to survive orbital reentry intact. No radioactive emmissions above background could be detected outside of its case (thus completely sealed). No periodic service was required. At the end of its useful life, you could just drop it in hole and cover it in concrete and forget about it. By the time the case breached, the radioactivity of the unit would be negligible.
I believe Sandia Labs in Albuquerque got their hands on one of these babies around 1990 or so. The Russians had already been using these things for 20 years. It tested out fine.
Now for the bad news, yet another 10: it cost in 1990 $10 million (US). Sigh.
Iv
Pardon me while I get pedantic for a minute. No offense is intended.
One thing that people keep forgetting about Apple is that they are a hardware company. Heck, even Apple forgot that for a while and almost died as a result. Since Apple is in the business of designing, building, and selling non-commodity hardware (lets face it, intel/AMD boxen are commodity items), they are in the position of being in complete control of how the box works. Which means everything in the OS and apps should be tweaked down as hard as possible to get the best performance, right?
Wrong. Apple is in this for the long haul. Several times in their history they have had to completely redesign both their hardware and their software, while also maintaining that illusive requirement of Backward Compatability for the masses of Mac faithful (heck I know people whose primary home machine is STILL a MacPlus, and they are fellow techies!). That means that Apple is basically in a state of constant porting of their OS to whatever new hardware they decide to manufacture. Remember, Apple is trying to create a stable and flexible software system that supports their bread & butter sales: hardware. (yes, I know it is a bit more muddy situation than that, but that is closer to the truth than any other assessment).
A microkernal architecture does make porting a little easier by abstracting the OS interface to the hardware. Yes it slows things down a little, but not that much. You also get lots of nice advantages. Think of it as contingency planning:
- Apple might have to move off of the AIM PPC design to something else (a very real possibility if Motorola can't bump past 500mhz G4s very soon)
- They might choose to attempt a raid on part of an Wintel/Lintel/Sun/SGI market segment (I doubt it, but they might) and need to port over to some other architecture while still maintaining code compatibility with the MacOSX main branch
- They developed OSX with the promise that it would run on G3 machines or better (boy was there alot of grumbling about THAT. Mac people keep and use their machines a LONG time). Some of those machines are now 1&1/2 generations out of date (2+ years). It just makes it simpler to abstract not only the microkernal, but everything in the new OS that they can (which is what they have done)
- They need to plan for the unknown. They don't know what the future holds techwise. They want to make sure they can maximize their response as quickly as possible (say for example if USB2 supplants Firewire/IEEE-1394).
There are lots of other good business reasons as well. One is that by abstracting to a microkernal, they don't have to exhaustively test every stinking OS upgrade on every type of OSX legacy machine. They can instead pound the heck out of their currently manufactured machines and then do restricted testing on legacy machines. Since the microkernal is identical on the machines and the microkernal gets exhaustively tested on all machines (a much smaller job), it eliminates a whole class of hardware unique bugs. That saves both time and money testing as well allows them to bring more features to market faster.
Another reason is security. How many potential security holes can you plug by not letting ANY software, including the OS, touch the hardware? The answer, alot. Apple has a tradition of this sort of abstraction. How many older MacOS developers bypassed the ToolBox API to talk directly to the hardware, only to find that in the next machine their software broke? The answer: many. If Apple tells you "don't rely on attribute X being there in the future" then don't expect it to be there. Additionally, the various flavors of BSD are considered by many to be the most secure OS on the planet. Using a microkernal architecture to take away potential hardware backdoors should make it even more secure.
Anyway, that is my assessment of why they chose the microkernal direction. I could easily be wrong. It could be something much simpler than that: we have this NeXT code, lets use it.
Cheers,
IV