But I think you are wrong. The real reason is that Google is now run by MBAs instead of engineers or visionaries, and they really did just calculate the Net Present Value of the research.
Google has so much cash it is obvious that it should throw a couple of billion at BD just to keep a hand in the field. In twenty years robots are going to be huge. Probably not the humanoid ones, but just intelligent machines doing many ordinary jobs. It takes time to get into that field. And lots of nasty patents will be being generated in the short term that will entrench the old players.
Indeed. Most (but not all) pilots know how to fly an aeroplane. If they see a Drone, they will just alter course. May or may not need to abort the landing and have another go.
Same for the laser nonsense. Yes, they are annoying and people should not point them at aircraft. But they do not make planes fall out of the sky.
Planes are big heavy things that can fly through storms etc. It takes a bit more than a 2kg drone to kill them.
That is why they do not want to interview Assange. They do interviews overseas all the time (40 odd since Assange went down.)
But if they interview Assange they will then have to put up or shut up, and they cannot do either.
Assange was arrested under very dubious European Arrest warrants which have belatedly been repealed. He could not be arrested in the same way today.
If these "rape" charges had any substance he would have been charged in the first instance. They are, at the very most, on the very edge of what is illegal.
None of that is not to say that Assange is an arsehole. But if that were illegal the jails would be full.
This is never covered in any coverage of patent cases. The actual substance. Because it is too hard for journalists to understand. So we just get the fluff.
Most consumer machines do not even come with a replaceable operating system.
If the system gets hosed or riddled with viruses you just buy a new one. Does not happen very often. People accept that.
You hark back to days when you could have some understanding and control over your machine. Those days are long gone. Think about how a teenager interacts with a computer. That is the future.
That is the deadly weapon N Korea fears mosts. Drop a million solar powered MP3 players on K Korea. Load them up not with propoganda or an in depth analysis, but instead load them up with South Korean soap operas.
It is ironic to note that Bush is responsible for all of this. Everyone has forgotten that under Clinton N Korea had nuclear inspectors and no bomb. But after 9/11 they were ignored.
This could still go very wrong. I am amazed at S Korea and Japan's tolerance of N Korea.
Love the Dick Cheney quote. He was spot on. But 9/11 made them angry so they followed their guts rather then their brains.
Some day a 0.5Kg is going to fly within 10km of a heavy aircraft (that it would not even scratch) and it will be announced that the world will end.
But buy a few kg of perchlorate, make a 10kg rocket, add a couple of kg of ammonium nittrate and you have a different story.
The trick used to be how to control it so that it can find a target. But a Raspberry Pi with a small camera and some relatively simple software could easily identify an aeroplane against a blue sky. And shield it with a bit of aluminum foil.
The solution, of course, is to ban the sale of Raspbery Pis.
The number of laws, regulations and bureacratic systems has grown dramatically over the last 50 years. Why? Because we now have computer automation that enables bureacracies to implement them.
Consider the Tax Office / IRS. It has roughly the same budget (as a proportion of GDP) today as it had in the 1950s, before (electronic) computers. But the laws are much more complex today. Today's laws simply could not have been administered in the 1950s, without computer automation. And the more laws the more lawyers.
In the longer term (50..200 years) computers will be able to really think. At that stage it seems unlikely that they would want people around, let alone lawyers.
Natural selection made people the way that we are. Not just our bodies, but also our minds, our personality, and in particular our goals which are ultimately directed at having grandchildren.
Would and indeed does natural selection play a role in selecting which AI projects get funded? And ultimately, if AIs can perform AI research without people, will natural selection guide AIs?
If so, what does that mean? Certainly and AI would not grow old in the sense that we grow old, and therefor would not need children.
By posing as customers the FBI could put lots of people in Jail. But Alford insisting that they arrest Ulbrict they just got one head. Not good for the KPIs. Not good at all.
This is a good move. NASA wastes billions on the space station, and now human Mars nonsense, and the only point is to produce television shows that make people feel good. With modern technology they can just produce fake pictures that will work about as well and then hopefully spend the real money on real science. I want to know about Europa. And have the Webb launched, and then replaced if the launch fails. Real science.
There is a good reason why nobody has gone back to the moon in 4 decades. Humans are obsolete technology for space travel. Have been for decades. As the machines become ever more intelligent the idea will seem more and more ludicrous.
A more interesting question, is will humans remain current technology here on earth over the next century or two.
I'm sorry, I have no idea what you are talking about.
If you do not have some kind of pre shared data it becomes trivial to insert a man in the middle, whatever mystical properties qbits have.
If there is substance to your claims, then a semi-technical paper would make your results much more widely known, if that is helpful. As it is all that I have got out of the discussion is that "somebody has done something with quantum crypto". Not very interesting.
(I have never read anything that makes a lot of sense about QKD.)
With the available information it is impossible for technical people like those that read SlashDot to make sense of anything. There is either the paper itself, which would require slogging through dozens of other papers to even make sense of it, or there is journalistic fluff that is completely meaningless. When you write for an academic audience in your discipline area you should be terse and obscure. But not for a general but technical audience.
My understanding of Quantum encryption is that two qubits are produced at the same time and one is sent to the encrypter and the other to the decrypter. Detecting them destroys them, defeating Eve the eavesdropper.
More importantly the process of creating these produces random qubits and they cannot be created to a specific pattern. Thus they cannot be regenerated in the same pattern that they were created, making like hard for Mallory the man in the middle.
There still needs to be some sort of digital signature to detect Mallory. But the argument goes that that would need to be broken in real time, and Quantum encryption is all about reading the back traffic.
So which part of that story have you attacked? And leave out the bits about the Frigembroten Sniggens defrobulation principals.
No, the trouble is that you just cannot implement an efficient garbage collector in C/++. So Java and.Net do their own compiling. C is only efficient if you think "C".
Slashdot Mirror
+1, good insight.
But I think you are wrong. The real reason is that Google is now run by MBAs instead of engineers or visionaries, and they really did just calculate the Net Present Value of the research.
Google has so much cash it is obvious that it should throw a couple of billion at BD just to keep a hand in the field. In twenty years robots are going to be huge. Probably not the humanoid ones, but just intelligent machines doing many ordinary jobs. It takes time to get into that field. And lots of nasty patents will be being generated in the short term that will entrench the old players.
Indeed. Most (but not all) pilots know how to fly an aeroplane. If they see a Drone, they will just alter course. May or may not need to abort the landing and have another go.
Same for the laser nonsense. Yes, they are annoying and people should not point them at aircraft. But they do not make planes fall out of the sky.
Planes are big heavy things that can fly through storms etc. It takes a bit more than a 2kg drone to kill them.
It was the previous Labor government that would lick your boots.
The current conservative government would lick a more personal yet less savory part.
That is why they do not want to interview Assange. They do interviews overseas all the time (40 odd since Assange went down.)
But if they interview Assange they will then have to put up or shut up, and they cannot do either.
Assange was arrested under very dubious European Arrest warrants which have belatedly been repealed. He could not be arrested in the same way today.
If these "rape" charges had any substance he would have been charged in the first instance. They are, at the very most, on the very edge of what is illegal.
None of that is not to say that Assange is an arsehole. But if that were illegal the jails would be full.
I reckon that if you offered most Australians FREE internet provided they let somebody else "keep it safe" a lot would go for it.
Anthony
This is never covered in any coverage of patent cases. The actual substance. Because it is too hard for journalists to understand. So we just get the fluff.
I miss Groklaw.
People used to do lots of hard work in the fields. But machines made that unnecessary.
People used to know how to do arithmetic and spel. But machines have made that unnecessary.
People used to learn to read maps. But machines have made that unnecessary.
People used to know how to follow rules that approve housing loans or insurance requests. But machines have made that unnecessary.
People still need to think. For the time being.
http://www.computersthink.com/
Ate them, actually.
Who will now be able to sell dozens and dozens of Kg of sugar to the US, provided it does not compete with US farmers...
There is no need to reset the boot loader.
Most consumer machines do not even come with a replaceable operating system.
If the system gets hosed or riddled with viruses you just buy a new one. Does not happen very often. People accept that.
You hark back to days when you could have some understanding and control over your machine. Those days are long gone. Think about how a teenager interacts with a computer. That is the future.
+1. Actually, I think pics of 17 year olds will do for child porn. And there are plenty of those that look much older.
If you are anti-arsehole then you must be full of shit.
Read up on the history.
+1
That is the deadly weapon N Korea fears mosts. Drop a million solar powered MP3 players on K Korea. Load them up not with propoganda or an in depth analysis, but instead load them up with South Korean soap operas.
It is ironic to note that Bush is responsible for all of this. Everyone has forgotten that under Clinton N Korea had nuclear inspectors and no bomb. But after 9/11 they were ignored.
This could still go very wrong. I am amazed at S Korea and Japan's tolerance of N Korea.
Love the Dick Cheney quote. He was spot on. But 9/11 made them angry so they followed their guts rather then their brains.
Some day a 0.5Kg is going to fly within 10km of a heavy aircraft (that it would not even scratch) and it will be announced that the world will end.
But buy a few kg of perchlorate, make a 10kg rocket, add a couple of kg of ammonium nittrate and you have a different story.
The trick used to be how to control it so that it can find a target. But a Raspberry Pi with a small camera and some relatively simple software could easily identify an aeroplane against a blue sky. And shield it with a bit of aluminum foil.
The solution, of course, is to ban the sale of Raspbery Pis.
Because the lasers are really not much of a threat, despite the hype.
The number of laws, regulations and bureacratic systems has grown dramatically over the last 50 years. Why? Because we now have computer automation that enables bureacracies to implement them.
Consider the Tax Office / IRS. It has roughly the same budget (as a proportion of GDP) today as it had in the 1950s, before (electronic) computers. But the laws are much more complex today. Today's laws simply could not have been administered in the 1950s, without computer automation. And the more laws the more lawyers.
In the longer term (50..200 years) computers will be able to really think. At that stage it seems unlikely that they would want people around, let alone lawyers.
See http://www.computersthink.com/
+1
But what do you do if your E6-B has flat batteries.
Natural selection made people the way that we are. Not just our bodies, but also our minds, our personality, and in particular our goals which are ultimately directed at having grandchildren.
Would and indeed does natural selection play a role in selecting which AI projects get funded? And ultimately, if AIs can perform AI research without people, will natural selection guide AIs?
If so, what does that mean? Certainly and AI would not grow old in the sense that we grow old, and therefor would not need children.
http://www.computersthink.com/
By posing as customers the FBI could put lots of people in Jail. But Alford insisting that they arrest Ulbrict they just got one head. Not good for the KPIs. Not good at all.
This is a good move. NASA wastes billions on the space station, and now human Mars nonsense, and the only point is to produce television shows that make people feel good. With modern technology they can just produce fake pictures that will work about as well and then hopefully spend the real money on real science. I want to know about Europa. And have the Webb launched, and then replaced if the launch fails. Real science.
There is a good reason why nobody has gone back to the moon in 4 decades. Humans are obsolete technology for space travel. Have been for decades. As the machines become ever more intelligent the idea will seem more and more ludicrous.
A more interesting question, is will humans remain current technology here on earth over the next century or two.
http://www.computersthink.com/
I'm sorry, I have no idea what you are talking about.
If you do not have some kind of pre shared data it becomes trivial to insert a man in the middle, whatever mystical properties qbits have.
If there is substance to your claims, then a semi-technical paper would make your results much more widely known, if that is helpful. As it is all that I have got out of the discussion is that "somebody has done something with quantum crypto". Not very interesting.
(I have never read anything that makes a lot of sense about QKD.)
With the available information it is impossible for technical people like those that read SlashDot to make sense of anything. There is either the paper itself, which would require slogging through dozens of other papers to even make sense of it, or there is journalistic fluff that is completely meaningless. When you write for an academic audience in your discipline area you should be terse and obscure. But not for a general but technical audience.
My understanding of Quantum encryption is that two qubits are produced at the same time and one is sent to the encrypter and the other to the decrypter. Detecting them destroys them, defeating Eve the eavesdropper.
More importantly the process of creating these produces random qubits and they cannot be created to a specific pattern. Thus they cannot be regenerated in the same pattern that they were created, making like hard for Mallory the man in the middle.
There still needs to be some sort of digital signature to detect Mallory. But the argument goes that that would need to be broken in real time, and Quantum encryption is all about reading the back traffic.
So which part of that story have you attacked? And leave out the bits about the Frigembroten Sniggens defrobulation principals.
No, the trouble is that you just cannot implement an efficient garbage collector in C/++. So Java and .Net do their own compiling. C is only efficient if you think "C".