chinese and indian population and how that has affected global ecomony is a decoy. the recent lucidation of the impending event is meant only to scare the US out of their credit card debt they cant pay to keep “the centre of the economic world” in new york city. however, 180,000 mortgages defaulted this month and more federal debt interest than they can pay with every penny of tax revenue the hull is broke and there’s too much water to bail.

those who have been kind enough to point out that computers are only as good as the programs they run are, simply, correct. to worry about the number of 1’s or 0’s that travel through a given cpu per second is like worrying about how many rice are in your bowl. thus, whether its a faster processor or fibre optic internet unless someone programs somthing vastly ahead of its time very soon, we will get to google negligably quicker than right now.

without trying to beat a dead horse, the mindset that has led to the mortgage crash last week and the idea that anyone really cares about computers surfing faster than we can blink is the root of all three problems. since all three are far beyond the point where we, socially, could possibly counter their effects before impact, we must instead learn both how to stem the rising tide and adapt to our new circumstance. whether or not enough people can be made to realize this in time is our key.

and; while i did enjoy the video itself as a discussion point, i feel it was overtly sensational to be taken as anything more than a vague census and a nerd wishlist. but; so be it[/quote]

Ramble much?

Ok i totally just made all that shit up.[/quote]

Damn, I bet that’s pretty accurate. That’s a lot of V.

: )

[quote comment="24434"]It was interesting up until the end when they threw in those predictions about computers. Those kinds of predictions need to be taken with a grain of salt and are often looked back upon as laughable. How can someone tell you what will be invented 30 years from now? And if there is a computer created that exceeds the computational power of the human brain or even race, that does not mean artificial intelligence will be any better. That’s all in the programming and we’re nowhere near close to figure ourselves out yet.[/quote]

I agree… that was alittle rediclous, I’d rather have a world nuked to death then see it be tooken over by robots, (a crazy, yet, bevliveable common preidction.) and speaking of, the robot thing is overdone… so is the rest of this artcle merely asumtions? wheres the reasereach backup proof?

[quote comment="24433"]Is there no limit as to how small we can be made to feel. So much connection and yet so many more lonely people. My time at the lake with no computer is my real life time. I suck up the view and fill my mind, heart and soul.[/quote]
it’s shameful, the rest of the world is too busy fighting there own wars to take time and try to feel the same way.

as for the rest of us? we don’t get the chance

chinese and indian population and how that has affected global ecomony is a decoy. the recent lucidation of the impending event is meant only to scare the US out of their credit card debt they cant pay to keep “the centre of the economic world” in new york city. however, 180,000 mortgages defaulted this month and more federal debt interest than they can pay with every penny of tax revenue the hull is broke and there’s too much water to bail.

those who have been kind enough to point out that computers are only as good as the programs they run are, simply, correct. to worry about the number of 1’s or 0’s that travel through a given cpu per second is like worrying about how many rice are in your bowl. thus, whether its a faster processor or fibre optic internet unless someone programs somthing vastly ahead of its time very soon, we will get to google negligably quicker than right now.

without trying to beat a dead horse, the mindset that has led to the mortgage crash last week and the idea that anyone really cares about computers surfing faster than we can blink is the root of all three problems. since all three are far beyond the point where we, socially, could possibly counter their effects before impact, we must instead learn both how to stem the rising tide and adapt to our new circumstance. whether or not enough people can be made to realize this in time is our key.

and; while i did enjoy the video itself as a discussion point, i feel it was overtly sensational to be taken as anything more than a vague census and a nerd wishlist. but; so be it

Ok i totally just made all that shit up.

I guess the difference between me and a spring chicken is that I’m a little bit confounded by it all…the young ‘uns are just plain excited. On the other hand, it must be strange to be an old person right now - my mom still can’t program a VCR…can’t imagine what the world feels like to her…[/quote]

Excited??? at 21 i suppose i am not yet even a spring chicken in some minds, however the amount of children being born everyday is not remotely exciting, it is just plain scary. The world we live in is over populated as of now, just imagine in 3 years when I have finished my post secondary education ( which will be completly outdated ) how over populated the world will be… and to add on to all that… my computer as well as yours will be smarter then us all, that is not in any way exciting to me anyway.

However the barbies of my generation will only hope that the super smart computer daddy bought them comes in pink.

As indicated in many comments above. Intelligence and “calculations per second” are not the same thing. The creation of an intelligent machine and the improvement in computational speed are two entirely separate endeavors. Certainly, if we attain the first, the second will come in handy, but no serious headway has even been made at creating intelligent machines.

As way of example I give you Kasparov vs. Deep Blue

Since early on in computing the game of Chess was thought of a bit as the holy grail of artificial intelligence. The idea being that playing the highly complex game of chess at a high level represented an excellent example of human intelligence. If a computer could be built that could beat a human chess master we would be well on our way to having intelligent learning machines.

In 1997 IBM’s Deep Blue computer took on reigning champion Kasparov in a much publicized battle. Deep Blue won two games, Kasparov won one, and they played to three draws.

In my opinion the match did more to demonstrate how amazing the human mind is and how far we are from recreating it than anything else. Why? Well because Deep Blue did not exhibit intelligence, it’s just a really fast abacus.

While there was certainly really cool computer science behind Deep Blue it basically played chess by brute force. Before it ever made a move it compared the board to it’s massive database of billions of games to determine the move most likely to result in a victory. It “learned” every time it played, which basically meant it added more games to its database.

Human beings do not play chess like that at all. What I find so amazing about the whole process is that any human being could stand up to that at all. I have read a few different descriptions from champions about how they decide on a move, but what it comes down to is that we have no idea how our heads work. Kasparov certainly pulled from a great deal of experience, and has a lot of that experience embedded in his memory, but ultimately he simply develops a feel or an intuition about the correct move. Deep Blue doesn’t do anything like that and it is a testament to what human beings can accomplish.

So it doesn’t matter if a computer is sitting on your desktop that represents more computational power than the entire human race combined. Until we make the leap to creating intelligent machines all the thing is going to do is sit there being a stupid box. Waiting for us to ask it what 2 plus 2 is, at which point it will tell us 4 with remarkable speed and precision.

He has a new one out entitled “The Singularity is Near” — the focus of the introduction is entirely devoted to exponential growth. A must read for anyone in the market for a computer, or for anyone who just purchased one and wishes to calculate its looming obsolesence

[quote comment="24438"]bibliography???[/quote]

Apt! Apt! Context is everything. Epic music does not constitute truth. At least not here.

The founder of IBM once said back in the 60’s I think, “There may be a market for 5 personal computers in the world.”
At least I think it was 5….
Regardless, I think he was a little off[/quote]

He said “I think there is a world market for maybe five computers,” in 1943. ;)

Just a thought.

There are more calculations than just math.

Think about when you catch a football. You calculate it’s velocity, trajectory, compensate for gravity, wind. You position your body in such a way to catch it, adjust your hands to grab it. Every one of those tiny adjustments in your body is a careful calculation. We don’t even think about them, and it happens within the fraction of a second.

I come home from my morning class, turn on the idiot box, and lo and behold: AG Seedy Gonzales is resigning.

One more rat deserts in a cloud of smoke, shit, and lies.

ps. i am apart of the myspace nation

PSS. This was posted from a Nintendo Wii !!!