466 replies to this topic

[Elus]

They're talking about super computers there. It will be awhile before you see that at walmart. I'd be satisfied with a teraflop on my desk. Maybe with a TF I could run windows without any lag.

Well, they said "especially" for supercomuting applications, so I suppose you're right. But I'm sure this could also be applied to personal computers.

[Reno]

They're talking about super computers there. It will be awhile before you see that at walmart. I'd be satisfied with a teraflop on my desk. Maybe with a TF I could run windows without any lag.

Well, they said "especially" for supercomuting applications, so I suppose you're right. But I'm sure this could also be applied to personal computers.

The experts ten years ago said we'd have 40-50 Ghz for personal computers now. I'm still waiting.

[Elus]

They're talking about super computers there. It will be awhile before you see that at walmart. I'd be satisfied with a teraflop on my desk. Maybe with a TF I could run windows without any lag.

Well, they said "especially" for supercomuting applications, so I suppose you're right. But I'm sure this could also be applied to personal computers.

The experts ten years ago said we'd have 40-50 Ghz for personal computers now. I'm still waiting.

Did they? Can you provide a source?

I understand your skepticism, but look at it from the other angle. People have been predicting the end of Moore's Law for ages. This is basically a slap in their face.

Edited by Elus, 04 December 2010 - 11:22 PM.

[Reno]

Did they? Can you provide a source?

I understand your skepticism, but look at it from the other angle. People have been predicting the end of Moore's Law for ages. This is basically a slap in their face.

Do I need to? Who cares? We've all heard predictions that didn't pan out. I just happen to believe it's because half the advancements are withheld for the government.

Edited by Reno, 05 December 2010 - 01:59 AM.

[Elus]

Did they? Can you provide a source?

I understand your skepticism, but look at it from the other angle. People have been predicting the end of Moore's Law for ages. This is basically a slap in their face.

Do I need to? Who cares? We've all heard predictions that didn't pan out. I just happen to believe it's because half the advancements are withheld for the government.

Yes, we've heard predictions that didn't pan out, and we've also heard naysayers who claimed "X" would never happen. I was trying to point out that this could be a major advance that may prove the naysayers wrong about the end of Moore's Law. If not, big deal. No need to be that negative about the future of nanotech and computing, considering that this IS a thread about the future of nanotech and computing.

P.S. The tidbit about the government holding all the advances for themselves, considering we live in a world where science and discoveries are available for everyone see, wasn't a necessary comment on your part. Let's not turn this into a political debate on how "evil" government is.

Edited by Elus, 05 December 2010 - 04:12 AM.

[valkyrie_ice]

Interesting news Elus. I can see that we may have three possible contenders now for the next gen computers, Graphene, Quantum and photonic.


However, photonic computers have been being played with for nearly 30 years now, and have yet to be put to practical use. Until further details of the manufacturing processes come out, I am still putting my money on graphene as the frontrunner. Among other things, carbon is proving to be both a structural as well as an electronic material. That means that not only can you build extremely durable structures using it, but those structures can SIMULTANEOUSLY be electronic devices as well.


Regardless, it is going to be interesting watching the developments.

[Reno]

Yes, we've heard predictions that didn't pan out, and we've also heard naysayers who claimed "X" would never happen. I was trying to point out that this could be a major advance that may prove the naysayers wrong about the end of Moore's Law. If not, big deal. No need to be that negative about the future of nanotech and computing, considering that this IS a thread about the future of nanotech and computing.

P.S. The tidbit about the government holding all the advances for themselves, considering we live in a world where science and discoveries are available for everyone see, wasn't a necessary comment on your part. Let's not turn this into a political debate on how "evil" government is.

I think your stuffing words into my mouth with the evil government bit. I definitely do not consider myself a dystopian. The majority of fun tech projects out there are funded with government money. The government gets the good stuff first in order to militarize it for research and use on other countries. This is why we don't use underground bunkers to test new nuclear bombs anymore.

Edited by Reno, 05 December 2010 - 08:10 PM.

[Elus]

Yes, we've heard predictions that didn't pan out, and we've also heard naysayers who claimed "X" would never happen. I was trying to point out that this could be a major advance that may prove the naysayers wrong about the end of Moore's Law. If not, big deal. No need to be that negative about the future of nanotech and computing, considering that this IS a thread about the future of nanotech and computing.

P.S. The tidbit about the government holding all the advances for themselves, considering we live in a world where science and discoveries are available for everyone see, wasn't a necessary comment on your part. Let's not turn this into a political debate on how "evil" government is.

I think your stuffing words into my mouth with the evil government bit. I definitely do not consider myself a dystopian. The majority of fun tech projects out there are funded with government money. The government gets the good stuff first in order to militarize it for research and use on other countries. This is why we don't use underground bunkers to test new nuclear bombs anymore.

Alright, perhaps I misinterpreted what you said then.

The rate at which we adopt new technologies is growing exponentially, as Kurzweil has pointed out. Perhaps that will also mean that tech will be spending less time in government hands after initial development and more time in public ones (Manufacturers for everyday goods, for instance).

[valkyrie_ice]

And this is why I say that the harder those in power seek to repress and prevent the free spread of information, the more they simply hurry innovation along:

http://www.newscient...e-internet.html

Info pirates seek an alternative internet

• 17:23 06 December 2010 by Paul Marks

After dumping thousands of secret US diplomatic cables in the public domain last week, WikiLeaks ended up losing its web hosting company – twice – and its wikileaks.org web domain to boot as providers got cold feet about its content. But a plan being hatched by fellow travellers in the file-sharing community may shield the controversial data dumper from such takedowns in future.

It all started with a tweet on 28 November: "Hello all ISPs of the world. We're going to add a new competing root-server since we're tired of ICANN. Please contact me to help."

This missive, complaining about the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers, was from Peter Sunde, an anti-copyright activist based in Sweden and one of the founders of The Pirate Bay website, which tracks the locations of copyrighted movie and music BitTorrent files. It instantly lit a flame among file-sharers. "That small tweet turned into a lot of interest,"Sunde blogged two days later. "We haven't organised yet, but are trying to… we want the internet to be uncensored. Having a centralised system that controls our information flow is not acceptable."


Taken down on a whim
What's their beef? The file-sharers believe that ICANN, which controls the internet's domain name system (DNS), takes down web domains at the whim of politicians and industry bosses, if they are considered to infringe the law. The DNS is effectively a phone book for the net, a look-up table which converts a website's URL into a machine-readable IP address that locates the relevant server and brings users their requested page. The DNS comprises 13 large registry computers, called root servers, dotted around the world. Each holds an identical copy of the internet's master look-up table. If a domain is deemed illegal, ICANN can render it useless by simply steering traffic away from it.

Sunde has lost at least one domain this way, seeing it taken over by music trade body the International Federation of the Phonographic Industry and, with others, faces a huge fine and prison for running The Pirate Bay. The wikileaks.org domain name was lost last week when the provider, EveryDNS, terminated it.

So activists, led by Sunde, hope to construct an alternative registry: one that will initially work like existing systems, but which in the long run will become a decentralised, peer-to-peer (P2P) system in which volunteers each run a portion of a DNS on their own computers. By breaking up the internet phone book and hosting it in pieces, they will strip ICANN of its power. Any domain it tries to take away will still be accessible on the alternative registry.


Eminently feasible
The exercise that Sunde and his colleagues are undertaking - if it ever gets off the ground - is reminiscent of Search Wikia, an attempt to make a distributed ad-free search engine to rival Google. Run by Wikipedia founder Jimmy Wales, the site aimed to be open and honest about its search algorithm, so that advertisers couldn't exploit loopholes in it for unfair advantage. But with its index spread around a few thousand volunteer servers, it could not reach anything like Google's scale or speed, and folded its tent in April 2009.

Oddly, Wikia - the parent company of Wikipedia - owns the domain names wikileaks.net, wikileaks.com and wikileaks.us - for reasons not yet clear. They expire in January.

Ben Laurie, a London-based security consultant and a former technical adviser to WikiLeaks, thinks the alternative internet idea is eminently feasible. "Technically, this is all pretty easy. What they have put together already is really quite professional. Persuading everybody to use it is going to be the difficult bit. Why should people trust it more than ICANN's root server?"

He thinks WikiLeaks is the kind of premium content that could convince people to take it up. If it works, a sort of "shadow internet" could form, one in which legal action against counterfeiters and copyright scofflaws would be nearly impossible.


Whose internet?
Still, ICANN does a lot of work managing the 280 top level domains – such as .com and .org plus the 248 national suffixes – and the frequent changes made to them. "A lot of people think ICANN is a waste of time, and I often agree, but it does some important things these people will not be able to," says Laurie.

Indeed. The back story to all this is that Sunde and colleagues Carl Lundstrom and Fredrik Neij, on 26 November lost an appeal in the Swedish courts and face a £4.2 million fine - and prison terms varying from four to 10 months - for running the Pirate Bay. They are now making a final appeal to Sweden's Supreme Court.

Laurie feels ICANN's proprietorial attitude to the net needs challenging. He recalls a manager from one of ICANN's political overseers, the US Department of Commerce, collaring him at an Internet Engineering Task Force meeting. "I've come to find out what you are doing with my internet," she said. That's an attitude the P2P DNS crowd will surely be hoping to change.

Edited by valkyrie_ice, 06 December 2010 - 09:32 PM.

[valkyrie_ice]

and two nice videos on advancements in quadrotors

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eWmVrfjDCyw&feature=player_embedded


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g8O5RBcwmjY&feature=player_embedded


Oh, and H+ just published this article I wrote on Wikileaks and the war between secrecy and transparency

http://hplusmagazine...nd-transparency

R.U. did a rush job publishing this one. I just submitted it last night, and it was up in 45 minutes.

Edited by valkyrie_ice, 07 December 2010 - 08:26 PM.

[Elus]

and two nice videos on advancements in quadrotors

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eWmVrfjDCyw&feature=player_embedded


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g8O5RBcwmjY&feature=player_embedded


Oh, and H+ just published this article I wrote on Wikileaks and the war between secrecy and transparency

http://hplusmagazine...nd-transparency

R.U. did a rush job publishing this one. I just submitted it last night, and it was up in 45 minutes.

I'm a huge supporter of wikileaks, but I am not a supporter of invasion of personal privacy. My thoughts and efforts are my own, and I should choose whether or not I want to share them. No one else should choose for me. I would rather have a world where I didn't know for sure that everyone was telling the truth, then a world where I lose my ability to have my own privacy.

That said, those who enforce and create law (the government) should show transparency and wikileaks is a fantastic step in that direction.

Edited by Elus, 07 December 2010 - 09:48 PM.

[valkyrie_ice]

I'm a huge supporter of wikileaks, but I am not a supporter of invasion of personal privacy. My thoughts and efforts are my own, and I should choose whether or not I want to share them. No one else should choose for me. I would rather have a world where I didn't know for sure that everyone was telling the truth, then a world where I lose my ability to have my own privacy.

That said, those who enforce and create law (the government) should show transparency and wikileaks is a fantastic step in that direction.

How do you lose your privacy? You have none outside the home already, and the "lifeblogging" records are private.

Let's take for an example this:

You own a gun. Without your knowledge, your child took it out of the house to show friends, and it was stolen, and he was afraid to tell you it was missing. At 3 am the Cops show up and arrest you, as the owner of the gun, for a murder, after finding your gun, with your dna and your prints on it (your kid was wearing gloves that day because it was cold)

You were alone, at home, watching pron on tv. You have no alibi, and the victim just by chance happens to be your worst enemy. You had no idea the gun was even missing, but there you are, a suspect with almost every clue condemning you.

Now suppose you have a lifeblogging VR phone, and you were using it to have VR sex instead. The SOLE part of all the data that was recorded that you need is the GPS location data that will verify that YOU WERE HOME AT THE TIME OF THE MURDER, and the case falls apart. Exactly WHAT you were doing is not need to know info for the police, just your location, in a concrete, verifiable record that cannot be disputed. You might be able to "alter" your personal record, but you would not have access to the VR carrier's computers, which would verify your GPS location, again without revealing what you were doing.

You still have privacy. What you DO NOT HAVE is secrecy.

[Reno]

If you want privacy, you can get it. It just means going without all the social site junk most people in the world say they can't live without.

Val, what your talking about is protection from one's own stupidity in exchange for an expectation of privacy. If you would have locked your gun in a secure area you wouldn't need to depend on VR sex records to find an alibi. If a person refrains from being a dumbass they have no need to give up their privacy. What I am saying is, privacy exists. It just takes more effort to maintain nowadays.

[Elus]

I'm a huge supporter of wikileaks, but I am not a supporter of invasion of personal privacy. My thoughts and efforts are my own, and I should choose whether or not I want to share them. No one else should choose for me. I would rather have a world where I didn't know for sure that everyone was telling the truth, then a world where I lose my ability to have my own privacy.

That said, those who enforce and create law (the government) should show transparency and wikileaks is a fantastic step in that direction.

How do you lose your privacy? You have none outside the home already, and the "lifeblogging" records are private.

Let's take for an example this:

You own a gun. Without your knowledge, your child took it out of the house to show friends, and it was stolen, and he was afraid to tell you it was missing. At 3 am the Cops show up and arrest you, as the owner of the gun, for a murder, after finding your gun, with your dna and your prints on it (your kid was wearing gloves that day because it was cold)

You were alone, at home, watching pron on tv. You have no alibi, and the victim just by chance happens to be your worst enemy. You had no idea the gun was even missing, but there you are, a suspect with almost every clue condemning you.

Now suppose you have a lifeblogging VR phone, and you were using it to have VR sex instead. The SOLE part of all the data that was recorded that you need is the GPS location data that will verify that YOU WERE HOME AT THE TIME OF THE MURDER, and the case falls apart. Exactly WHAT you were doing is not need to know info for the police, just your location, in a concrete, verifiable record that cannot be disputed. You might be able to "alter" your personal record, but you would not have access to the VR carrier's computers, which would verify your GPS location, again without revealing what you were doing.

You still have privacy. What you DO NOT HAVE is secrecy.

Okay, I see what you mean. So I would still have the privacy of my own home - as long as there's no camera there, watching me shower and sing, I'll be fine .

And, just to note: There will always be some secrecy. As the technology of detectability improves, so will the technology of stealth. There's probably some happy equilibrium.

[Reno]

Okay, I see what you mean. So I would still have the privacy of my own home - as long as there's no camera there, watching me shower and sing, I'll be fine .

And, just to note: There will always be some secrecy. As the technology of detectability improves, so will the technology of stealth. There's probably some happy equilibrium.

The Light of other Days

Read that book. It'll blow your mind..

Edited by Reno, 08 December 2010 - 07:22 AM.

[valkyrie_ice]

Okay, I see what you mean. So I would still have the privacy of my own home - as long as there's no camera there, watching me shower and sing, I'll be fine .

And, just to note: There will always be some secrecy. As the technology of detectability improves, so will the technology of stealth. There's probably some happy equilibrium.

Yes, there may indeed be some secrets still, but they will be so hard to keep secret that it will keep them severely limited. There are a very limited number of legitimate reasons for secrecy. However if some of David Brin's idea's, like the henchmen amnesty law, become accepted, the kind of widespread secrecy to avoid accountability we have now will become nearly impossible, making criminal use of secrecy unlikely.

To explain the Henchmen Amnesty law, it is basically a very large reward combined with a complete pardon for any underling of a criminal to turn in their bosses. Combined with a "Whistleblower reward" for anyone who turns in evidence of a crime it will be a massive deterrent to any kind of criminal activity. Combine lifeblog records with these laws and you basically are likely to have a nearly 100% conviction rate for any serious crime, which in turn, because 90% of laws are intended to enforce accountability and most "failures" of that law are because insufficient evidence can be assembled to prove that the culprit committed the crime, it will not only reduce the number of needed laws, but ensure that only those who commit the crime pays for it.

Edited by valkyrie_ice, 08 December 2010 - 07:34 AM.

[valkyrie_ice]

The Light of other Days

Read that book. It'll blow your mind..

I have it in RTF format on my HD already.

[valkyrie_ice]

If you want privacy, you can get it. It just means going without all the social site junk most people in the world say they can't live without.

Val, what your talking about is protection from one's own stupidity in exchange for an expectation of privacy. If you would have locked your gun in a secure area you wouldn't need to depend on VR sex records to find an alibi. If a person refrains from being a dumbass they have no need to give up their privacy. What I am saying is, privacy exists. It just takes more effort to maintain nowadays.

It might be a bad example, Reno. There are millions of others, such as having a record when the office jackass grabs your breast, or recording the face of your mugger.


Regardless, to enable VR and AR, by default you will be making a record of yourself and your environment. And you will be using that record to augment your memory, record verbal contracts, prove what you really said when someone else misremembers your words, etc.


Basically, environmental recording and lifeblogging is a necessary enabling technology to too many other technologies to believe it will NOT become a fact of life.

[valkyrie_ice]

Okay, this one blew MY mind:




http://nextbigfuture.com/2010/12/ucsf-team-develops-logic-gates-to.html

A team of UCSF researchers has engineered E. coli with the key molecular circuitry that will enable genetic engineers to program cells to communicate and perform computations.

The work builds into cells the same logic gates found in electronic computers and creates a method to create circuits by “rewiring” communications between cells. This system can be harnessed to turn cells into miniature computers

Nature - Robust multicellular computing using genetically encoded NOR gates and chemical ‘wires’

That, in turn, will enable cells to be programmed with more intricate functions for a variety of purposes, including agriculture and the production of pharmaceuticals, materials and industrial chemicals, according to Christopher A. Voigt, PhD, a synthetic biologist and associate professor in the UCSF School of Pharmacy’s Department of Pharmaceutical Chemistry who is senior author of the paper.

The most common electronic computers are digital, he explained; that is, they apply logic operations to streams of 1’s and 0’s to produce more complex functions, ultimately producing the software with which most people are familiar. These logic operations are the basis for cellular computation, as well.

“We think of electronic currents as doing computation, but any substrate can act like a computer, including gears, pipes of water, and cells,” Voigt said. “Here, we’ve taken a colony of bacteria that are receiving two chemical signals from their neighbors, and have created the same logic gates that form the basis of silicon computing.”

The Nature paper describes how the Voigt team built simple logic gates out of genes and inserted them into separate E. coli strains. The gate controls the release and sensing of a chemical signal, which allows the gates to be connected among bacteria much the way electrical gates would be on a circuit board.

“The purpose of programming cells is not to have them overtake electronic computers,” explained Voigt, whom Scientist magazine named a “scientist to watch” in 2007 and whose work is included among the Scientist’s Top 10 Innovations of 2009. “Rather, it is to be able to access all of the things that biology can do in a reliable, programmable way.”

Computation underlies the organization of cells into higher-order structures, for example during development or the spatial association of bacteria in a biofilm. Each cell performs a simple computational operation, but when combined with cell–cell communication, intricate patterns emerge. Here we study this process by combining a simple genetic circuit with quorum sensing to produce more complex computations in space. We construct a simple NOR logic gate in Escherichia coli by arranging two tandem promoters that function as inputs to drive the transcription of a repressor. The repressor inactivates a promoter that serves as the output. Individual colonies of E. coli carry the same NOR gate, but the inputs and outputs are wired to different orthogonal quorum-sensing ‘sender’ and ‘receiver’ devices4, 5. The quorum molecules form the wires between gates. By arranging the colonies in different spatial configurations, all possible two-input gates are produced, including the difficult XOR and EQUALS functions. The response is strong and robust, with 5- to up to 300-fold changes between the ‘on’ and ‘off’ states. This work helps elucidate the design rules by which simple logic can be harnessed to produce diverse and complex calculations by rewiring communication between cells

[Reno]

Most likely VR will become a fact of life. Whether VR will provide a hard record is another thing altogether. I would rather see research done to perfect human memory as it exists today. After all, if an electromagnetic pulse rips through my city, I want to be able to remember verbatim the survival text I read twenty years ago. If I depended on VR I'd be out of luck.

I don't want to share my information with ANY people. Anonymity provides a layer of privacy. It isolates a person from the outside world. Networked VR is different from VR. I could handle a regular VR overlay for my personal use, but there is no way in hell I would agree to network my environment to another group of people.

Edited by Reno, 09 December 2010 - 05:33 AM.

[valkyrie_ice]

Most likely VR will become a fact of life. Whether VR will provide a hard record is another thing altogether. I would rather see research done to perfect human memory as it exists today. After all, if an electromagnetic pulse rips through my city, I want to be able to remember verbatim the survival text I read twenty years ago. If I depended on VR I'd be out of luck.

I don't want to share my information with ANY people. Anonymity provides a layer of privacy. It isolates a person from the outside world. Networked VR is different from VR. I could handle a regular VR overlay for my personal use, but there is no way in hell I would agree to network my environment to another group of people.

Reno, I would almost suspect that you are deliberately misunderstanding me, except that seems out of character for you. At what point did I say you HAD to share your information?

A lifeblog is YOUR PERSONAL DATA STORE. It would be your's and your's alone. The data shared from it would be under your control. If you needed it to prove a court case, ONLY THE INFORMATION YOU CHOSE TO SHARE would be available.

However, your interactions with another person are NOT PRIVATE, and thus subject to recording by their lifeblog. This data is therefore not subject to the same restrictions. The same goes for any activities you do outside your own home, which could not only be recorded by surveillance cams, but by all other individuals with lifeblogs/VR.

You can indeed remain "anonymous" by isolating yourself in your house and performing all interactions with the world outside via drone and Avatar. If you are that rabidly obsessed with anonymity, feel free to do so. However, certain data will still be open to the public, in order to authenticate your drone as your representative for you. What that data will be is still being worked out, see this article on H+ ( http://hplusmagazine...-digital-people )

There are many aspects of VR that will remain private, for example your personal VR space might render everyone nude. Despite the social rudeness this might appear to be, there is really little that can be done to stop it, and little point. You might also chose to have an Avatar that is little more than a stickfigure, with no possible identifying features. Privacy can be maintained, within very liberal and practical limits, but secrecy, i.e. preventing anyone and everyone from knowing who you are and thus being able to perform acts which cannot be attributed to you (making you unaccountable) will be very difficult to do. It will require a program which can not only prevent the vr net from recording you, but prevent every camera, lifeblog, or VR device you interact with or pass by from recording you or acknowledging your presence.

Oh, and there are any number of very easy ways to prevent EMP from damaging electronics. Faraday cages for example.

And it's yet to be proven whether graphene, quantum computers or lightbased computers would even be vulnerable to EMP.

Edited by valkyrie_ice, 09 December 2010 - 06:03 AM.

[valkyrie_ice]

Humm Reno, I'm reading "Light from Other Days" and this sounds all too familiar

But despite protests from campaigners against the erosion of rights,everybody seemed to accept that as far as its use in criminal investigation andprosecution was concerned, the WormCam was here to stay; it was simply toopowerful to ignore.

Some philosophers argued that this was no bad thing. After all, humanshad evolved to live in small groups in which everybody knew everybody else, andstrangers were rarely encountered; it was only recently, in evolutionary terms,that people had been forced to live in larger communities like cities, crammedtogether with friends and strangers alike. The WormCam was bringing a return toolder ways of living, of thinking about other people and interacting with them,

The "wormcam" is in no essential feature other than the "timecam" different than what a "lifeblog" will be, and this particular argument is nearly identical with what I stated in the opening paragraphs of my article. It's interesting to see Clark making the same case.

[valkyrie_ice]

Further notes on LFOD: It's a pity Clark didn't live to see the current advances in stemcells quantum dots, graphene and such. It makes the future being portrayed rather poorly realized. Darkness would not be much of a shield against any number of surveillance techniques common today, let alone to qdot cameras able to see both ultraviolet and infrared, and the utter lack of body sculpting is seriously ruining my suspension of disbelief.


However, nearly every effect he is describing is identical to what will occur with lifeblogs and VR. Considering your recommendation of this book Reno, I really wonder why you question my predictions so much?


also the "softscreens". Completely likely given qdot impregnated cloth, and even without VR would enable someone to look like their Avatar. Even I didn't think of this application at first, but a person wearing a full Qdot body suit could look anyway they wish even if someone was looking at them without VR enabled lenses. Going to have to make an update to my article on Qdots. Thanks Reno.


And yes, what that could mean is that all I need wear until a full body rebuild is possible is a qdot skinsuit.

[Reno]

Most likely VR will become a fact of life.

I did say the above earlier. I never said what you predicted wouldn't come to pass.

I just don't see some of the utilitarian uses to be as certain. Recording a record of my life to be stored on a server outside my control is sharing my information with other people. If the server is within my home then sure, I could handle that. I'm not depending on the ethics of others to keep my personal data secure.

The book goes a bit deeper the further you go. I suggested it because it seemed right up your alley, and because the story takes what we're discussing here and runs about 150 years with it.

[valkyrie_ice]

Most likely VR will become a fact of life.

I did say the above earlier. I never said what you predicted wouldn't come to pass.

I just don't see some of the utilitarian uses to be as certain. Recording a record of my life to be stored on a server outside my control is sharing my information with other people. If the server is within my home then sure, I could handle that. I'm not depending on the ethics of others to keep my personal data secure.

The book goes a bit deeper the further you go. I suggested it because it seemed right up your alley, and because the story takes what we're discussing here and runs about 150 years with it.

Actually the story only covers about four years in narrative, then jumps 35, then 60 with almost no details given of those two periods.


However, seriously Reno, you know about the coming computers and the various kinds of megamemory that are in the works, I'm talking about devices that store your data IN YOUR SMARTPHONE VR for personal records. Where ever did you get the idea I was talking about a server farm keeping them?

[Reno]

However, seriously Reno, you know about the coming computers and the various kinds of megamemory that are in the works, I'm talking about devices that store your data IN YOUR SMARTPHONE VR for personal records. Where ever did you get the idea I was talking about a server farm keeping them?

You were describing it as everyone was linked in various environments as though they were part of some VR social network. I don't remember you describing personal storage for your version of VR. I guess it was my turn to misunderstand someone..

Have you finished the book already? At the end I remember it jumping far into the future as a character is resurrected long after he has died. I got the impression it was at least a hundred years after the book begins.

Edited by Reno, 09 December 2010 - 05:32 PM.

[valkyrie_ice]

However, seriously Reno, you know about the coming computers and the various kinds of megamemory that are in the works, I'm talking about devices that store your data IN YOUR SMARTPHONE VR for personal records. Where ever did you get the idea I was talking about a server farm keeping them?

You were describing it as everyone was linked in various environments as though they were part of some VR social network. I don't remember you describing personal storage for your version of VR. I guess it was my turn to misunderstand someone..

Have you finished the book already? At the end I remember it jumping far into the future as a character is resurrected long after he has died. I got the impression it was at least a hundred years after the book begins.

People will be linked in various environments, in which their avatar data will be used to enable interaction. At what point does that make it "Personal data"? That's like saying the login name you use on a forum tells everyone every personal detail about you.

Your data will be recorded by your personal unit. Public appearances by you will be recorded by who knows how many units, but will still only record your actions, and not access your personal data or VR space UNLESS you "login" to a shared VR "world" like you sign in to a forum, in which case the information shared will be subject to your instructions. Pretty much like today, except I expect you will probably have a lot more control over what data is shared.
And yes. I have a casual reading speed of about 800 to a thousand words per minute. I finished last night.


IF timeviewer tech becomes possible, then I can see the concept of eventual "resurrection" of the entire human species, ala Riverworld, becoming feasible. Still not sure it would actually happen though. It would be a massive trauma for 99.9% of humanity to wake up in a post singularity world.

Edited by valkyrie_ice, 09 December 2010 - 06:00 PM.

[Reno]

Shoot, that's fast. I don't know if I'd enjoy reading as much if i blew through books that quick. If I remember right I read that one in a week or so. I tend to only read at night. It helps me slow down my mind before going to sleep. If it wasn't for books, I imagine I'd spend a few hours each night staring at the ceiling.

I find predicting the singularity to be entertaining, but I really doubt the future will look anything like what most of us believe. I think it'll be far more complicated. I imagine the flood of information will become overwhelming to any one individual. Anonymity will probably become the only way for most people to get any form of privacy. If timeviewer tech comes out then even that will be out the window. That is why I hope when time travel is accomplished it will be through a difficult, expensive, and complex process.

Edited by Reno, 10 December 2010 - 05:26 AM.

[valkyrie_ice]

Shoot, that's fast. I don't know if I'd enjoy reading as much if i blew through books that quick. If I remember right I read that one in a week or so. I tend to only read at night. It helps me slow down my mind before going to sleep. If it wasn't for books, I imagine I'd spend a few hours each night staring at the ceiling.

I find predicting the singularity to be entertaining, but I really doubt the future will look anything like what most of us believe. I think it'll be far more complicated. I imagine the flood of information will become overwhelming to any one individual. Anonymity will probably become the only way for most people to get any form of privacy. If timeviewer tech comes out then even that will be out the window. That is why I hope when time travel is accomplished it will be through a difficult, expensive, and complex process.

Reading actually sets my mind racing as I analyze the data.


As for time viewing tech, even if it is a difficult, expensive and complex process, given time it will become easy, cheap and simple enough a chimpanzee could use it. Like the iPhone XD


I simply chose to not be embarrassed by anything humans do. I have to assume that since eventually it will happen if it is possible, it's already going on.


There are three things we can assume, 1 If time travel is possible, it is occuring. 2 if it is possible, paradoxes cannot be caused. 3 that there's bugger all we can do about it in any case.


Assume it's going on. Maybe that sense we have of being watched is real.

[valkyrie_ice]

Val's latest article: http://hplusmagazine...rld-and-virtual

If you remember my very first article on H+, you might remember this quote: "With the upcoming release of "Project Natal", the Emotiv Epoc neural headset, a variety of video glasses such as Limus's see-through glasses, and a computer or console game, basic virtual reality is now a reality."

It's called the Kinect now, and with all the news recently about its being 'hacked' I thought it was worth revisiting that original concept and cover it a bit more in depth and explain why the Kinect is so very much more than a "mere" console game controller.

There are lots of videos on the various uses of the Kinect, and the forum wouldn't let me post them all so go check them out