Comments on: The Future http://www.sciencebase.com/science-blog/the-future.html Science Blog from Freelance Science Writer David Bradley Sat, 07 Nov 2009 00:41:44 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.5 hourly 1 By: Tony Clarke http://www.sciencebase.com/science-blog/the-future.html/comment-page-1#comment-607635 Tony Clarke Mon, 29 Dec 2008 08:21:44 +0000 http://www.sciencebase.com/science-blog/the-future.html#comment-607635 Are you really sure about the time that TV took. Most people in USA think that all inventions come from there. The first free-to-air TV service was from the BBC in 1936. There was a bit of a hiatus starting in September 1939. The computer was invented (sort of came together) to crack the German Enigma Machine, between 1940 and 1944. 'Tis possible that things are speeding up even more that you said. Are you really sure about the time that TV took. Most people in USA think that all inventions come from there. The first free-to-air TV service was from the BBC in 1936. There was a bit of a hiatus starting in September 1939. The computer was invented (sort of came together) to crack the German Enigma Machine, between 1940 and 1944. ‘Tis possible that things are speeding up even more that you said.

]]> By: David Bradley http://www.sciencebase.com/science-blog/the-future.html/comment-page-1#comment-590906 David Bradley Wed, 03 Dec 2008 07:26:17 +0000 http://www.sciencebase.com/science-blog/the-future.html#comment-590906 @Pio A computer beating a grandmaster at chess is not quite what the concept of a technological singularity is about. As to freewill and god. There is evidence that what we think of as freewill is merely an afterthought in terms of the electrical signals and that our brain's decide for us nanoseconds before our consciousness becomes aware of many decisions, so I'm not sure how that notion of love being returned freely works. @Iain The Gascoigne quote is literally, obviously, basically a classic for the Colemanballs archives. @Pio A computer beating a grandmaster at chess is not quite what the concept of a technological singularity is about. As to freewill and god. There is evidence that what we think of as freewill is merely an afterthought in terms of the electrical signals and that our brain’s decide for us nanoseconds before our consciousness becomes aware of many decisions, so I’m not sure how that notion of love being returned freely works.

@Iain The Gascoigne quote is literally, obviously, basically a classic for the Colemanballs archives.

]]> By: Pio Yap http://www.sciencebase.com/science-blog/the-future.html/comment-page-1#comment-590892 Pio Yap Wed, 03 Dec 2008 06:26:59 +0000 http://www.sciencebase.com/science-blog/the-future.html#comment-590892 In many aspects the computer has already outdistanced humans. It can even beat a world grandmaster in the game of chess. But can emotion be programmed into it? More scary is can it have free will and be ambitious and greedy? Barring Asimov's laws of robotic, that would mean the end of the hman civilization. But I don't think that free will would ever be duplicated by us in our inventions. I think that free will is an inimitable creation of God alone - to ensure that His love is truly responded in return. In many aspects the computer has already outdistanced humans. It can even beat a world grandmaster in the game of chess.
But can emotion be programmed into it? More scary is can it have free will and be ambitious and greedy? Barring Asimov’s laws of robotic, that would mean the end of the hman civilization.
But I don’t think that free will would ever be duplicated by us in our inventions. I think that free will is an inimitable creation of God alone – to ensure that His love is truly responded in return.

]]> By: Iain McLeman http://www.sciencebase.com/science-blog/the-future.html/comment-page-1#comment-590760 Iain McLeman Wed, 03 Dec 2008 00:31:12 +0000 http://www.sciencebase.com/science-blog/the-future.html#comment-590760 If the "pundits" predict it... “Fooling around with alternating current is just a waste of time. Nobody will use it, ever.” — Thomas Edison, 1889 http://listverse.com/history/top-30-failed-technology-predictions/ "I never predict anything, and I never will." - Paul Gascoigne If the “pundits” predict it…

“Fooling around with alternating current is just a waste of time. Nobody will use it, ever.” — Thomas Edison, 1889

http://listverse.com/history/top-30-failed-technology-predictions/

“I never predict anything, and I never will.” – Paul Gascoigne

]]> By: David Bradley http://www.sciencebase.com/science-blog/the-future.html/comment-page-1#comment-590683 David Bradley Tue, 02 Dec 2008 20:56:07 +0000 http://www.sciencebase.com/science-blog/the-future.html#comment-590683 You're right John, nothing new under the sun, eh? I think the futurologists and those predicting a technological singularity are anticipating that Moore's Law is going to take us to a point some time soon when the sophistication of computers will hit a tipping point after which they will be able to design/evolve new machines that then become exponentially more powerful much more rapidly than we have seen over the last few decades since quarks and chips were invented. They could be wrong. You’re right John, nothing new under the sun, eh? I think the futurologists and those predicting a technological singularity are anticipating that Moore’s Law is going to take us to a point some time soon when the sophistication of computers will hit a tipping point after which they will be able to design/evolve new machines that then become exponentially more powerful much more rapidly than we have seen over the last few decades since quarks and chips were invented. They could be wrong.

]]> By: Johnx http://www.sciencebase.com/science-blog/the-future.html/comment-page-1#comment-590524 Johnx Tue, 02 Dec 2008 14:55:17 +0000 http://www.sciencebase.com/science-blog/the-future.html#comment-590524 I submit that this is not a new phenomena, and that it likely commenced during WWII. When I started a university education in 1966 in mathematics and physics, quarks and gluons, for example, were merely ideas written on pieces of paper. By the time I finished in 1970, physics then constituted could not exist without accounting for quarks and gluons. This, and many other then occurring discoveries meant that my physics education was obsolete. I took a job working with computers that were not even dreamed of in 1966 and working with Queue Theory, learning that much transpired during my education years of which I had little or no knowledge. Given that, I seriously doubt that a computer as intelligent as a human will be built any time soon. The human brain appears to be capable of simultaneous parallel processing and serial processing in a manner that we have not begun to understand. And human intelligence draws on functions that are not yet understood. We are still trying to design computers that can mimic the lowly eons old cockroach -- still trying, mind us all. I submit that this is not a new phenomena, and that it likely commenced during WWII. When I started a university education in 1966 in mathematics and physics, quarks and gluons, for example, were merely ideas written on pieces of paper. By the time I finished in 1970, physics then constituted could not exist without accounting for quarks and gluons. This, and many other then occurring discoveries meant that my physics education was obsolete. I took a job working with computers that were not even dreamed of in 1966 and working with Queue Theory, learning that much transpired during my education years of which I had little or no knowledge.

Given that, I seriously doubt that a computer as intelligent as a human will be built any time soon. The human brain appears to be capable of simultaneous parallel processing and serial processing in a manner that we have not begun to understand. And human intelligence draws on functions that are not yet understood. We are still trying to design computers that can mimic the lowly eons old cockroach — still trying, mind us all.

]]> By: David Bradley http://www.sciencebase.com/science-blog/the-future.html/comment-page-1#comment-590523 David Bradley Tue, 02 Dec 2008 14:53:33 +0000 http://www.sciencebase.com/science-blog/the-future.html#comment-590523 David, of course "Truth" becomes outdated. At one time in human history the truth had it that the Earth was at the centre of the universe and gods marched across the night skies. More subtly Newton's truth about gravitation is known to be false within the truth that is Einstein's relational universe. No doubt, there will be a paradigm shift again at some point in the future that demonstrates that Einstein's truth is false too. There are degrees of truth. David, of course “Truth” becomes outdated. At one time in human history the truth had it that the Earth was at the centre of the universe and gods marched across the night skies. More subtly Newton’s truth about gravitation is known to be false within the truth that is Einstein’s relational universe. No doubt, there will be a paradigm shift again at some point in the future that demonstrates that Einstein’s truth is false too. There are degrees of truth.

]]> By: David Brown http://www.sciencebase.com/science-blog/the-future.html/comment-page-1#comment-590514 David Brown Tue, 02 Dec 2008 14:35:26 +0000 http://www.sciencebase.com/science-blog/the-future.html#comment-590514 Since when does truth ever become outdated? It's only fallacy that needs to be corrected. Technological innovations provide more precise means to investigate physical phenomena. Beyond that, we already know how to prevent most chronic diseases although, because of wrongheaded dietary advice from our government, most people consume too much of the foods that do not furnish proper nourishment. In the future, access to powerful genetic analysis tools will likely help health experts determine what sort of diet one ought to consume to promote sound health and , in some cases prevent a genetic disorder from expressing itself. Alcoholism comes to mind. Since when does truth ever become outdated? It’s only fallacy that needs to be corrected.

Technological innovations provide more precise means to investigate physical phenomena. Beyond that, we already know how to prevent most chronic diseases although, because of wrongheaded dietary advice from our government, most people consume too much of the foods that do not furnish proper nourishment.

In the future, access to powerful genetic analysis tools will likely help health experts determine what sort of diet one ought to consume to promote sound health and , in some cases prevent a genetic disorder from expressing itself. Alcoholism comes to mind.

]]> By: David Bradley http://www.sciencebase.com/science-blog/the-future.html/comment-page-1#comment-590106 David Bradley Mon, 01 Dec 2008 20:45:16 +0000 http://www.sciencebase.com/science-blog/the-future.html#comment-590106 Yes, just watch out that your calculator doesn't start telling you what time you can eat and sleep... Yes, just watch out that your calculator doesn’t start telling you what time you can eat and sleep…

]]> By: Mike Chelen http://www.sciencebase.com/science-blog/the-future.html/comment-page-1#comment-590100 Mike Chelen Mon, 01 Dec 2008 20:36:08 +0000 http://www.sciencebase.com/science-blog/the-future.html#comment-590100 My calculator predicted that pundits would predict this. My calculator predicted that pundits would predict this.

]]>