...more recent posts
O.K., I finally read that feed piece about weblogs. Dave and Alex both told me to, but I guess we all take our own time. Right on, though, I think.
Very interesting piece at the EETimes about the cable industry adopting MPEG-4 as their streaming media standard (over closed proprietary systems from microsoft, real and apple.) Sounds like some good thinking. I like this part: "...with channels 1 to 300 dedicated to broadcasting digital TV programs and channels 301 to 3 million [reserved] for streaming high-quality video on demand." I can hear it now, "Please tune in to channel one million seven hundred and fifty thousand four hundred and twenty three..."
Here's a link to the Foresight Institute's Engines of Creation 2000 Confronting Singularity conference page. The conference is happening next weekend. The page outlines some of the thinking behind the event. Here's a blurb:
In the next one-to-three decades we expect to see these capabilities:
"strong" nanotechnology
genetic engineering of humans
the end of aging
advanced machine intelligence (call it what you will)
encrypted private currencies
thorough surveillance and sensing, able to detect what you ate,drank, and smoked last night
bio/chem/nano weapons of mass destruction
human civilization expanding into space
Such a future is so different from human history that we can barely imagine it. Some call it a "Singularity" beyond which our best projections are useless...
Heady stuff from some very well respected researchers.
I am having some email problems today. Try my inch account if you need to get me.
Apparently, the U.S. had plans to detonate a huge nuclear explosion on the moon in the late fifties in order to demonstrate their military power, and one-up the successful Soviet space program. In an effort to cut down on my ranting I'm not going to say anything more about this one (except that some of these people are still in power, and they need not to be.)
I bought David Chalmers book "The Conscious Mind" when it came out in 1996. It was right up my alley, but frankly, just a little too hard. A lot of the science got pretty technical, and my schooling was all on the philosophy side. But Chalmers is a philosopher, and those parts of the book where he actually makes his argument (especially the concluding chapter) really made a huge impact on me. Still, I was always a little frustrated at not being able to digest the whole thing. A few days ago I found this link to a paper he wrote that is like a shorter version of the book. All the philosophy, without all of the backing scientific examples. Now, don't get me wrong, this guy is out of his mind smart, and he's very deep into a highly specialized field full of jargon, so I can't exactly recommend this as a quick read. Probably it's not even interesting. But if you happen to like any of the more popular people in the field (like maybe Daniel Dennet) then Chalmers is where to go from there. He is laying the groundwork for the type of thinking that will be needed to tackle the questions our technology, and especially our information processing systems, are going to present. And oh yeah, I found the link through a review on Hedweb in which the reviewer finds him both lazy and facile. Well, I wonder what he'd make of me, because I think Chalmers is hard at work on something very ambitious.