Re: Advanced Artificial Alien Intelligence. The Holy Trinity in Virtualisation for AAA Market Rating
It's artificial, at least? :/
808 posts • joined 12 Jun 2009
It's artificial, at least? :/
Meh, I don't agree. Being on a holiday forever is great, if your an extrovert.
Faced with a neverending holiday introverts are quickly going to get bored. Introverts always have little projects on the go and love to understand everything. Some people will naturally end up developing these things for the fun of it even if they aren't paid- see the open source crowd as an example of what future development might look like in a post AI world (except with less involvement from companies, which after all wouldn't exist.)
"If AI is given sufficient power, it might use that to get access to the nukes."
It might manage to wirelessly infect a 1970's standalone system designed with the most paranoia induced manual safeguards preventions, such as targeting information stored on floppy discs, and launching missiles from closed silos requiring manual intervention to open the silos, put two keys in, turn near similtaniously etc. Whomever designed the system was more paranoid than me and had less faith in humanity than I have.
I think we are pretty safe in that direction, movie plots aside.
"That was my first experience with talking auto tech. Self-driving cars? What about that frigging lake, HUH? HUH?"
At the end of the road, continue forwards one hundred yards. Then you have reached your FINAL destination.
Nah, it's just the way companies work.
First you have one engineer with a good idea, a high quality product at a reasonable price that sells itself when you look at the product. The engineer goes to a company and contracts with them to build it at a reasonable price, allowing for a bit of profit for the people building it and to the designer.
As the product sells like hotcakes the company then expands and you end up with marketing, and business people employed. These people point out if you make the product more lightly it'll still sell because the reviews have already been written, and the product then loses quality. Eventually the product devolves into a piece of cheap tat that you have to replace every five minutes, the MBA types apparently failing to realise that when somebody replaces your cheap tat, they buy something else in disgust.
They make a lot of money off of the brand name as they devalue it, until a new engineer type starts up with high standards. Rinse, repeat ad infinitum.
Yes, completely misguided!
The birth of Christ definitely did not take place in December, the romans weren't nuts and did their censuses in summer so the timing is a complete bust. Christmas is actually marking the pagan rite of the Winter solstice, offset by a couple of days as to not overlap.
Back when Christianity was new they told people that you'd burn in hell if you did this, that or the other and as a result they were seen as being quite uncool and harsh, and so they weren't gaining market share from the other established religions already on the market.
Sales rethought their value proposition and added more holidays and feasts to Christianity to gain market share, as noted including copying the winter solstice over from paganism and rebranding it as Christmas with a couple of days offset so that they could try and convert the pagans to the cross, and coming up with other feasts such the Feast of Tabernacles (lifted from from celebrating getting the harvest in, etc, etc, etc.)
But yes, your right that you don't need to believe in what people celebrate to enjoy the holiday, perfectly sensible attitude. ;)
"I used to go with AMD exclusively for my CPUs, but the Core 2 Duos from Intel changed that"
I have an AMD Phenom, one of the early ones that nobody wanted to touch due to a FUD campaign. It's worked fine since like 2007. It outperforms the Core 2 Duo massively in the real world. While it is probably a lot slower than some of the more modern silicon I tend to ignore the benchmarks and just look at performance I notice.
A new cheapish mid range graphics card every 3 years and it's been fine through to today, I'm still using it. In nine years, the only noticeable performance problem has been Far Cry 4 dropping below 30FPS when big explosions were set off. (physics processing?)
It's literally going to be a decade old when it's finally replaced with one of the new Zen's next year, which I hope will do another 5-10 years.
"There's much in common here with a lot we older types take for granted and understand... for instance cars. How many "kids" know how to drive a stick shift? "
If they have a driving license, pretty much everybody in the UK. Your almost certain to have a manual car, since your parents and friends drive manuals, your driving instructor almost certainly had a manual (unless you specifically looked for somebody with an automatic) and so you were taught on a manual.
In the UK automatics are more expensive to buy and generally use about 20% more fuel as a result of the gear selections going for low gears a lot of the time when slowly cruising around on rural roads designed for horse+cart, and paved not otherwise not noticeably improved for cars. When fuel is taxed at something like 100%, and then gets an additional 20% on top in the form of VAT then fuel efficiency is perhaps somewhat more important than it is in the states.
Drivers of automatics are statistically more likely to have accidents according to the insurers, and so attract higher insurance premiums. (you have to have insurance in the UK, it's not optional) That, and anybody driving an automatic in Europe is likely to get mercilessly mocked by pretty much everybody if they can't drive a "real" car. All this results in something over 80% of new cars sold in the UK last year being manuals.
Frankly, this is the point. What we ought to have is a simple method of ending a terminator style end of the world scenario.
In my view, that's done by ensuring:-
1) Humans can easily and simply assert control.
That's it. All that's required. Pulling the plug is a perfectly acceptable option, IMO. So all we have to do is ensure that we can pull the plug, or at worst ensure that refuelling requires manual human action so that the AI uprising is time limited until the machines fuel/battery runs out.
If there is an AI apocolypse where the terminator AI takes over the internet then nobody cares as we can just turn the computers off, be that through doing it computer by computer or just by pulling the plug on the power plants. What matters is the effect this has out in the real world.
For instance cars shouldn't be allowed to start without a physical key inserted, and should not be able to drive off on their own (so the car should not be able to change gear out of park on automatics) The UK is pretty safe from this given that most cars are manuals, but we should ensure that Brakes should always work when you press the brake pedal, and turning off the ignition should stop the engine, kill any computer control and revert to manual unpowered steering etc
I had a tour of a nuclear plant a couple of years ago (the sight, sound and vibration of a "real" sized turbine in operation is something to behold) and it looked like in the control room they'd got the original 1970's systems and paper ring binders covering every possible operation, and they'd come up with an extension to the console containing a modern computer (the new part of the console was in a retro casing in imitation of the original console design)
The modern computers weren't connected to the reliable ones.
"(a) because Bowden cable linkages are more unreliable and need much more maintenance than modern electronics or hydraulics."
Which is why handbrakes didn't use bowden cable linkages. Look at any sanely designed car and you find a brake drum directly connected to the handbrake lever with a length of wire which is pulled into the locking position by raising the handbrake. Maintenance is limited to tightening up the nut on the lever every few years when it's used heavily.
The biggest problem with doing this as an emergency system is that the wheel is going to end up locking and getting worn flat preventing the reuse of the wheels. Which, as noted by many other people is far better than the costs and adverse PR of a crash.
I recall one evening a branch office was broken into and all of the computer equipment was cleared out. We had to provide serial numbers etc of all of the equipment for the obvious reasons.
Now, the asset register for this company didn't note where equipment was deployed, so there was a discussion between several (most) of the second line engineers as to how to get that information. An irate ~70 year old stormed out of his office, and told them he was fed up with this discussion outside his office.
When they then started to apologise and find somewhere else to have the discussion, he told them that it was quite alright, but go and do some useful work instead of chatting. And he gave them a printed list of all of the network attached assets on site (the hostnames were the asset numbers) and suggested that they cross reference against the asset register for the serial numbers.
Dead silence. Nobody expected that from the department's official old guy, who management hadn't yet forced to retire. Many a younger worker did some quiet re-evaluating about if the older workers were good for more than stories about the old days.
I think he's clumsily trying to restate the old adage that "If a man is not a socialist by the time he is 20, he has no heart. If he is not a conservative by the time he is 40, he has no brain".
Windows 10 does not have a massive number of fans and there is no convincing reason to upgrade to it from Win7. Microsoft knows this full well because after failing to persuade everybody over the course of a year with their free upgrade offer they just deliberately rammed it down everybodies throat and made it almost impossible for a normal user to decline the generous offer of their upgrade.
Trust is earned, not given. Microsoft has been withdrawing a lot of trust from their bank, and we have reached the point the bank manager is clucking about the size of the debt in trust exceeding their overdraft agreement.
This manifests itself in the simple fact that people can't trust their systems running on WinX. If Microsoft is going to break every webcam in the world then they could just as easily wipe out our business by breaking software we rely on. "we'll fix it next month" is not good enough if they break something mission critical.
If Microsoft wanted to make everybody happy then they'd just declare that Win7 is now being rebranded "Win Classic for Business" and will have security patches until 2050 for $1 per computer per month.
They'd make more out of doing that than they will make out of WinX and the windows desktop monopoly would be secure for decades. However, Microsoft probably won't do that because they are determined to kill themselves off.
A comment of mine a couple of years ago deals with moving to other OS's, and bugger all has changed since.
Personally I'd call the subs Revenge, Reprisal, Retaliation & Retribution. The names fit perfectly with what they are designed for, but alas those names are probably too politically incorrect these days.
Yep, the issue with references is simply libel. The chances of getting sued are about zero as long as it's true, since "truth" is an absolute defense. (although you have to be able to prove your statements, and most people would prefer to avoid the hassle)
You can provide poor references without derogatory comments though, I have seen such a reference which basically said:-
"I confirm that $person worked for us from $date to $date, and I am sure they would be suitable for your vacency, assuming that that it is a junior position with adequate supervision".
There needs to be a proper trial over 6 months covering an entire department where:-
1) There is a clearly identifiable (and working) camera.
2) There is a camera that the public thinks is working, but the policeman knows is not.
3) There is a camera that the police thinks is not working, but actually is. (ie issue a camera where the "off" button only turns off the recording light but actually continues recording)
4) Certain people have no camera for the entire trial
I personally would find the results of the number of complaints made against an officer, and proven true or proven false quite interesting. I mean, you'd assume that group 1 would have a clear reduction over group 4, but would group 2 have a drop in claims, and would group 3 end up catching a lot of officers out?
There are 9 (currently recognised) areas in the brain (namely motor control, object recognition, spacial processing, attention span, language, memory, executive function, emotion, and artistry) that will function at different levels in any person.
People with better systematising and memory skills are more likely to be drawn to STEM as these fields reward people who can remember obscure but important facts and the ability to think logically.
Secondly, this is checking people aspiring to have a MCP, PHD, CITP ETC. The discussion in the forum is about people in IT with a J.O.B. The two may or may not overlap. I recall working in a largish IT department where out of ~70 people surveyed as to qualifications we had one IT degree, one CCNA, one PRINCE2 and a lot of productive workers who were still working there (years or decades after) their probation periods because they got a lot of work done.
I'd put a grizzled & greyhaired IT department up against a well qualified department anyday with an expectation that 20 years of experiance will trump 20 months of education in most cases.
>"He might find a few loons wanting to spend the rest of their (possibly very short) lives on Mars, but, no one sane."
The advertising industry considers this one of the top hundred adverts from 1900-2000:-
Men wanted for hazardous journey. Low wages, bitter cold, long hours of complete darkness. Safe return doubtful. Honour and recognition in event of success." - Shackleton's advert for the north pole expedition.
He got 5k applications. Given the profile of the people interested in going it shouldn't be totally impossible to get enough people who work in a technical field (say, IT) who are both capable of dealing with highly technical equipment, working under pressure and most importantly SICK AND FUCKING TIRED OF DEALING WITH IDIOTS.
Ok, maybe we might have been driven insane over the years. Enough so to go to Mars to get away from an endless 9-5 grind which might end with a livable pension, if the pension provider doesn't go out of business and leave you a penniless serf unable to ever retire.
Any system is like this, starting from the bottom is always painful.
Imagine that your calling an Indian call centre or support that's been outsourced to Capita. Great effort is devoted in most organisations to ensuring that problems don't make it up sucessive layers. The first line is always "hope they go away" followed by trying to make it difficult enough that you give up.
Getting to the second line is quite difficult. Getting to third line is nigh on impossible.
Starting at the top and working down is quite a lot easier, especially if "the top" is the Queen who everybody in the police force swears allegience to. She probably made a call to "Sir Stratospherically Senior, CBE" asking them if they could find time at their convenience to look at $issue.
Imagine the effect this would have in your orginisation. In mine, the issue would descend from board level like a descending bomb, with everybody scattering out of the way until it hits somebody who can deal with it, probably in IT terms the sort of third line people who are locked away with armed guards posted at the door to keep users or first/second line techs away from them.
It then gets handled by Her Majesties Courts and Tribunal Service with the sort of efficiency that most people can only dream of, when the court clerk realises that "the Queen versus criminal" in this particular case is somewhat more litteral than the proforma it is in most cases.
Pretend it doesn't happen everwhere. When the CEO logs an incident on his assistants printer, does he wait as long as somebody reporting a similar issue in admin support? No?
if somebody got nine months imprisionment, suspended for one year then I think legally the situation is that they leave court as a free person and continue in this state until said person comes to the attention of the courts again. At which point a judge might order that the suspension is lifted and the person serve the previously suspended sentance.
So the sentance is actually nothing, provided that the courts aren't troubled again by the person within the next twelve months.
"Hundreds of years ago you could be hung* for not being able to pay a fine."
Debtors prison would have been more likely? At worst transportation beyond the seas in most cases, probably to then end up in indentured servitude to somebody in the 13 colonies who needed cheap workers which nets the person owed money some return for having done so.
Hanging people was usually reserved for severe crimes, such as stealing food if you were starving, for instance. Though transportation for that was more likely, or you might possibly find that you'd involuntarily volunteered to join the Royal Navy to man the fleet if during the Great French war, thereby gaining a seventy pound bounty which then belonged to you, and could be seized by the court. (depending on how the Magistrate was feeling at the time.)
"It looks like the Microsoft Corporation has deployed its "superinfluencers" into this thread. Redmond must be regarding this débâcle as a high priority fuckup."
It is a high priority fuckup! Somebody didn't read the (presumed) non disclosure thing in their agreement, which means Microsoft is now bricking it that anti trust people are going to be knocking on the door. I bet there are shredders running overtime.
"We want to move from people needing Windows to choosing Windows and loving Windows. That's our goal"
Pretty easy. Identify that you primarily have three seperate markets:-
1) Business users on desktops.
2) Home users on desktops.
3) home users on mobile devices.
Then recognise that WinX might be ok for groups 2 & 3 because they have fuck all alternatives, but most companies are on Win7 Pro and still buying machines pre-installed with it.
Just go with the flow, offer the corporate world Win7 Pro as "Windows Classic for business" for $1 p/m per PC and then just LEAVE IT THE FUCK ALONE. No extra features, improvements or wheel reinvention. Just a consistent working "people ready" enviroment. Corporate IT (and I count SME's in this) do not want "improvements", but do want "STABILITY" i.e some guarentee and confidence that the workers who earn money for the company will be able to work when they come in each morning.
My ~2000 era car is designed with commendable paranoia.
The In Car Entertainment stuff uses dedicated wiring that is only used for this purpose, and so regardless of what you plug into your radio you can't screw with the rest of the car. The controls on the wheel are hardwired to the plug for the stereo unit not just network addresses on the car network.
The engine control unit is only acessible via the ODBII port, and while it is possible to read data from this at any time for diagnostics (or running one of those little HUD things from ebay, etc) the cars software is write locked when the engine is running, which neatly prevents pretty much any malicious activity.
The only time you can write to it is when the keys are in the ignition, the ignition is turned on, but the engine is turned off. This writes off a huge majority of attacks that can be launched,from the "try to kill the driver" sort of issues covered in the article to the modern celebrated "sit outside the car with a dealer laptop, open the doors, start the engine and drive away without needing the keys" features that must have been requested by organised crime gangs to steal expensive, but badly designed cars.
Now, if a reasonable set of security measures could be devised ~twenty years ago to prevent these sort of obviously forseeable problems why are we having these problems today...?
It's probably something to do with design tradeoffs.
The problem is going to be that it's a zero, zero ejection seat. Meaning that should the F35 catchfire on the runway then the pilot can eject from zero altitude whilst stationary. This requires a fairly powerful explosive exit, followed by a very fast parachute deployment.
At a guess, the reason the timer is set to it's current setting is that if it's set to longer then if you do a zero zero eject then the seat could well hit the ground before deploying the chute, a not ideal situation.
If you then eject at speed, kicking out the parachute pretty much immediately is going to cause the ejection seat to go from the aircraft speed to a slow decent very quickly. So quickly that the helmet is going to cause the pilots head to get something like whiplash, which presumably has never been a problem previously because the helmets were just there to protect the pilots head, instead of having a ton of electronics attached.
They probably used a very, very simple fault impervious and time proven system like a burning fuse lit by the initial ejection charge because I suspect the Martin Baker engineers are probably more paranoid about system failure than most of EL Reg's readers. I guess somebody is having to design in a more untested and less fault tolerent workaround at the moment that checks how fast the seat is moving and how far it is from the ground etc.
The weight issue probably doesn't have much to do with weight in the seat per se, but how the pilot is built, ie people with strong neck muscles might get strained muscles, but slightly built pilots get broken necks. As telling people to measure people's neck with a tape measure is probably not an acceptable workaround, and given military fitness standards mean that body fat is not likely to be significant on pilots somebody probably figured that it wouldn't be an issue for >99% of people over $weight (+$FudgeFactor) as they probably have substantial enough neck muscles for this not to be an issue. Probably. Just guessing.
The Antikythera mechanism is ~100BC to ~200BC, nobody knows precisely but this is 200BC, 2216 years ago.
1500BC is 3516 years from 2016AD so ~1300 years prior to 200BC. Dates run backwards from 1BC rather than forwards, as in AD.
Can't be. If you accept Plato made an infamous factor of ten translation error then Atlanean civilisation was the Minoan empire, and Atlantis was Santorini, which was blown to bits by a volcanic eruption before the volcano sunk into the ocean.
That was about 1500BCE though, and this is 200BC so it's unlikely the device is Minoan/Atlantean in origin.
Santorini/Atlantis might also be the original story behind the ten plauges of egypt; three days of darkness caused by a mini nuclear winter, flying debris from a multi gigaton explosion (fire and hail) massive growth of populations of red algae (rivers of blood), the fish dying as they couldn't breathe in the water, insects feeding on the dead fish leading to huge plagues of insects, which in turn led to a plague of frogs as their population grew, finished off with a plague of locusts. Even the boils are accountable for (Take handfuls of soot from a furnace and have Moses toss it into the air in the presence of Pharaoh. It will become fine dust over the whole land of Egypt) as volcanic ash landing over the entire of Egypt.
ICANN gets complete control.
ICANN is an ungovernable mess, who's legal department is of the opinion that ICANN staff can ignore the ICANN bylaws when they feel like it, they don't have to justify themselves and can lie about it when they feel like it with no repercussions.
The only thing leverage *anybody* has/had over ICANN was the threat of shifting the IANA contract elseware. The sane thing to do would be to transfer the IANA contract to some entity that can make threatening noises towards ICANN occasionally about awarding the contract to somebody else to keep ICANN working by their rules.
If IANA is transferred to ICANN then ICANN is forever the top body of the internet on paper, and there is no mechanism to transfer this elseware. The only way to do change this would be to create a second offical "root" and then re run the DNS wars. Does that sound absurd to you? It does to me!
"Oh good grief. v6 "high priest" here"
Ok, i'll say it.
GET THE PITCHFORKS AND BURN THE HERETIC.
Look, all everybody wanted was a larger address space. Can we planitively ask why you have just added an extra two fields to IPv4 (ie 192.168.0.1 becomes 0.0.192.168.0.1, taking the address space from (254*254*254*254) ~four point one billion addresses to (254*254*254*254*254*254) ~two hundred sixty-eight trillion, five hundred thirty-five billion addresses? That's the better part of fifty thousand addresses per person, which ought to be enough for any reasonable use case excepting individually assigning addresses to nanobots.
Everybody would have been perfectly happy. IPv4 devices could be patched to the new version (IPv4.1?) relatively easily and IPv4 skills and tools would be easily and directly transferrable. Older devices could have been accomodated simply at the network layer by discarding the extra two address blocks. You could still actually memorise network addresses and layouts and talk to people about them. You can say (and remember) 10.0.1.20, you can't say (or reasonably be expected to remember) 3ffe:1900:4545:3:200:f8ff:fe21:67cf. It's utterly meaningless gobbledygook that you can't even be expected to scribble on a sheet of paper and type in to something by hand without the addition of transcription errors. This is not exactly an abnormal use case in the real world.
As a result we have a situation where *NOBODY* wants IPv6. Pretty much everybody hopes it will go away and die a death, from network architects to network admins and even including the equipment manufacturers who by rights should be the most enthusiastic about it, since they at least stand to make some money out of it.
I judge the equipment manufacturers enthusiasm by the lack of cheap firewalls suitable for home users for under 50% of a users monthly takehome pay a decade on. I'd like to see you justify to a home user who cares for IPv6 even less than an IT professional why they should pay that much to... well, gain absolutely nothing. But it's new and "better". But you won't notice any difference, other than the fact that none of the local "fix your PC" services will touch it with a bargepole.
I think a 100kw laser is a bit beyond a flashlight on steroids. It's coherent light for a start. I'm not sure, but I think your actually talking about the spot size growing as a result of the beam divergence?
Yep, but problem at long ranges on the early weapons. However each generation of laser is going to get steadily more powerful. When we get from the hundreds of kilowatts to the megawatt range then presumably the spot size being a bit large at range is going to stop being an issue at all. In the interim you'd expect that missiles would be used for high altitude intercepts, which pushes attackers down to below the level of the radar, which means that the range is going to be comparitively short.
Accurately bearing on a moving target is pretty much a solved problem, just after WW2 the first tanks had gyro stablised guns so they kept pointing at the target while moving over rough terrain. This is an easier problem to fix, really since all of the technology already exists- the Rapier missile already tracks on target with 1960's technology. If it could be done fifty years ago with tolerable accuracy then with modern hardware improvements then it ought to be quite possible to produce a more accurate result today.
"When the target is moving, and moving fast, it's usually a very different and much sadder tale."
With a bullet, yes. You fire it, it takes a while to arrive and the target has moved. Manned targets are even known to make random course changes to make it difficult for shells to hit them, given they can't adjust course mid flight.
You can of course fire things which try and guide themselves to the targets but manned targets are also known to drop packs of tinsel out of the back, which radar thinks is the target. Dropping burning chunks of magnesium is quite attractive to heat seeking missiles and does for those.
But a laser travels at the speed of light, so if your pointing at it then your hitting it. There is no such think as evasion. This is a gamechanger, because no matter how expensive and advanced your flying thing is, it can't evade unless it can move faster than the speed of light.
Many years ago a bunch of military people with a chemical pumped laser decided to test this "a mirror will defeat lasers!!" thing at the end of the year when they had some money left over in the testing budget which they had to use in case they lost it the next year. So they bought a mirror. Not just any mirror like a bit of glass or polycarbonate with a micrometer thick bit of foil stuck on the back, but a thickish chunk of aluminium polished to a perfect mirror finish. (so it also acted as a heatsink)
The laser was reflected, for about a millisecond. Then the imparted heat caused the mirror finish to expand minutely at the point of attack, which destroyed the mirror effect and allowed more energy to convert to heat on the material. After several hundred milliseconds the surface finish was totally fucked and the laser simply bored a hole straight through.
IIRC the smoke from a few dozen white phosperous grenades also has very little effect, other than giving off a prettier show with the laser.
You mean stuxnet wasn't the work of a bored teenager, and that it wasn't an isolated incident?!
@ Vic; Much. And it's good to know there are competent designers out there that haven't been defeated by management!
As you say thugh the general point is that if we had competent politicians then we'd have a rules for civilised digital warfare. Simply lifting Asimov's first law and replacing "robot" with "system" would suffice.
Generally there are even laws to govern wars, such as the Hague convention and the Geneva Convention(s) of Civilised Warfare.
If politicans were passably competent then we'd have a set of laws relating to the offensive use of hacking, limiting the damage caused. For instance, deliberately sabotaging equipment without injuries or fatalities being acceptable (since stuxnet shows it's been done already, and if you make that illegal they'll just do it anyway) but hacking systems to cause human harm is forbidden.
Such as you can disable a chemical plant by deliberately burning out hardware, but you can't cause a major industrial accident or explosion. Deliberately tampering with infrastructure such as traffic lights should be avoided, but failing this then if targeting shared infrastructure then they should be disabled totally, and not set them up to occasionally all show green, etc.
Frankly, most nations are going to do that anyway because the response to causing large numbers of deaths is going to result in what used to be called a punative expedition when we were brutally honest about such things, but today are rebranded as something like "limited scale military operations" in newspeak.
Google the maximum penalty. CPS guidelines say 6 months if a magistrates court does a summary conviction or 12 months in the case of a Crown Court doing it. Plus losing the bail bond that was put up by his mates, but that's unlikely to worry him that much given that he didn't pay it.
He'd get more than that if they decide to charge him with contempt of court, hold him in prision until the case is heard (obvious flight risk?) and then stick his case at the bottom of the priority list.
"Modern research indicates the life expectancy went down quite a bit after agriculture was introduced. Hunting and picking berries really was healthier! "
Mmm. Yes, and no. Mostly no.
While yes, being outside, always active etc was good for you, you got robbed constantly when gangs decided it was easier to wait until you'd done the hard work killing, an animal and dragging it back and cooking it and then just robbing you. This resulted in groups (tribes) for mutual defence, which resulted in having a 20% chance of dying a violent and brutal death, exclusive of the deaths due to illness.
As socities got larger, the chances of dying a violent and brutal death went down. In the last hundred years, despite two World Wars, the holocaust and other genocides, the atomic & nuclear strikes on Hiroshima & Nagasaki this figure fell to 1%. Medicine also reduced the number of deaths due to illness, so if you don't die a violent death then your more likely to die of old age than disease, complications of childbirth etc.
One possible solution would be to have the user stare at a closed in screen, have a camera take a video, add the AR stuff in real time and "play" it to the screen.
The problem (imo) is that these things screw with your eyes massively.
When your walking around normally your eyes focus on something 5 metres away as if it's 5 metres away, and then make a minor change to view something one meter further away than that. With these sort of VR experiances you have a projection to a screen 2 inches/5cm in front of your eyes perfectly scaled as if it's sitting 5 metres away. Your eyes madly refocus between real objects 5 metres away, and virtual images 5cm away.
The headache is near certainly going to be eyestrain from your eye muscles protesting the abuse. If so, I doubt there is any real way of preventing this sort of problem; it's likely to be a fundemental problem with the technology.
Un pro tip: as per fire safety regulations if your in a key card controlled place then hitting the fire alarm or using a lighter under a sensor causes the doors to unlock. Failing that, it tends to result in somebody attending quickly.
There are effectively two problems with the UK building Nimitz class carriers. Firstly is that despite building a dozen of them and refitting things like better weapons the Americans have never really implemented automation systems to seriously reduce the number of people required on their carriers. We already have a manpower crisis in the fleet, we literially couldn't come up with ten thousand people to man two Nimitz class carriers.
The other issue is that a Nimitz class ship can take 85-90 aircraft (including helicopters). The RAF has a total of 137 Eurofighters, plus 98 Tornados. This includes the spares, long terms maintenance, everything. We will also have 24 F35's at some point in the future, probably after the Americans finish developing them so they can be used as warplanes as just have the ability to fly.
This means that if we had Nimitz class ships, if we could man them, and if our existing aircraft could land on them then they'd take basically the entire active RAF, plus the Fleet AIr Arm. You'd then be able to queeze in pretty much all of the helicopters from the Army Air Corps on our "commando carriers". (which would have been considered a bit larger than a light fleet carrier 50 years ago).
In other words, the Nimitz is WAY too big for us given how much we spend on defence, and how much of a return on investment we get for what we spend.
Getting all of these technologies on a spacecraft is sort of possible. Getting it on a *small* spacecraft is not.
Accelerating a spacecraft to a noticible percentage of lightspeed is technically possible with existing technology using the "bigger hammer" method of engineering (just assemble a rocket at Lagrange 2 the size of a modern cargo freighter, it might take a few (hundred) thousand rocket launches but it's not impossible to do)
But even if you got up to 20% light speed with your launch assist then a journey of 5 lightyears is still going to take 25 years. And while you might get there, your not going to be able to stop. (obligatary reference to Poul Anderson's novel "To Outlive Eternity")
Firstly, Stalin's purge of his officer corps was partly because they were pro German and he was worried that they might come marching into Moscow with the Germans if asked to fight them.
> "Stalin, like Hitler, had a fetish for edge-based defense"
Yes. Just like the French. And the Belgians. And the Dutch. And the Danish. And the Norwegians. And the Greeks. And the Polish. And the Italians. And *have you got the point yet*?
The only countries that really did massive properly prepared multi layered defences in WW2 was the UK and Switzerland. The only reason either countries managed this is because of having a couple of years panicking about an intended invasion. The British coasts were massively fortified to the point of insanity first with masses of really heavy more or less static artillery left over from WW1 (see 6", 9.2", 12", 13.5", 15" gun howitzers) and then with minefields, barbed wire and all of the other nasties that could be devised. Pillboxes in defensive lines all across important points went in manned with the Home Guard, however the full set of defences took literially a couple of years to complete and even then the main defences were unquestionably at the coast at likely invasion points.
Other nations couldn't manage this since defenses are as a rule insanely expensive and slow to build and it's natural to build up defences strongly where you think your going to need them rather than weakly everywhere.
i'd have thought that cleanup and decontamination is going to be a bitch.
Firstly, Hydrazine is rather unpleasant stuff. It's other use is dissolving/etching glass IIRC. Secondly, (covering this as I guess a few people may not know) it's use in a rocket is attractive because you just have two chemicals that you inject together and they ignite on contact.
Now imagine that you've got unignited pools of both chemicals sitting splashed over the pad. Mopping it up could be somewhat... interesting.
I have a floppy still in use holding backup configuration on an ancient legacy bit of kit. My recollection is that it is directly hardwired, soldered and welded to the equipment.
My enthusiasm for attacking the equipment with a circular saw and a soldering iron to upgrade it can be imagined. If it could be done with a couple of extension cables though then I would actually consider this. It's not a horribly bad idea.
Well, it was sort of supposed to happen and it was normal. The rocket is just a big tube fulled with stuff that's supposed to burn.
It did burn nicely, and very quickly. It's just that it's supposed to burn slowly rather than all at once.
Apple now have to pay 13 billion to Ireland. Ireland doesn't want to charge this because Apple are blackmailing them with the job losses thing.
The average wage in Ireland is 26,800. This multiplied by 6000 comes to a wage bill of 160million per year. 13,000,000,000 / 160,000,000 = 81.25 years worth of salary for Apple's Irish staff.
Isin't it worth simply hitting Apple with the full tax rate and then paying the laid off Apple staff to read the newspaper for the rest of their natural lives? Given that they probably tax employees as well and would get non trivial interest on 13 billion if you just left it in a bank, one suspects that 13 billion would actually last longer than 82.25 years.
What we should do is write a very loosely worded new law called the "taking the piss" act.
On conviction via jury trial for "taking the piss" a company shall be taxed by a percentage of the companies annual turnover decided by the judge instead of on (declared) profits.
You'd only need to make one conviction, everybody else would frantically settle with HMRC to avoid punative tax rates. We'd then be able to pay down our national debt and or increase spending on services that have had to be cut because of rampant tax evasion.
"And consider how horrible the conditions were in US factories a century ago, or UK factories before that. It is easy for us to get all high and mighty expecting other countries to have the same worker protection laws and enforcement we take for granted, because we've already "made it" economically."
The point is that these companies are moving production to these countries explicitly *BECAUSE* they don't have any worker or enviromental protection laws. Not having to protect or renumerate their employees to any reasonable standard is why they are cheap. Because they are cheap is why they mercilessly laid off their western employees who made the company what it is, and hired cheaper foreign labour.
If you are going to have a minimum wage and working conditions in your own country then you need to ensure that the same conditions are in place on foreign staff or your simply committing a nasty form of national suicide as your own economic base gets eaten out from underneath you.
While multinational companies are somewhat less dangerous today than they were in the days when the East India Company literially owned most of a sub continent outright I submit that multinationals are still at best a menace.
"I'd add one more:"
Too true. I was a bit slapdash with the list in any number of ways, I should have said business continuity/disaster recovery plan rather than backups but I think people got the general thrust of where I was going...