We think dogs are smart because we can teach them to perform tricks to satisfy our whims. Cats think the same thing about people.
Also, true story: I recently witnessed a dog, who freaks out at everything that walks past her house, being let out the front door for a quick run around the neighborhood. She immediately turned left and ran a couple houses away to relieve herself. Not thirty feet away in the other direction there was a thoroughly terrified rabbit that was obviously very glad that the dog went the other way. Now, that's not why I'm writing about this event. No, it's because when the dog came _back_, she _still_ failed to notice the rabbit, and ran straight back to the front door. Dogs are dumb.
This brings a whole new way of looking at Schrödinger's cat paradox. If we replicate the cat's brain and way of thinking, is it a cat or not? What dictates life and what dictates death?
@Nathan Obbards: I think it probably just means you couldn't use cybercat in the experiment; either that or instead of using acid or gunpowder, the system would have to cut power to cybercat or otherwise disable it to generate multiple states.
@Nathan Obbards: I don't think you understands Schrödinger's cat paradox. It has to do with quantum mechanics. If I recall correctly, it has to do with some physicists believing that energy/matter exists in two states simultaneously, as a wave and a particle, until it is observed at which point it becomes one or the other. The paradox for Schrödinger is that if you apply this system to a cat in a box with 50% chance of being alive and 50% chance of being dead then the cat is both alive and dead until you look in the box at which point it is one or the other. The cat is just a means, it could as easily be a light bulb or anything with multiple states like water.
@Nathan Obbards: I think it would simplify the paradox if the cat-in-a-box were Virtual in nature... If you wanted to ensure the state of the cat-in-a-box you'd simply unplug the cord and wait a couple seconds. It would be dead every time.
@Nathan Obbards: Edit: You bring up a very good question, but I still think the virtual cat would not be the same one that lost power.
Chances are a cat would come back alive if the system could handle a hard powerdown like that, but it would not be the same virtual cat that was there before because this new cat would have, at the very least, experienced a unique bootup that it had not experienced before, so arguably it is a different virtual cat that exists. Beyond that, chances are the cat lost everything it had in ram at the time of the power loss unless it was using that new-fangled ram that retains its last state. Of course if the developers include that technology they may have foiled my theory here.
If being unfriendly were any kind of mimickry of intelligence, Chihuahuas should look like friggin' geniuses, but they're dumber than a sack of chalupas.
No doubt God is not going to be happy with mankind coming closer and closer to mimicing animal brains.
Oh dear. I guess I'll be sending this slices of bread, just like I did the LHC. Gabriel, make it so.
It could've been worse:
They could've tastelessly slapped a metric ton of EL accents, LEDs, and useless slabs of lucite on that bitch, cutting multiple windows in the case just so you can watch the blinkenlights symbolically represent the computing going on. #jaguar
Accordingly, the next in the Cray line will now be called "Cool-Ass Airbrushed Wizard Slaying Dragon, Bro" and will play Blue Oyster Cult songs at startup. #jaguar
Following Moore's law, can you imagine in 50 years when personal computers will have that computing power. At such computing power will all PC's be identical having capped the markets need for computing? What would an individual need with such computing power? #jaguar
On 13 April 2005, Gordon Moore stated in an interview that the law cannot be sustained indefinitely: "It can't continue forever. The nature of exponentials is that you push them out and eventually disaster happens." #jaguar
@Michai: I'd argue closer to 25 years rather than 50.
According to this article ([www.macobserver.com]) the fastest Mac Pro in 2008 was 1/12,142 as fast as RoadRunner.
Given that ratio, it will only take 14 doublings (which is 16,384 times more) to reach this speed for a consumer computer.
Moore's law says we should expect a doubling of transistors on a chip every two years which comes to only 28 years.
Ray Kurzweil argues (convincingly) that the doubles are occurring faster than every two years and in fact are themselves speeding up. So 28 years is probably a very conservative estimate.
@Michai: Since we've made similar statements for decades now while Moore's Law has been working and had all those needs filled and more, I'm believing that you'll need this power for your latest 3 dimensional Hollo-Deck display in the game room of your house by then where a MMG finally exceeds 100 million simultaneous players and even the cockroaches walking under your feet are being modeled and you have infinite zoom to be able to check molecules in objects. Bottom line, whatever computing power is created will cause applications to be written that will enable it's use, and more... #jaguar
@kosai: Thanks for the vid, very cool. I'd like to add that it does not account for the intelligence of software aiding in the conductibility of trillions of computers. #jaguar
@NorwoodIsMyHero: Here is a cool fact that everyone may find interesting. All of todays digital information, if translated into a physical weight, would weight about the same as large grain of salt*. Given that knowledge a atomic matrix the size of a 6 sided die has the potential to hold more than enough information for generations to come.
*(I read this story in either one of my Scientific American or Discover magazines, I spent a few minutes looking for the article but could find which month or magazine it was. Props to the person who locates the original article for me. It was within the last 9 months.) #jaguar
@SkipErnst: Yes true, but Kurzweil doesn't account for - like anything the closer you get to reaching the exponential's vertical the longer it takes. Also a change in transistor tech from silicon to 'whatever' will cause an initial slowing of the curve. #jaguar
Dude, Apple dumped the Jaguar release years ago since it had significant user interface and speed issues - they need to get Snow Leopard on this thing ASAP.I assume they are leasing time on this system for those silly scientists and engineers to use to figure out the answer to life, the universe, and everything. Multiply six and seven, geeks - your search will be over and we can stop building these crazy fast systems. #jaguar
11/19/09
Also, true story: I recently witnessed a dog, who freaks out at everything that walks past her house, being let out the front door for a quick run around the neighborhood. She immediately turned left and ran a couple houses away to relieve herself. Not thirty feet away in the other direction there was a thoroughly terrified rabbit that was obviously very glad that the dog went the other way. Now, that's not why I'm writing about this event. No, it's because when the dog came _back_, she _still_ failed to notice the rabbit, and ran straight back to the front door. Dogs are dumb.
11/18/09
I can has portable vershun?
11/18/09
11/18/09
11/18/09
11/18/09
11/18/09
11/18/09
11/18/09
11/18/09
11/18/09
11/18/09
Chances are a cat would come back alive if the system could handle a hard powerdown like that, but it would not be the same virtual cat that was there before because this new cat would have, at the very least, experienced a unique bootup that it had not experienced before, so arguably it is a different virtual cat that exists. Beyond that, chances are the cat lost everything it had in ram at the time of the power loss unless it was using that new-fangled ram that retains its last state. Of course if the developers include that technology they may have foiled my theory here.
11/18/09
11/18/09
11/18/09
11/18/09
HAI
CAN HAS STDIO?
VISIBLE "HAI WORLD!"
KTHXBYE
11/18/09
No doubt God is not going to be happy with mankind coming closer and closer to mimicing animal brains.
Oh dear. I guess I'll be sending this slices of bread, just like I did the LHC. Gabriel, make it so.
Mmmmm verry good sir
11/18/09
11/18/09
11/18/09
We're in ur mainframe, crunchin ur numberz
11/18/09
11/18/09
11/18/09
@Ishbar: I can has flowding maff coprosesser? KTHXBAI
11/18/09
@RayKinStL: I'm bettur then a Mac Quadra an i'm not evun tryin
11/18/09
11/18/09
11/18/09
11/18/09
They could probably fit all the processors necessary to out-think me in this building.
11/16/09
They could've tastelessly slapped a metric ton of EL accents, LEDs, and useless slabs of lucite on that bitch, cutting multiple windows in the case just so you can watch the blinkenlights symbolically represent the computing going on. #jaguar
11/16/09
11/16/09
11/16/09
11/16/09
11/16/09
11/16/09
11/16/09
Following Moore's law, can you imagine in 50 years when personal computers will have that computing power. At such computing power will all PC's be identical having capped the markets need for computing? What would an individual need with such computing power? #jaguar
11/16/09
11/16/09
[en.wikipedia.org]
On 13 April 2005, Gordon Moore stated in an interview that the law cannot be sustained indefinitely: "It can't continue forever. The nature of exponentials is that you push them out and eventually disaster happens." #jaguar
11/16/09
11/16/09
[www.vimeo.com] #jaguar
11/16/09
He did also point out that their are ultimate limits at the atomic level to how small things can get. #jaguar
11/16/09
11/16/09
According to this article ([www.macobserver.com]) the fastest Mac Pro in 2008 was 1/12,142 as fast as RoadRunner.
Given that ratio, it will only take 14 doublings (which is 16,384 times more) to reach this speed for a consumer computer.
Moore's law says we should expect a doubling of transistors on a chip every two years which comes to only 28 years.
Ray Kurzweil argues (convincingly) that the doubles are occurring faster than every two years and in fact are themselves speeding up. So 28 years is probably a very conservative estimate.
But will it run Crysis? #jaguar
11/16/09
11/16/09
11/16/09
*(I read this story in either one of my Scientific American or Discover magazines, I spent a few minutes looking for the article but could find which month or magazine it was. Props to the person who locates the original article for me. It was within the last 9 months.) #jaguar
11/16/09
11/16/09
11/16/09
11/16/09
11/16/09
11/16/09
[en.wikipedia.org] #jaguar