I would recommend JavaScript. Hybrid apps are completely viable

>> We stuff billions of logic gates into a square centimeter of silicon.
Compared to hundreds of trillions synaptic connections and everything that happens at chemical and molecular level, that is minuscule. Sense of scale.

>>We already pretty much understand how a neuron works,
No we dont. Understanding how 300 neurons of c.elegans worm actually work is beyond our current capability.

>> it's just the emergent behaviour of billions of those neurons connected to each other that still evades us
Bollocks, for all we know connections are just a small part of the puzzle. Chemical and molecular level functions could be the key for actual functioning nervous system, worst case quantum level.

In other news, Big Oil is suspiciously quiet on wearables. Big pharma completely ignores twitter hashtags. Conservative think thanks have not chimed in on the icebucket meme. Mainstream media headlines on systemd fiasco are eerily minimal.

Is your pillow trying to quietly kill you ?

Most researchers ( including AI researchers ) dont do engineering very well, and hence dont understand the basic principles that in engineering everything is a tradeoff. Whether you are trading back and forth around physical resources ( flops, bandwidth , latency, memory ) or more abstract constructs like sockets etc everything is still a tradeoff.

There is a theory that there is significant "resource overhang" ( http://wiki.lesswrong.com/wiki... ) in our computers today, meaning that we are not really utilizing the physical resources the best, as more efficient algorithms will simply blaze faster on existing hardware. That is another case of "duh, captain obvious" where they do not understand most basic algorithmic optimizations are ALSO tradeoffs.

In short, all "hard takeoff" AI scenarios are delusional, and most "moderate takeoff" AI scenarios are misguided. "Soft takeoff" however is happening every day, for example case where genetic algorithms for example are used to work out better solutions to isolated problems than human designer could.

Hydrogen makes some sense for long haul trucks and Greyhound and alike. The high capital investment of filling stations and the rest of the infrastructure etc can be more easily absorbed by fleets. It makes almost no sense for passenger cars.
However, Kenworths, Macks and Volvos of the world are in no rush to do that capital investment from their side, lacking any serious incentives.

There is no existing mechanism for an AI that somehow was started on a particular type of computing equipment to suddenly and exponentially start increasing the computing efficiency of that equipment, even if the whole thing is an FPGA. Even if it would be directly linked to each and every machine at TSMC or UMC it cannot magically start shitting out better CPUs and plug them into itself.

Yeah "it" will be self limiting for the obvious reason - processing takes resources. There is not going to be an exponential explosion in computing without exponential explosion in power efficiency or resource availability. Nothing in my laptop will ever become sentient, the power supply is not sufficient for such a crappy flops/watts design.

I have tech parks everywhere around here ( sf bay area ). All of them have tons of business or activity happening. As a startup dude, you actually have to fight for space, its that busy. You build a tech park here, you are guaranteed to have people in there, creating businesses, making money and spurring economic development - paying everything back in taxes.

This spaceport in NM doesn't do any of that.

>>Unix (Linux) is about as far from a monoculture as you can get

What, like Android that has linux underneath ?

You generally aren't supposed to play that much of a VC or blackjack with public money. Could as well build a unicorn zoo and cold fusion powered monorails with the expectation that someone will eventually bring unicorns and cold fusion.

Creating business incentives like tax breaks is one thing, because real money gets involved if there is actual business happening. Massive infrastructure investments for business and technology that doesn't exist yet is a whole different level.

I think your reply missed the point.
In this case, NM government tried to attract a class of businesses that doesn't really exist. After X-Prize win everyone was high on suborbital tourism and regular passenger services from multiple providers appeared to be magically around the corner to many, mostly to a bunch of talking heads that have never built a real business by themselves.
10 years later, "suborbital industry" does not exist, apart from the sounding rockets that have always been flying. Every would be entrant either folded, failed or in the case of VG keeps overpromising and underdelivering. Branson starts to sound like Paul Moller after a while.

This is not a statement whether there is a market potential and would be customer, or technological and economical feasibility of the industry. This is a statement about every entrant in the field abysmally failing to deliver.

What you are looking at is quite possibly the last of the species. There likely wont be a mainstream successful handheld console that is made for gaming.

Agreed with most of what you say. There IS one area where Mac loses in flexibility, it's system programming. If you ever have to do anything with hardware or drivers etc, working on OS X is often like trying to run a marathon in a thick jungle.
I.e. yes you have all the freedom with your software in userspace, but touch any foundation layers and you are at mercy of apple.

Author Susan Marenco has been caught up in the swirling controversy. She spoke with ABC News, saying her assignment for the project was to write about Barbie as a "designer." It's not necessarily uncommon in the industry to have game designers working on the look, flow and story of a game while programmers handle the coding side.

That is clearly misogyny and cis scum right there.

I saw a factor of 10 less warnings and errors, so yeah there is a point.