You seem upset. You should eat some pie.
Yeah, not so much a "hope" for me though. When I read the title I just really doubted they meant to say what it sounded like they were saying. And sure enough, they didn't.
There very likely isn't any computational model that can solve any problems that some TM equivalent method can't. It's just a matter of doing them faster.
In your first reply you mentioned that computers are based on binary logic - on or off. I thought you were getting at quantum computing where you can have a combination of the two.
From the article - "One is the discovery of a material that allows electrons to switch states really quickly that could improve magnetic random access memory speeds by a factor of thousand." So, yeah, that's essentially what I said.
If the difference is that a single electron can store on or more bits then this is definitely equivalent to a Turing Machine.The only thing a Turing Machine specifies for storage is a sequence of symbols. How you create the symbols, whether by on/off bits or an electron that can represent multiple bits, is completely irrelevant as to whether or not is is the equivalent of a TM.
Ack! Should have read more carefully before posting. Not "pointless drudgery" - there's definitely a point to it. More like tedious drudgery to support the interesting bits.
They're not. But there seem to be a whole bunch of people who like to turn to science or technology for some type of transcendent experience or something.
"Oh almighty computer, how powerful you are! Surely your intellect will excel beyond us puny humans soon. I am so unworthy. *Grovel*"
It's just a desire to have something to take the place of what the faithful crowd use some omnipotent god for. All over a tool that can do pointless drudgery work quickly and efficiently so that us humans can spend our time working on interesting stuff. Meh.
Hmmm, I'm not so sure. Unless I'm missing something in the article the proposal does not offer anything new toward quantum computing. The advantages listed are the ability to switch electron states very quickly to improve RAM speeds and being able to read the spin of electrons - both without requiring excessive power to drive it.
I'm not sure how quantum computers compare to TMs. After some quick browsing it looks like they don't have the computational speed potential of the (only theoretical) non-deterministic Turing Machine.
I admit you got me at first. I guess I was never a fan of people determined to turn science and technology into religions. Those topics are already cool enough as they are. Plus there are enough faith-based alternatives for that kind of thing if it feels like it's something you need in your life.
- I would like to present the results of [experiment].
- I would like to lead a group discussion about the implications of [novel hypothesis].
- I would like to teach you how to perform [new calculation].
- I would like to tell everyone how to comply with [complex new regulations].
Sometimes a picture is worth a thousand words. I've been at very productive scientific meetings where someone puts up one or two slides of data and we spend the rest of the time in an open discussion around the whiteboard trying to figure out what it means (and which experiments should come next).
So what would be the budget for creating a medium-sized star?
Autonomous cars: oh, lordy lord lord, what a colossal fuck-up that will be; hubris on a scale undreamed of heretofore. Absolute perfection required of billions of kilos of metal racing around at high speed...
You seem to have entirely accidentally illustrated why it's very difficult to improve things with technology. In the United States, there are something like six million automobile accidents per year. Motor vehicle accidents kill about thirty-five thousand people each year, and maim many times that number. Yet for some reason, the expected standard for autonomous vehicles is no deaths, and no accidents.
It's a weird quirk of human psychology that we're predisposed to tolerate and accept - essentially without thought - any risk that we've faced for most of our lives, but primed to respond with terror to any 'new' threat, even if it replaces an older, more dangerous threat. The old, dangerous ways are always better than the newfangled ones. Heck, we build that prejudice into our regulatory frameworks. Compare the level of regulation - and level of passenger safety - associated with, for example, aircraft versus automobiles. If Aspirin (acetylsalicylic acid) or Tylenol (paracetamol/acetaminophen) had been brought to market in 1990, they'd be behind the pharmacist's counter, not sold on open shelves in 200-tablet extra-strength bottles. Our brains 'grandfather in' old risks, and react disproportionately to new ones.
If grinding and brewing is too tough get a super automatic espresso machine. Better long term purchase than a Keurig. Unground beans and water in and espresso out at the push of a button.
Sure it is 700-800 bucks but if you like coffee it is AWESOME (my wife and I drink a lot of coffee). The only problem is all other coffee tastes like old dishwater after you have one of these.
...nothing to keep him from taking them to court and suing over the original thing. Might even work to their favor. "Well your honor, they were going to pay us off, but then didn't when word of it got leaked out via facebook."
Suuuuuuure....because a judge is definitely going to want to incentivize violation of contracts and out-of-court settlements. That sort of encouragement couldn't possibly have negative effects.
And I'll leave aside the plaintiff's likely difficulties that would arise from saying "Well, I broke part of the contract already; let's go violate some more terms!"
It's hard to think that FaceBook would take this threat seriously. It's a $10+ Billion deal. Throwing in some extra first class seats for a different day would be the equivalent of a give-a-penny-take-a-penny dish compared to this.
Indeed. I expect that the deal happened in spite of, and not because of, this 'threat'. Sure, Facebook's team would have had an "Oh shit!" moment--but it would have been "Oh shit, we're dealing with an unprofessional nitwit" and not "Oh shit, he might walk away". Given that Koum has apparently decided it's a good idea to broadcast his unprofessional nitwittery, I imagine that Facebook's first move will be to keep him as far away as possible from anything dealing with 'business' as they possibly can.
Once you own one, you'll probably want to take it to a LAN party and show it off... which means it will need to be engraved.
This basically means you need to buy two.
Who wants to come to my engraver party?