i work in mergers & acquisitions.
libertarian benefit collector - anti-academic super-intellectual. http://mixlr.com/the-little-phrase/
And for a decade or two, exactly how far did computers advance in comparison to the rate of development that follows?Dilbert_X wrote:
For a decade or two computers sold only to corporations, high end computers still do.Spark wrote:
You speak of them as if they are completely separate. They are not. The staggering pace of research and development in computers, computer science, especially at an exceptionally high level - AI and the like - is only possible due to consumerism. Simply put, Intel and IBM didn't make processors to help automate critical systems. They made them to sell, sell, sell. It's not pretty, but it's how it works. You cannot separate the two.Dilbert_X wrote:
They aren't that complicated TBH, the systems you mention are practically steady-state, nothing too complex there.
A single 286 would run the average power plant just fine.
Its consumer goods which absorb the huge volumes of materials, not a few simple computers managing our infrastructure.
Likewise, the search for a cheap very-high-temperature superconductor, which would cause staggering change, a large part of which would be undeniable progress, would be a lot slower if not for the money involved in doing so. Again it's not pretty, but it's how it works. If you want the good stuff you gotta deal with the excess as well.
Not having that excess is less a question of technological progress and much more a question of society's inherent mindset/attitude towards, well, everything. Basically.
Consumers were irrelevant in that part of the progress, and still are in terms of real progress.
Pah, engineers. I bet you use H instead of B too. :pA joule is rather useless without a force attached. I work in watts.
The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
~ Richard Feynman
Like calling me a pog, your insults don't work here either. Do you even know what joules, newtons, and watts are? What is their relationship?Uzique wrote:
Dilbert_X wrote:
Jay wrote:
No, I don't. Joules are energy, watts are power. When discussing machinery that allows humans free time, watts are the most appropriate unit.Sorry, wrong.every watt harnessed is one less joule expended by humansWould be correct, except its Watts and Joules, and you don't really harness a Watt.every watt harnessed is one less joule expended by humans every secondGalt wrote:
you should have taken physics, uziqueGalt wrote:
i did a remarkable engineering course
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
Jay wrote:
A joule is rather useless without a force attached. I work in watts.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JouleWiki wrote:
(a Joule) is equal to the energy expended (or work done) in applying a force of one newton through a distance of one metre
Please give the engineering stuff a rest now.
Last edited by Dilbert_X (2011-07-20 05:49:19)
Fuck Israel
Nah, I was taught BSpark wrote:
And for a decade or two, exactly how far did computers advance in comparison to the rate of development that follows?Dilbert_X wrote:
For a decade or two computers sold only to corporations, high end computers still do.Spark wrote:
You speak of them as if they are completely separate. They are not. The staggering pace of research and development in computers, computer science, especially at an exceptionally high level - AI and the like - is only possible due to consumerism. Simply put, Intel and IBM didn't make processors to help automate critical systems. They made them to sell, sell, sell. It's not pretty, but it's how it works. You cannot separate the two.
Likewise, the search for a cheap very-high-temperature superconductor, which would cause staggering change, a large part of which would be undeniable progress, would be a lot slower if not for the money involved in doing so. Again it's not pretty, but it's how it works. If you want the good stuff you gotta deal with the excess as well.
Not having that excess is less a question of technological progress and much more a question of society's inherent mindset/attitude towards, well, everything. Basically.
Consumers were irrelevant in that part of the progress, and still are in terms of real progress.Pah, engineers. I bet you use H instead of B too. :pA joule is rather useless without a force attached. I work in watts.
Edit- and the right hand rule
Last edited by Jay (2011-07-20 05:49:56)
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
Good man.Jay wrote:
Nah, I was taught BSpark wrote:
And for a decade or two, exactly how far did computers advance in comparison to the rate of development that follows?Dilbert_X wrote:
For a decade or two computers sold only to corporations, high end computers still do.
Consumers were irrelevant in that part of the progress, and still are in terms of real progress.Pah, engineers. I bet you use H instead of B too. :pA joule is rather useless without a force attached. I work in watts.
Edit- and the right hand rule
The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
~ Richard Feynman
According to Moore's law IIRC, which hasn't changed since consumerism took over.Spark wrote:
And for a decade or two, exactly how far did computers advance in comparison to the rate of development that follows?
Fuck Israel
It seems you don't so just stop.Jay wrote:
Do you even know what joules, newtons, and watts are? What is their relationship?
Fuck Israel
i did science up to a pre-university level pretty well, yeah, though knowing their relationships seemingly doesn't help you form a cogent intellectual argument, does it? instead you come out with anti-academic, anti-philosophical tripe in a discussion that's really questioning the philosophy of science. yeah, lets think about this question of meta-narrative and 'progress' by showing off our knowledge of energy!!!!Jay wrote:
Like calling me a pog, your insults don't work here either. Do you even know what joules, newtons, and watts are? What is their relationship?Uzique wrote:
Dilbert_X wrote:
Jay wrote:
No, I don't. Joules are energy, watts are power. When discussing machinery that allows humans free time, watts are the most appropriate unit.Sorry, wrong.every watt harnessed is one less joule expended by humans
Would be correct, except its Watts and Joules, and you don't really harness a Watt.Galt wrote:
you should have taken physics, uziqueGalt wrote:
i did a remarkable engineering course
libertarian benefit collector - anti-academic super-intellectual. http://mixlr.com/the-little-phrase/
Dude, you're a moron. A joule without force is potential energy, like food. A joule with a force attached is power, like a car engine. Why do you think continental European cars are rated in watts while their food is rated in joules.Dilbert_X wrote:
It seems you don't so just stop.Jay wrote:
Do you even know what joules, newtons, and watts are? What is their relationship?
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
I rate my food in carrots
Do you have orange skin?Jenspm wrote:
I rate my food in carrots
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
Anyway this has gotten kind of boring now, so...
In a pickle. Have to choose one of these to do next semester, but can't make my mind up as to which one takes my fancy. Although I do kind of like the look of the wave-particle resonance one, looks neat and kind of useful.
In a pickle. Have to choose one of these to do next semester, but can't make my mind up as to which one takes my fancy. Although I do kind of like the look of the wave-particle resonance one, looks neat and kind of useful.
The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
~ Richard Feynman
I'd go with the orbitals myself.Spark wrote:
Anyway this has gotten kind of boring now, so...
In a pickle. Have to choose one of these to do next semester, but can't make my mind up as to which one takes my fancy. Although I do kind of like the look of the wave-particle resonance one, looks neat and kind of useful.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
o.OJay wrote:
Dude, you're a moron. A joule without force is potential energy, like food. A joule with a force attached is power, like a car engine. Why do you think continental European cars are rated in watts while their food is rated in joules.Dilbert_X wrote:
It seems you don't so just stop.Jay wrote:
Do you even know what joules, newtons, and watts are? What is their relationship?
and you call me a moron
You clearly don't know what those words mean.A joule with a force attached is power
Last edited by Dilbert_X (2011-07-20 06:41:34)
Fuck Israel
Ok dilbert, whatever you say.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
Wow.
Firstly the whole progress thing. Seriously?
All im going to say is Quantum computing.
As for mining space rocks supplying huge amounts of material I find it very difficult to see how this would not facilitate progress. Ultimately our ability to mine and build within space will dictate our penetration throughout our solar system. The higher availability of rare earths will help to catalyse our space expansion by significantly reducing input costs. Lets be honest the biggest barrier to space atm is cost.
I agree not everything we make is directly advancing society however the technology that is being developed has a myriad of other uses which do.
Firstly the whole progress thing. Seriously?
All im going to say is Quantum computing.
As for mining space rocks supplying huge amounts of material I find it very difficult to see how this would not facilitate progress. Ultimately our ability to mine and build within space will dictate our penetration throughout our solar system. The higher availability of rare earths will help to catalyse our space expansion by significantly reducing input costs. Lets be honest the biggest barrier to space atm is cost.
I agree not everything we make is directly advancing society however the technology that is being developed has a myriad of other uses which do.
What happened to landing on Mars?
The irony of guns, is that they can save lives.
cost, and the staying 2 years there, with radiation and shitWar Man wrote:
What happened to landing on Mars?
Haha, there is a small quantum computing is a complete pipe dream. Very small, though, that field is advancing very rapidly.Cheeky_Ninja06 wrote:
Wow.
Firstly the whole progress thing. Seriously?
All im going to say is Quantum computing.
As for mining space rocks supplying huge amounts of material I find it very difficult to see how this would not facilitate progress. Ultimately our ability to mine and build within space will dictate our penetration throughout our solar system. The higher availability of rare earths will help to catalyse our space expansion by significantly reducing input costs. Lets be honest the biggest barrier to space atm is cost.
I agree not everything we make is directly advancing society however the technology that is being developed has a myriad of other uses which do.
The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
~ Richard Feynman
Fat neutron observed! http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/20 … witterfeed
It's official name is Ξb0, with a sub composition (a neutron is udd).
Oh, and by the way its existence was predicted by the Standard Model. The theory that keeps on going, eh?
It's official name is Ξb0, with a sub composition (a neutron is udd).
Oh, and by the way its existence was predicted by the Standard Model. The theory that keeps on going, eh?
The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
~ Richard Feynman
Mmm ive been catching updates on the progress should be interesting. Hoping its not stillborn.Spark wrote:
Haha, there is a small quantum computing is a complete pipe dream. Very small, though, that field is advancing very rapidly.
Show me... magnetic charge!Spark wrote:
Fat neutron observed! http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/20 … witterfeed
It's official name is Ξb0, with a sub composition (a neutron is udd).
Oh, and by the way its existence was predicted by the Standard Model. The theory that keeps on going, eh?
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
few days ago a new moon of pluto has been discovered! it is called p4 now.
i think this the great news, it shows there are many unknowns even in our own solar system and im very exited what the new horizons probe will see when it finally reaches pluto in 2015
http://www.space.com/12356-pluto-fourth … photo.html
i think this the great news, it shows there are many unknowns even in our own solar system and im very exited what the new horizons probe will see when it finally reaches pluto in 2015
http://www.space.com/12356-pluto-fourth … photo.html
Last edited by menzo (2011-07-21 05:18:25)