Hello,
At 22:47 07-05-2015, Mohammad Nadim wrote:
>Hololens is quite new to all of us. But if you watch or listen to
>the talks given by Michio Kaku, you'll realise that physicists
>developed (or were testing) these technologies back some 5-10 years ago!
"In 1948, Dennis Gabor introduced 'A new microscopic principle',
which he termed holography". There were some experiments around 1966.
>In the year 2000, if someone asked what is the hardest element on
>earth, we would say "diamond" but unfortunately (or fortunately)
>this is not the case now. In the labs, physicists developed
>something called "graphite" (a form of carbon, like diamond), which
>is light (the weight) and hard enough that a 1mm think graphite
>sheet can hold you in the air (pseudo-levitate!) if you sit on it.
Yes.
>Watch https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=219YybX66MY - delivered on
>October 28, 2009, but you'll realise that they tested these
>technologies before 2009!
Thanks for sharing the video. There was a comment about
"connected". The comment about the origins of the internet is
incorrect. There is some marketing in the speech; the author kept
mentioning his book. The author worked on the second-quantization of
the light-cone string (related to string field theory).
At 23:06 07-05-2015, Amaelle Lamusse wrote:
>Hope you guys are doing great today. Concerning this topic, I would
>like to share my point of view :
>
>"You focused on the robot and whether it would act against us. Is
>that because it is usually what we see in movies?" It is not always
>the case. If we take into consideration movies like "Bicentennial
>man", "I, Robot", "Wall-E" or "Robots" to name a few, we clearly see
>that robots or androids are not always meant to threaten humanity or
>destroy but to be friendly and help rather. Of course, if we take
>more extreme scenarios like "Terminator" or "The Matrix" things are
>totally different... If we remember Asimov's 3 laws of robotics
>correctly (which in his fictions are hardwired in the robots'
>positronic brain), we can see for instance that robots shouldn't
>normally represent any form of threat and shouldn't be harmful to humans.
I suggest reading about the uncanny valley if you are interested in a
critic of the three laws of robotics.
>"Do people in Mauritius view the internet as advanced
>technology? Is it still something alien to most people?" : I don't
>think that the Internet is generally viewed as an advanced
>technology here. Of course it is still quite new to some people but
>I doubt it could be qualified as alien, at least if we consider the
>word from a strict etymology point of view.
Ok.
>"The Hololens may look like advanced technology as it is not
>something which has been done before. However, it looks primitive
>in relation to what researchers would like to do." : Very true.
>Technology is not something that you can stop from progressing. A
>lot of research is being carried out every day and there are things
>that can be done now that we could never conceive in our mind
>before. There are also major improvements that we remain unaware of
>as they are not publicized yet... People are now raving about web
>5.0 so I guess even in our own mind, technology is an ongoing
>process... Eventually what matters is what we do out of it and how
>we use it. Sometimes what we as humans elaborate tend to be the most
>harmful to ourselves.
I'll comment about the above from an internet in Mauritius
perspective. It is possible to stop the internet and some of the
technology that comes with it from progressing. There would affect
the technological progress of the island as there isn't any important
technological research in Mauritius. Are you looking at publicized
in terms of what appears in the local press or on MBC TV? I would
not rely on that for information about new technology. I like with
what you wrote about the human tendency to be the most harmful to itself.
Regards,
S. Moonesamy
Received on Fri May 08 2015 - 15:12:21 PST