hoopa

oh in that case, I feel much better. It's not like humans to make bad decisions. I'd like to think that nano technology could be used to a point, but my bet would be that money pushes it too far, too fast.

I guess they probably could but they could also do a LOT more harm. Can you say Grey Goo Theory? If I took a punt I would say the total destruction of the entire planet at a molecular level (and everything on it) could be a bad outcome? no? I think they could have endless applications if harnessed properly, and I think that there are some real positives that could come out of it. Sadly I think the potential of a run away technology like this would far out weight the benefits that we may gain from nanotechnology. A Pandora's box I'd rather see left closed.

As far as I can tell likes & dislikes would be pretty much down to environment & personal experiances. If anyone has forgotten, twins are not that rare, but I think technically regarded as clones (I think, happy to be corrected). That said, twins are never exactly the same in their behaviors & tastes. Meh, as for cloning humans, I think there are way too many of us already. Apart from that, diversity is one of the key principles of our survival to date. Take that away and we're totally screwed IMO. Start doing too much cloning and we become too similar. Once we're all 'perfect' (which I think is an impossibility), we are all prone to the same diseases, and the human population as a whole is weaker for it. Our diversity is one of the things that has served us so well in the past. e.g. strangely enough when the black plague hit London all those years back, I think there was some evidence that all the survivors had some similarity in their genes. That means that perhaps a portion of the population had a small advantage and survived. If we were all the same we may not be here right now. The idea repeats in nature too. Viruses run in strains, and only when we take a full course of anti-biotics do we kill then all. Take a half dose, and the strongest survive to create the next strain (of even stronger viruses). To play devils advocate however, I do think there are a few valid times where cloning is justified in it's end. Where I come from there was a creature called a Tasmanian Tiger. This creature is now extinct because the of the blind stupidity of humans who believed it to be a threat to livestock. Turns out it actually couldn't care less about livestock, but that doesn't matter now. There is a slim chance that this create could one day be cloned from preserved embryos of the tiger and brought back into existence. For those creatures who solely owe their disappearance to us, I think it only fair that we try and right some of our blunders of the past. My 2 cents

I had this little on what could be a new generation of MMRPG.Take GTA4, but combine it with an idea like transformers where all the vehicles in the turn into transformers. It could also have a little twist to it, because if you made it into an MMRPG like WoW, then all the vehicles would be players playing against each other. There could be some awesome scenarios for espionage, as moving around such worlds, you would forever provide an element of cautiousness as you'd be looking over your shoulder in case that innocuous looking truck started to bash your brains out. It might also give a some degree of flexibility for extravagant vehicles such as fighter jets, tanks, all manor of cars & trucks. Oh, an imagine the massive explosions, and large scale damage that you might be able to do. Everyone loves explosions. :(Anyway, that's my little rant. I thought it was a good idea anyway

You have to see this one. I can just see how this one got started. Two guys sitting around in their shed; "Wouldn't it be great if we could just fly the boat to the lake...", and hey presto another oddity of nature is born. http://gizmodo.com/383996/dinghy-%252B-hang-glider-%252B-giant-engine--hilarious-obituary

When I think steam cannons, I think chicken cannon from mythbusters Why did you decide to use copper for your cannons? I would think it's all good, as long as it doesn't explode ... From memory, a my friends made crude version of something like this from a long plastic tube (like those used in down pipes for houses). Put a stopper at one end, and a small hole at the bottom from memory. Spray some flammable aerosol into the tube, then insert an object about the same diameter as the tube so that it has a nice snug fit. I think oranges were the ammo of choice. Through the small hole, light the aerosol, and watch the orange fly. Needless to say my friends weren't all that intelligent, and lighting aerosol like that is quite dangerous. I personally like the confederate rocket experiments done by the mythbusters, a very impressive/scary display of what can be rigged up in a backyard. I particularily liked the ultra explosive wool that they had, and the the fact that they ran some of their rockets off Salami (I think) !!!

Hi all, I thought that this thread would be the most appropriate place to post my sign off message for Xisto. I have decided to move my website to another host because of a mutual benefit for both parties, but also partly because of the posting for hosting scheme at Xisto (I'll explain in a moment). For those that were interested in my work, my new website is now at http://punter.pokerplasm.com/, where I shall continue to post up my tips. I intend to try and keep posting at Xisto as I have really enjoyed some of the discussions here, as it is a rare thing to have some intelligent conversation for once. The next bit is to everyone, but specifically to the admins. Firstly, this is not to say that you are doing a bad job. I think the idea of posting for hosting is innovative and a really good idea for keeping an active forum. Part of the reason that I have decided to stop hosting with Xisto is that I have simply not been able to find the time to post, or the topics to post against. I appreciate it is a delicate balancing act in how credits are distributed, but I have found that even though I work a 9-5 office job and a a few spare hours each night, it has turned into a chore to upkeep my credit. I'm not being critical of the system, as I have no constructive comments on how this might be done differently, but I do hope to provide some constructive feedback on my experience for your future reference. I don't doubt that my website will soon go inactive, but I hope to still check in on these forums occasionally to see what is happening. Cheers, Hoopa

This is true the distinction between the two is very necessary, but they are inevitably tied together as well.I liked your examples of how we might mechanically perform the same functions as those described in the definition of life, but I actually think AI would be the more difficult of the two. Don't ever underestimate the complexity of that pile of goo in your head. As you say, it is the AI we need to go along with it. I can make all those things happen with machines, but it is my brain doing all the work. I find it interesting that it may be possible to create such an AI that could solely be based in a mechanical world, but that it could only come into existence because of another intelligent being. I diverge, but perhaps it was once possible that we came into being because of another intelligent being? As I said I diverge, and I don't want to do any 'god' chasing today, but it is an interesting thought.I categorise life into two groups, aware and non-aware. Life takes the form of plants and animals, but humans put themselves into an unique category that has self awareness. Niether is trivial to think about, but I'm sure that we'll figure out non-aware AI long before we reach self awareness.cheers,Hoopa

And how ironic is it that we all sit here on a forum, on the internet and discuss whether technology is good or bad, or if we should actually be outside doing something physical. There is only one thing that destroys the environment, and it's not technology. It is such a broad term, but it can hardly be divided into something that is black & white. Atom bombs, cures for cancer, fraud across the internet, keeping people in touch with family overseas, the consumption of a countless amount of fossil fuel, the ability to generate renewable energy etc. Should we be outside more? I think that is a personal choice. I think the more important point on this topic is what people do with that technology. With the more power that we wield as a society, there is ever increasing responsibility (to be badly quoted). Someone today described generation y as having grown up in an electronic world, but I don't see that as a bad thing. I see in ways that parents in the real world have let their children down in a way. Punishment (I do not mean abuse) of children is frowned upon now, and that probably has more to answer for than technology ever will. Get outside if you want, it is a very beautiful world out there, but we should not be frowning upon the people if they wish imerse themselves ina world that is an extension of our own. My 2c Cheers, Hoopa

Hi all,I was watching a documentary last night called Human 2.0. The doco revolved around the advancements in artificial intelligence, and the possible impacts that it might have on our lives. What do people think about the idea of humans creating 'artificial' life, is it actually possible, when will it happen, and what impacts that it might actually have on us?I personally think that we will one day succeed in creating an 'artificial' being. I say 'artificial' because what life is is still personally up for debate. The program talked about some people predicting this might happen as early as 2029, but if history has told us anything abot wild futuristic dreasm, it will more likely be hundreds of years in the making. As the name of the doco suggests (and I think some of the doco backed it up), that some people consider AI to be the next evolutionary step for human beings. I think this is partially correct. I been called negative before, but again I think we should refer to history again as after all we are the only species of humans left!! I think that when all is said and done we will be relegated to insignificance, and perhaps non-existence. From the comments being made around quantum computing, and the advances in AI, the results are very interesting and possibly very concerning at the same time.The thing I find ironic about the whole situation is that humans are possibly approaching a level of knowledge that we have never seen before, but at the same time the total outcome might not be totally 'positive' for us a whole.Any thoughts??Cheers,Hoopa

c'on how can you not like mythbusters? they blow stuff up!!! They do also provide some explanation behind what they are doing. I can see times where due to the limitations of producing an hour long tv show that certain amounts of detail are omitted, but hey, they blow stuff up. My all time favorite would have to be the confederate rocket. That was a most impressive display of how a little bit of knowledge can be a dangerous thing . We get a little bit of brainiac here, but it just seems to be a couple of guys doing dangerous stuff for no apparent reason. I'll admit the difference is only minor from what I just described (i.e. mythbusters blowing stuff up), but the mythbusters just seem to present far better than the brainiac crew.What do others rate as their favorite mythbusters experiment?Cheers,Hoopa

My 2c. Do I think space exploration is a good idea? Maybe. I can't really comment as I don't know much about NASA, but of all the wonderful things that we might discover due to space exploration, I just hope it is not tainted by that most evil of human ideas, money. I've heard of paid rides into space and things like that already popping up, and for me I think it only cheapens the value of such a thing. If experience tells us anything, if humans figure out how to do something, they will do it. I think it only inevitable that we will reach up and learn more about what is out there, not least of all other possible life forms.On the flip side, step back for a moment and stare at the stars. Space may be one of those few things that we have left that we can only reach in our wildest dreams, and all the possible things that might be out there. There may likely come a day when the wonder is removed from space, and that might make the universe a duller place. Think how people a few hundred years ago looked across the sea in wonder at what was beyond the horizon, or into the sky at the birds flying over head and only wishing we could do the same. Now we know, and these things seem merely trivial to us now. It will probably not happen for many generations to come, but perhaps one day we will take space for granted as well?Cheers,Hoopa

Which is better for the environment? If the car is the same size, is it better for the environment if the car runs on electricity, or on petrol? I'd have to say electricity would still win hands down, but some of our methods of generating electricity are questionable. There was show about elcric cars on tv today, and a very valid point was raised when it came to manufacturers adopting the new technology. An electric car has far fewer moving parts than a conventional car, and I would suspect that a great deal of revenue is generated from spare car parts (perhaps more than the cars themselves?)Cheers,Hoopa

Hi all,just a quick update on the accuracy of the system over the pre-season competition, before we get into the 'real' thing this weekend. :)Overall the performance wasn't too bad, but this has be be taken with grain of salt given the reduced number of games in the pre-season competition.11 correct tips out of 15 games (73%). Normally anything that cracks 60% over a whole season is a good result for the current system, but it does have good and bad years. The tips unusually performed lower that the total (4 correct from 7 games - 57%), but the silver tips made up for it, with 4 out of 4 for 100% accuracy.I won't post here too often about the results, but my latest picks are always up on my web site each week before the games.Cheers,Hoopa

On the principle of things, I don't think time travel is possible. e.g. If something bad happened, and someone went back in time to stop that event happening. If that event was then stopped, then that person would never travel back in time to stop it, and so the bad event would then happen because no one stopped it, and so someone would then go back in time to stop it ...... You see what I mean, I think paradox is the correct word in this case. I don't know much about physics, but perhaps if time travel, I could see some sort of black hole effect developing from this.The other option is that by traveling back in time there was no way that you could stop the event, such as the very fact that you traveled back in some way was woven in with the very event you're trying to stop.As for physics, I'm not sure what I believe anymore. A friend recently introduced the concept of entanglement to me, and that still has me scratching my head. I think the fact that an electron can exist in more than once place in the same instant pretty much blows what we know about physics out of the water.CheersHoopa

This is sad, but I also think this is where we are heading. Another planet would be nice, but I think colonisation of other planets will still be a pipe dream in 50 years. I find it mind numbing that no-one see that things are finite, and that non-one seems to realise the impact that it will have. 50 years from now will not be nice. If resources continue to dwindle, I can see a natural reduction in the human population as being the only outcome. It's nice not to think about how that will happen, but if we don't then that could well be a terrible reality. I shaw follow the rest of the world and stick my head in the sand and pretend my life is great. I have a car, fuel, electricity, gas, water, supermarkets . . . what could possibly be wrong? Cheers,Hoopa

I do have to agree, after my rant about a lack of safety . In a big city scenario, this would be an advantage. I can't say that I live in a large city, but I can see how this could only be an improvement on a auto-rickshaw. The thing that I find myself pondering is what might the impact of this cheap car be? If we introduce cheap cars like this, might they replace the rickshaws, but since they are cheaper and 'cleaner' might they also add even more vehicles to the roads. In turn might this make the roads more crowded, perhaps together add even more pollution than before, and in general have a negative effect? This is only speculation on my part with no actually proof, but these are the sums that need to be done in order to take a sale gimmick and give it some real substance.Cheers,Hoopa

"what will I have for breakfast?". I think these sort of questions (in time) could be answered. I'm not sure anyone would care, but they could probably be answered. e.g. as a person grows up they experience things, different foods, situations, emotions etc. A bad experience while eating one food may lead to bad memory when eating that food, and thus a dislike for that food. The opposite could be true for a positive experience. We do not yet understand a human brain, but perhaps one day we'll understand enough to read a humans memories and thought processes, and be able to calculate what I will decide to have for breakfast. As I said, I'm sure no-one will care, but we may work it out one day. Oh, if you've ever watched TV, then you've probably seen an electron in a state where we can control them enough to draw moving pictures with them.Cheers,Hoopa

Tudor: I must have missed something, as you seem to have failed to explain how there is any proof that anything was created by god. In just about every one of your statements, you've managed to state "god is the best explanation for...". You've listed the alternative scientific explanation, but nothing to back up exactly what "god did". Best is only a relative term. Let's assume that god is the best explanation, that doesn't necessarily make it the correct explanation. If all of those scientific theories turned out to be completely true, then I'd be as surprised as you. It is the scientific process that is the important thing in uncovering what is fact, and if that fact is god then the scientific process will eventually resolve to that conclusion. Sohaib: Thanks for your reply, and after doing a bit more reading about the Quran , I've become more impressed in the organisation of the Quran. There was a date around 650 AD where there was a consciouse decision to standardise the Quran. I still have to question the logic of your argument, as I think that you need to take a more objective view of things (i.e. try and step back from your religion for a few moments. I will try to show a few example of what I mean. a) As I put in my last post, Heliocentrism has been around for quite a while. It did not take me long to find a example that pre-dated 1400 years (about 9 BC). As you say, there may have been other recordings that pre-date Muhammad, but without evidence of that then you are not able to state that the Quran was the first to state the earth was not the center of the world. b.) My only info on this one is from wikipedia, so I'm open to more proof if you have it. I think it is true that the Quran has not changed for 1400 years. I think it is wrong that the Quran has never changed. In order for the Quran to be standardised 1400 years ago, this means that there had to be at least 2 versions of the Quran sometime before that, and it appears that any previous incarnations have not survived the test of time. I looks like the standardisation was to bring the variations of the Quran back into line with the original Quran. So, I have no proof that those other version existed and cannot progress this argument any further. I do not question anyones faith, but I know that humans are not perfect, and quite regularly make mistakes. No proof of the originality of a document can ever be trusted based solely on the word of a human. I'm not a trusting person. I cannot prove that the big bang is real, so I can only trust people know what they are talking about. Likewise, I cannot prove that God talked to Muhammad, so I can only trust that this is correct. One will be shown to be the truth, but only with proof can that be done.No guarantee on the info, but the source was: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quran c) I think this means no-one was shown to have known this before they wrote the Quran? I think we covered this one in part a (i.e. there are sources pre-dating the Quran). Another interesting point is that the death of Muhammad is stated to be 632. The standardisation of the Quran was stated to be in about 650 (after Muhammad's death). I do not want to go too far into this as I understand that Muhammad is a sensative topic, but keep in mind that perhaps Muhammad has never actually seen the current version of the Quran (if it is actually different from pre 600 AD. It is not my aim to disprove anything (I can disprove a lot of things), but the important thing is to provide solid objective proof. Until proof arises, then all we really have are theories (big bang, religion etc). If god is the answer, then we should remain open to that as a possibility. Science is not the answer, it is only way of discovering that answer, and that we should all be aware of the distinct possibility that we could all be totally wrong Cheers, Hoopa

OMG!!!! This is a joke, right? It sure will be good for the environment, as it'll only take one good collision to kill the occupants!!! I can't possibly see how something like that could stand a head on collision with a 4WD, or heaven forbid, a semi-trailer. You'd be picking the pieces of metal out of the road.

This is very impressive. I had a look at a few of the Youtube videos and I couldn't believe what was happening!!! The superheating is a little scary. I wasn't aware that you weren't supposed to boil water in the microwave, so I think I'll just stickto the good old kettle for boiling water. I'm going to have to try some supercooling for myself, it just looks too fun (edit) This didn't seem to warrant it's own thread, but... I was just looking at some of the Youtube vids from the this thread when I came across non-newtonian fluids. From what I can understand about these things, they are a fluid, but the viscosity is altered depending on the amount of force being applied to the fluid. After reading a bit, I found that quicksand is a type of non-Newtonian. Probably the most impressive example if these two guys, and their swimming pool full of non-Newtonian fluid How about: Superfluid (not sure exactly, but looks like it reaches 0 viscosity) Supersolid (I think, reaches the same properties as a superfluid, but in a solid state at low temperatures ???) Superconducticity (cooling some materials to a point where they produce magnetic fields ???) Superdiamagnetism (loss of magnetic field at low temperatures, associated with superconductivity) Cheers, Hoopa

I remember hearing about these, and I think if they ever see the light of day they may also solve Habble's wishes too. I can remember hearing about what was called optical storage, and crystals seem to fit the bill for that sort of thing. I have no references for this (and the wiki page didn't seem to have anything) that they were talking in amounts like terabytes for a device not more than 1 cubic centimeter!!! Imagine having a hew of those little beauties packed into your PC Some other technologies that I wish would turn up in my life time. Quantum Computers (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_computer) - this would make a 64 bit machine look like an abacus. Molecular Circuitry (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molecular_switch) - Bring on the RAM if they ever build this stuff Cheers, Hoopa

Hehe, as funny as that is, the question "what is your question?", is probably the most important question ?!? We can only find what we are looking for, and sometimes you can't only know what to look for until you have answered a whole fleet of other questions. I think yes, we can figure out how things work even things which may be relegated to 'fantasy' at this stage. Baby steps people, baby steps. Cheers Hoopa

Hi all, me again Just to let you know that I have a shiny new web space, care of Xisto. Now that my site is back up again, you should now be able to have a closer look at my results and judge for yourself how well Punter (the name of the system) does. There are some results for the NFL as well, but that has been discontinued until further notice. For those in Australia, my tips are up for the AFL pre-season grand final, with all my tips being available before the games. http://forums.xisto.com/no_longer_exists/ Cheers, Hoopa

is what you are proposing intended to be some sort of virtual reality world, or just something that could translate between mediums (e.g. take a photo, and make it into an animated video)?I could see the second would be very difficult. I would think the only way that we have right now is though some sort of 3D modeling package, which generally require an experienced and expert user.The first one reminds me a bit of the Matrix movies. The images of themselves in the matrix reflected their real world equivalents, except in the matrix they could manipulate the way that they appeared and the abilities that they had.From what you discussed, it sounds like you are looking at a more adult market? I would suggest going onto google and doing a quick search, as I would bet someone, somewhere has tried to do something like it.Cheers,Hoopa