Human survival depends on space exploration, says Stephen Hawking

From the Winnipeg Free Press:

TORONTO - Stephen Hawking says the colonization of outer space is key to the survival of humankind, predicting it will be difficult for the world's inhabitants "to avoid disaster in the next hundred years."

The renowned astrophysicist explores some of the most remarkable advancements in technology and health with the new U.K.-Canadian series "Brave New World With Stephen Hawking," debuting Saturday on Discovery World HD.

 Before its premiere, he discussed the earth's most pressing concerns in an email interview with The Canadian Press from Cambridge, England, declaring space exploration to be humankind's most urgent mission.

 "We are entering an increasingly dangerous period of our history," said Hawking, who has Lou Gehrig's disease, leaving him almost completely paralyzed and unable to speak.

 "Our population and our use of the finite resources of planet Earth are growing exponentially, along with our technical ability to change the environment for good or ill. But our genetic code still carries the selfish and aggressive instincts that were of survival advantage in the past. It will be difficult enough to avoid disaster in the next hundred years, let alone the next thousand or million.

Pretty much what the nerds have been saying for years. If only Hawking played football, maybe people would listen.

Source Article

Senate votes down anti-Net Neutrality resolution

I suppose Obama won't have the chance to veto the bill after all.

The US Senate has decided the Federal Communications Commission's Net Neutrality rules are OK after all. Senators voted down S.J. Res 6 ("Disapproval of Federal Communications Commission Rule Regulating the Internet and Broadband Industry Practices") which criticized the FCC's rules, 52-46 on Thursday morning. President Obama had threatened to veto the resolution had it landed on his desk.

The Senate's vote was cheered by advocates of Net Neutrality rules. "We are pleased that the Senate stopped this dangerous resolution in its tracks," said Free Press Action Fund President and CEO Craig Aaron in a statement. "The Senate sent a strong signal today to would-be gatekeepers that the free and open Internet needs to stay that way. The American public doesn't want phone and cable companies undercutting competition, deciding which websites will work, or censoring what people can do online."

There are still other threats to the FCC's regulatory regime, most notable lawsuits filed by telecoms opposing Net Neutrality rules.

Source Article

Obama Pledges to Veto Anti-Net Neutrality Legislation

Interesting bit of convoluted politics popping up. Not too long ago, the FCC implemented rules favoring the concept of Net Neutrality. The concept is that internet service providers could, potentially, start providing premium services to those websites and pages that can afford it. That is, if, say, YouTube wanted to buy the rights to have higher streaming priority from an ISP, they could, and when someone tried to access YouTube, their streaming would trump Obscure Website B, who would load slower, etc, because they couldn't afford to buy off the ISP.

I find this interesting, because this is regulation that spurs competition, though in a different field.

By regulating and forcing ISPs to abide by the regulations (which haven't gone into effect yet), they are essentially creating a level playing field on the internet itself. This is regulation that (in theory) actually favors the little guy (on the internet) on some level, though probably to ISPs detriment. This doesn't happen terribly often. Hurting one capitalist market in favor of another.

Anyway, the Senate doesn't like it, and proposed a resolution to end those rules, which Obama plans to veto.

WASHINGTON — The White House said Tuesday that President Barack Obama likely would veto upcoming legislation that would unwind net-neutrality rules the Federal Communications Commission adopted last year.

Senate Journal Resolution 6, which is expected to go to the Senate floor perhaps as early as this week, “would undermine a fundamental part of the Nation’s Open Internet and innovation strategy — an enforceable, effective but flexible policy for keeping the internet free and open,” the White House said. The House passed a similar measure last spring, and Obama had threatened to veto that, too, if it landed on his desk.

The Senate measure, which mirrors the House resolution, says Congress “disapproves” of the FCC’s net neutrality rules, which “shall have no force or effect.” The rules, which don’t go into effect until Nov. 20, bar broadband providers like Comcast and Time Warner Cable from playing favorites with internet traffic, while a lighter set of rules applies to mobile broadband providers like

Not really sure how I feel about the whole situation. But I think I'm the FCC/Obama's side on this one. Maybe. Possibly.

Source Article

Polaroid: This time it’s digital

Never had a polaroid. Don't know that I care about it that much. But I found it interesting that it took them this long to reach this point. Technological limitations, or did no one simply connect the dots that this is a product that would sell?

Long before Facebook and Twitpic, photos were shared by simply handing someone a print. No camera made this easier than the once-ubiquitous Polaroid. Nothing represented instant gratification better in the film era than having a print develop before your eyes, ready to hand out in a minute. Unfortunately for Polaroid, the advent of digital photography sounded the death knell for its iconic instant print cameras. A brief reprieve in the form of inexpensive sticker-printing versions was ended by the cellphone camera revolution.

Now, after a decade in remission, Polaroid has returned with a full-up digital camera that incorporates instant printing technology. The Polaroid Z340 is a 14MP digital with an integrated Zink-enabled (Zero Ink) printer. In a nostalgic touch, the new camera prints 3×4-inch images, the same size as the original Polaroid film cameras. Remarkably, all this fits in a one-pound, seven-ounce package, about the same weight as a mid-range DSLR, although over twice as heavy as a typical point-and-shoot.

Speaking of unimplemented ideas, where's that pokemon MMO that no one has made yet? That's right, it doesn't exist, and somewhere there is an economist crying because of the massive opportunity cost of it all.

Source Article

A Laser to Give the Universe a Hernia?

Think back to 2008, when the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) was about to be switched on for the first time. Remember all those "micro-black hole," "spacetime-ripping," "stranglet-creating" doomsday headlines?

Although much of the hype was complete nonsense, those pesky physicists are at it again; they want to build a laser so powerful that it will literally rip spacetime apart. 

The headlines write themselves.

What's more, by giving spacetime a hernia, it is hoped that theorized "ghost particles" may spill from the fissure, providing evidence for the hypothesis that extra-dimensions exist and the vacuum of space isn't a vacuum at all -- it is in fact buzzing with virtual particles.

Such a laser could also help in understanding the nature of dark matter, the "missing" mass that is thought to pervade the entire observable Universe.

Big "Frickin' Laser Beams"

As we all know, all good megalomaniac plans for world domination start with lasers (not necessarily attached to sharks' heads). But the lasers planned by the Extreme Light Infrastructure Ultra-High Field Facility, known as "ELI," would concentrate 200 petawatts of power -- that's 100,000 times the world's energy production -- and fire it at a single point for less than a trillionth of a second.

The combined power of 10 separate lasers would be focused down to a very small volume, creating conditions more extreme than in the center of our sun. It is hoped (yes, hoped) that this immense energy will punch a hole through the fabric of spacetime itself, heralding a new era of exotic physics discovery.

No one sees an issue with this? Maybe I'm just a pessimist, but we only have one planet, and no feasible way to escape it if we somehow manage to destroy it, and we're trying to, on our only planets surface, rip apart the fabric of existence itself just to see what happens?

I totally appreciate the curiosity and search for knowledge, but maybe this isn't the best experiment to try. Seriously people. This is tried a lot in science fiction. Many, many variations on a theme. And in every variation, it goes completely wrong. And do you know why? Because it's a terrible idea. Never mind how cool this many super powerful lasers is on the surface, it's a bad idea past the awesome 'splosion factor.


And people wonder why the public defunds science.

That said, if we do destroy the planet, I hope this monstrosity makes the Death Star sound, and we go out Alderaan style. I might forgive them if that's how it plays out.


Source Article