HLP Network

News:

HLP Donations Page has been reworked for supporting the site.
Please note that the previous "Tiers" are currently not operational (but will be worked on).
You can still cancel any previous re-occurring donations to make new ones which will go to the new Treasurer Admin (Zacam).

   
« Previous Thread Next Thread »
Print
Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: Possible changes of the net  (Read 862 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Kosh

  • A year behind what's funny
  • 210
Possible changes of the net
on: September 19, 2004, 02:12:59 am
I'm suprised this hasn't been posted for debate yet. Yes, I know it is a week old.


http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/3643902.stm
"The reason for this is that the original Fortran got so convoluted and extensive (10's of millions of lines of code) that no-one can actually figure out how it works, there's a massive project going on to decode the original Fortran and write a more modern system, but until then, the UK communication network is actually relying heavily on 35 year old Fortran that nobody understands." - Flipside

Brain I/O error
Replace and press any key
 

Offline Clave

  • Myrmidon
    Get Firefox!
  • 23
    • Home of the Random Graphic
Possible changes of the net
Reply #1 on: September 19, 2004, 03:45:40 am
"If the net grows to 100 billion devices connected to it, our goal is to have a piece of Intel inside in every one of those hundred billion," :ha: Dream on....not in my house anyway.

It looks like scare-mongering to drum up business.
altgame - a site about something: http://www.altgame.net/
Mr Sparkle!  I disrespect dirt!  Join me or die!  Could you do any less?
 

Offline Liberator

  • Poe's Law In Action
  • 210
Possible changes of the net
Reply #2 on: September 19, 2004, 02:52:43 pm
100 Billion connected devices...

That's more connections than the human brain, are we sure the damn thing is not aware of us?
So as through a glass, and darkly
The age long strife I see
Where I fought in many guises,
Many names, but always me.

There are only 10 types of people in the world , those that understand binary and those that don't.
 

Offline aldo_14

  • Gunnery Control
  • 213
Possible changes of the net
Reply #3 on: September 19, 2004, 05:55:36 pm
100 billion is actually (unless my exponents are wrong, 100 bil is 10^11, isn't it?) the same number (well roughly) as there are computational units in the brain, but is still an order of magnitude less in terms of storage units.

Kinda makes you think, eh? :)
 

Offline Corsair

  • Gull Wings Rule
  • 29
Possible changes of the net
Reply #4 on: September 19, 2004, 08:22:07 pm
Intel inside every one? Sounds like a plot to take over the world...
Wash: This landing's gonna get pretty interesting.
Mal: Define "interesting".
Wash: *shrug* "Oh God, oh God, we're all gonna die"?
Mal: This is the captain. We have a little problem with our entry sequence, so we may experience some slight turbulence and then... explode.
 

Offline Kosh

  • A year behind what's funny
  • 210
Possible changes of the net
Reply #5 on: September 19, 2004, 11:43:43 pm
What if it is something that is just as small as a resistor or an IC chip?
"The reason for this is that the original Fortran got so convoluted and extensive (10's of millions of lines of code) that no-one can actually figure out how it works, there's a massive project going on to decode the original Fortran and write a more modern system, but until then, the UK communication network is actually relying heavily on 35 year old Fortran that nobody understands." - Flipside

Brain I/O error
Replace and press any key
 

Offline Grey Wolf

Possible changes of the net
Reply #6 on: September 20, 2004, 04:30:19 pm
Hm.... AMD, nVidia, ATI... Nope, no Intel parts in this computer :)
You see things; and you say "Why?" But I dream things that never were; and I say "Why not?" -George Bernard Shaw
 

Offline Aspa

  • 25
Possible changes of the net
Reply #7 on: September 20, 2004, 04:39:28 pm
Quote
Originally posted by aldo_14
100 billion is actually (unless my exponents are wrong, 100 bil is 10^11, isn't it?) the same number (well roughly) as there are computational units in the brain, but is still an order of magnitude less in terms of storage units.

Kinda makes you think, eh? :)


If you by computational units mean neurons, there's 10 billion of them, each with an average of 1000 connections to other neurons. And neurons work more like tiny computers (IIRC networks of tubulin (sp?) proteins functioning as cellular automata) than simple binary switches.
 

Offline aldo_14

  • Gunnery Control
  • 213
Possible changes of the net
Reply #8 on: September 20, 2004, 04:57:32 pm
Quote
Originally posted by Aspa


If you by computational units mean neurons, there's 10 billion of them, each with an average of 1000 connections to other neurons. And neurons work more like tiny computers (IIRC networks of tubulin (sp?) proteins functioning as cellular automata) than simple binary switches.


Brain has 10 ^ 11 neurons (100 billion, 1 billion = 10^9 unless i'm mistaken), 10^14 synapses, 10^-3secs cycle time, 10^14 bits/sec bandwidth and 10^14 neuron updates/sec.

IIRC the brains learning process is a strengthening of certain pathways between neurons, where the firing of said pathways is the result of sensory input.

I can;t remember offhand if the brains learning process is different from a computational neural network - in the latter case learning is performed by tuning a weight (upon the inputs to the 'neuron', also aka perceptron for non-feedback NNs), until a desired output is achieved (or rather, to move closer to that desired output).  Albeit I'm not sure how similar the brains own learning process is to this, it's been about 4 months or so since I studied it.
Print
Pages: [1]   Go Up
« Previous Thread Next Thread »