[Tfug] IBM 5100 v. Holographic Computers

[Brian Masur]

As far as I know, hologra[m|phic] refers to storage, not how AI works...

>From: sitkaa at email.arizona.edu
>Reply-To: Tucson Free Unix Group <tfug at tfug.org>
>To: tfug at tfug.org
>Subject: [Tfug] IBM 5100 v. Holographic Computers
>Date: Thu,  6 Jul 2006 14:47:32 -0700
>
>Good point. Please, correct me if I am wrong. My understanding of 
>holographic
>computing/memory storage is that the OS self evolves (holographically?), in 
>a
>way that we cannot really follow, as the computer does its functions.
>
>Should this become the ubiquitous computing platform running our
>society, the 32
>bit problem will definately become moot. However, to play devil's advocate
>again, we have had the promise of optical computers for a few years 
>already.
>One of the problems, aside from switching, is that no one really knows how 
>to
>program them very well.
>
>I sincerely doubt we will have flying cars in 25 years. Among the flying 
>car
>projects, the Moller flying car (which doesn't work very well) has been 
>among
>us for almost this amount of time. (http://www.moller.com/skycar) Here we 
>are
>just now developing a rudimentary transportation system that could handle 
>the
>traffic control personal flying craft neccessitate. 
>(http://sats.nasa.gov/).
>Two and one-half decades is not that long to restructure a large social 
>system
>upon which everyone depends daily.
>
>The original question stands. Is the IBM 5100 architecture worth 
>integrating
>into modern computers, or is it simply a relic worthy of derision due to 
>its
>unfortunate association with a time traveler before its time? I am curious 
>to
>read your responses.
>
>This is relevant to me, in particular, because I am standing at the
>beginning of
>a large potential project that proposes to migrate many public planning
>functions into the *nix world. How can I seriously propose this if the
>IT world
>doesn't take the time stamp problem seriously?
>
>It will take time and effort to fix this time stamp problem. It doesn't 
>simply
>dissappear.
>
>
>
>
>Quoting Judd Pickell <pickell at gmail.com>:
>
> > This whole thread postulates that OSs will be the same in 25 years. At 
>the
> > current rate of change, wouldn't it be more feasible to believe that the
> > problem will evaporate just as the 2k bug did? What is the concern of a
> > 32bit int in a world where variables are only light pulses:
> > http://www.holographiccomputing.com/
> >
> > On 7/6/06, Brian Murphy <murphy+tfug at email.arizona.edu> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Tucson Free Unix Group - tfug at tfug.org
>Subscription Options:
>http://www.tfug.org/mailman/listinfo/tfug_tfug.org