Did you know?

What provokes me is how little the content of the post really reflects the thread title :confused:
 
Did you know that the forum has seen this video twice before?

Still, I like seeing some of those statistics. There are foggies in the world (baby-boomers, I'm looking at you!) who are wholly unprepared for the changes that are happening. I know too many 50-somethings who're unwilling to learn how to use computers: even though they're on the verge of retiring and likely have another 30 years left.

Post-retirement schooling (i.e., re-attending college) is going to separate the wheat from the chaff.

Edit: I'm wrong. This is a new video along the same theme, but with different things to look at and new stats
 
I don't believe in this kind of predictions...

"By 2049, a $1000 computer will exceed the computing capabilities of the human race"

Can anyone explain that to me? :confused: Because it doesn't sound very scientific to me. Nor do any of the predictions. The statistics are interesting, but this kind of predictions are BS IMHO. My father has a book written in 1930 speaking about how in 1990 we will colonize Mars, in 1995 we will produce 10-gram portions of aliments enough for the entire life of any animal in the world at virtually no cost, and how in 2015 we will build a planet... :p
 
The 2049 prediction is WAY out there. Though the short-term predictions are much more feasible.

It's predicting that a laptop will be able to do more calculations per second than all the human brains combined.
 
The 2049 prediction is WAY out there. Though the short-term predictions are much more feasible.

It's predicting that a laptop will be able to do more calculations per second than all the human brains combined.

Yeah, I think they're basing it off of the improvement curve of current and past computers. To think that everything will go perfectly smooth that whole time with no plateaus is a bit out there.

Still, i'm looking forward to these new great computers everyone talks about. Have been talking about forever now. Because I can't wait to play the sweet new PC games on them. :lol:
 
The 2049 prediction is WAY out there. Though the short-term predictions are much more feasible.

It's predicting that a laptop will be able to do more calculations per second than all the human brains combined.

It already can do some calculations faster than the human brain. Yet, there are many more things the human brain can do, that a computer is far from achieving. Until it achieves those, it will never be superior to the human brain.

Stevenpfo said:
Yeah, I think they're basing it off of the improvement curve of current and past computers. To think that everything will go perfectly smooth that whole time with no plateaus is a bit out there.
Yes, planners do have a nasty, recurring tendency to realize that plans sometimes hit unforseen obstacles. They believe everything will go just as they've said. They generally don't leave enough room for error.
 
It already can do some calculations faster than the human brain. Yet, there are many more things the human brain can do, that a computer is far from achieving. Until it achieves those, it will never be superior to the human brain.

No, we are talking about all the human brains combined. Which is why I consider this prediction BS. :) And since when does calculating speed equal capabilities? That's another reason why I consider this prediction BS. :)
 
Well, once calculating speed is generated, then it's a function of programming. We certainly need better programmers and a better system to get people to be better programmers.

Still, remember the 2049 prediction is a hard-to-make prediction. The ones within the next 20 years are much more reliable, hopefully.
 
The whole thing is BS...what a waste of 8 mins of my life!:mad:
 
The original version had a lot more information in it, and better music.
 
^ :lol: Heh I love that joke, I use it all the time. But IMO it works better if you don't use a round percentage, something like: "73.28% of the statistics are made up on the spot". :D
 
I agree. I think it's a good sequel if you've seen the first, though.
(Oh, you're just biased regarding the music :))

I am actually biased about the whole thing, because I was the person who posted the original, the first time.
 
Top Bottom