More Travel Tips:
7 stunning end of the world predictions
According to scientists, the world could endon March 16, 2880. Asteroid 1950 DA has a 0.3% chance of hittingEarth in 867 years. At 1 km in diameter, rotates once every twohours and six minutes and would cause untold damage were it to hit the earth.The Shrinking Mt Everest, 2015 There was something else going on with thelandscape of Nepal, which nobody would have even thought of us.As the earthquake subsided, what came as a real shocker was that the earth's highestmountain range, Mt. Everest stood 2.8 cm smaller, according to satellite data.Earth's magnetic field flips!
The biggest reason which led the Mayan apocalypsebelievers to predict the end of the world in 2012 was based on the changing patternsof Earth's magnetic fields. However, Earth's magnetic field is stillweakening 10 times faster than normal, at present and can further weaken.Earth's magnetic field flips! The biggest reason which led the Mayan apocalypsebelievers to predict the end of the world in 2012 was based on the changing patternsof Earth's magnetic fields. However, Earth's magnetic field is stillweakening 10 times faster than normal, at present and can further weaken.Earth Will Be Destroyed by Floods and Earthquakes
by 2021.A series of apocalyptic events, including floods and earthquakes will spell the endof the world before 2021, according to a doomsday prophecy.NEW UNKNOWN WEAPON In this scenario a new type of weapon is created.It might be a Fusion Bomb capable of turning the world into a shortterm star, it mightbe a new form of radiation or it might even be a gravitational weapon that stops the worldspinning. TOTAL NUCLEAR WARThe devastation from thermonuclear blasts would be bad enough and would send what wasleft of mankind back to the Stone Age.
The radiation would engulf the planet on ascale that can't be imagined. Within 6 months anyone who was not â€œblown upâ€� would bevery sick. Within 24 months just about everyone is dead.
Humans Need Not Apply
Every human used to have to hunt or gatherto survive. But humans are smartly lazy so we made tools to make our work easier. Fromsticks, to plows to tractors we've gone from everyone needing to make food to, modernagriculture with almost no one needing to make food â€” and yet we still have abundance. Of course, it's not just farming, it'severything. We've spent the last several thousand years building tools to reduce physicallabor of all kinds. These are mechanical muscles â€” stronger, more reliable, and more tirelessthan human muscles could ever be. And that's a good thing. Replacing human laborwith mechanical muscles frees people to specialize
and that leaves everyone better off even thoughstill doing physical labor. This is how economies grow and standards of living rise. Some people have specialized to be programmersand engineers whose job is to build mechanical minds. Just as mechanical muscles made humanlabor less in demand so are mechanical minds making human brain labor less in demand. This is an economic revolution. You may thinkwe've been here before, but we haven't. This time is different. Physical Labor
When you think of automation, you probablythink of this: giant, custombuilt, expensive, efficient but really dumb robots blind tothe world and their own work. There were a scary kind of automation but they haven'ttaken over the world because they're only cost effective in narrow situations. But they are the old kind of automation, thisis the new kind. Meet Baxter. Unlike these things which require skilledoperators and technicians and millions of dollars, Baxter has vision and can learn whatyou want him to do by watching you do it.
And he costs less than the average annualsalary of a human worker. Unlike his older brothers he isn't preprogrammed for one specificjob, he can do whatever work is within the reach of his arms. Baxter is what might bethought of as a general purpose robot and general purpose is a big deal. Think computers, they too started out as highlycustom and highly expensive, but when cheapish generalpurpose computers appeared they quicklybecame vital to everything. A generalpurpose computer can just as easilycalculate change or assign seats on an airplane or play a game or do anything by just swappingits software. And this huge demand for computers
of all kinds is what makes them both morepowerful and cheaper every year. Baxter today is the computer in the 1980s.He's not the apex but the beginning. Even if Baxter is slow his hourly cost is penniesworth of electricity while his meatbased competition costs minimum wage. A tenth thespeed is still cost effective when it's a hundred times cheaper. And while Baxtor isn'tas smart as some of the other things we will talk about, he's smart enough to take overmany lowskill jobs. And we've already seen how dumber robots thanBaxter can replace jobs. In new supermarkets what used to be 30 humans is now one humanoverseeing 30 cashier robots.
Or the hundreds of thousand baristas employedworldwideé There's a barista robot coming for them. Sure maybe your guy makes your doublemochawhateverjust perfect and you'd never trust anyone else but millions of people don't careand just want a decent cup of coffee. Oh and by the way this robot is actually a giantnetwork of robots that remembers who you are and how you like your coffee no matter whereyou are. Pretty convenient. We think of technological change as the fancynew expensive stuff, but the real change comes from last decade's stuff getting cheaper andfaster. That's what's happening to robots now. And because their mechanical minds arecapable of decision making they are outcompeting
Viktor MayerSchonberger Kenneth Cukier BIG DATA A Revolution That Will Transform
FEMALE SPEAKER: Pleasejoin me in welcoming Mr. Kenneth Cukier. APPLAUSE KENNETH CUKIER: Thankyou very much. You can probably appreciate thefact that I've got a lot of trepidation coming here totalk to you folks for the obvious reason that I'mwearing a suit.
And the truth is I had abreakfast this morning at the Council on Foreign Relationsto talk to them about the international implicationsand the foreignpolicy implications of big data. That leads to the secondtrepidation and the context of my remarks. So the second trepidation isthat this is a sort of homecoming for the book.
Because my journey, so to speak,in the world of big data started at Googleand started at the Googleplex in 2009. It was you folks who opened upthe kimono to what you were doing in very smalllittle slivers. I never got the full picture. But I was able to cobble it alltogether and see something and then give ita label to it.
Luckily, there was a coupleof labels that we were thinking of. And I reached for one thatwasn't a popular term at the time, and the termwas big data. And that was really helpful. It was the cover storyof quot;The Economistquot; in February of 2010. It was called quot;The Data Delugequot;,because they thought
they would sell it betterthan saying quot;big data.quot; But big data it was basically all aboutthat and about what you guys are doing. And so it brings me great fearto walk into a room, because you guys have been doingit for so long. And that brings me intothe context of my conversation today.
I want it to be aconversation. I was obviously just at theCouncil on Foreign Relations thinking about this in ways thatI am sure your engineers never thought aboutit 10 years ago. I may have heard a snort. But here's the thing. Many of you were thinking ofit as a technological issue when people around the worldthink of it in terms of the