Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Intel Communications Input Devices Science

Intel To Help Stephen Hawking Communicate Faster 133

Posted by samzenpus
from the keep-talking dept.
hypnosec writes "Stephen Hawking's ability to communicate has been deteriorating over the years and as it stands, he is only able to communicate at the rate of 1 word per minute. Intel CTO Justin Rattner has revealed that they are working on an interface that will boost the scientist's speech to up to 10 words per minute. Beyond twitching his cheek, Hawking is also capable of other voluntary facial expressions which can be tapped to achieve faster communications with the help of a better character interface and a better word predictor."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Intel To Help Stephen Hawking Communicate Faster

Comments Filter:
  • Yay! (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Shemmie (909181) on Sunday January 20, 2013 @06:35PM (#42642229)

    He'll be able to do even more awful TV adverts for crappy insurance companies! [youtube.com]

  • Re:I have an idea (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Electricity Likes Me (1098643) on Sunday January 20, 2013 @06:36PM (#42642239)

    Well I suspect principally because a company which builds computer hardware doesn't have a very large bioscience division.

  • it's pity (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday January 20, 2013 @06:46PM (#42642325)

    It's pity that person that have so many interesting things to say can't communicate normally with other peoples.

    There are a lot of people that speak a lot and doesn't have anything interesting to say.

  • Re:I have an idea (Score:5, Insightful)

    by wonkey_monkey (2592601) on Sunday January 20, 2013 @06:52PM (#42642365) Homepage

    Instead of rehashing 1970s tech, could we PLEASE start understanding how the human body works and why some bodies destroy themselves in this way?

    Could you PLEASE stop assuming that there aren't thousands upon thousands of people actively engaged in all areas of medical science trying to do exactly this?

  • Re:I have an idea (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Kwyj1b0 (2757125) on Sunday January 20, 2013 @07:53PM (#42642777)

    The state of actual medical research to fix conditions like his is in just as sorry of a state. Companies are too busy pouring cash into penis pills and weight loss drugs to spend R&D money on tailoring targeted DNA rejuvenation treatments. No, it's not just Sci-Fi, or rather it ought not to be, but assholes like you act like this is being feverishly worked on around the clock when in reality nobody is doing a GODDAMN THING.

    Two points: (1) Do you claim to have a solution that can be implemented? (2) What are YOU doing about curing the diseasse?

    I know it is fun to sit at home and bash medical R&D of focusing on weight-loss pills etc. But look at the statistics. About 5000 people in the US have ALS at any given time (and death rate is close to incidence rate of 2/100,000 per year: Citation [cwfo.org]). So in the US (300 million population) that is 6000 deaths a year. Do you know how many people die due to obesity? Automobile accidents? Heart disease? ALS doesn't even count compared to those: Rank of causes of death.

    Just so you know, I would love cures for a lot of diseases to be found (including ALS). But in the real world, companies focus on what makes business sense. Why should the NIH grants/Medical R&D focus on ALS when there are a lot more deaths due to other causes? Because one person who has it is famous? I'm sure there are a lot of smart/famous people (okay, may not be Stephen Hawking type of smart, but talented and contributing to society in other ways) who die of lots of other causes. We don't live entirely in a meritocracy that says Famous Guy's life is worth more than everyone else's and is therefore more deserving of resources.

  • Tennyson - Ulysses (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Tenebrousedge (1226584) <[moc.liamg] [ta] [egdesuorbenet]> on Sunday January 20, 2013 @09:23PM (#42643259)

    Tho' much is taken, much abides; and though
    We are not now that strength which in old days
    Moved earth and heaven; that which we are, we are;
    One equal temper of heroic hearts,
    Made weak by time and fate, but strong in will
    To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield.

    It is not enough to have the ability to change the world. It is a rare combination of chance and circumstance, far more than any particular genius. Archimedes could not have formulated the questions that led to quantum electrodynamics. Nor is it fair to select a particular point of inflection out of a continuum of progress -- which discovery since the invention of the transistor is responsible for the processor in your computer?

    You judge beyond your ken, and far above your station. I hope that you are ashamed of your comment, but console myself that it will likely receive all the attention that it deserves.

  • Please tell me you are joking. The reason why I advocate more people buy AMD is because frankly X86 has gotten so incredibly powerful on BOTH sides of the aisle that I think its more important to have competition than to win some benchmark and the difference is like going from insaneo speed to ludicrous speed.

    I mean look at some of the chips both have been putting out, even 7 years ago you would have had to spend just insane amounts of money to get anywhere near this performance and now you can get these sub 20w CPUs with multiple cores and GPUs that do full 1080p? Honestly people really need to take a moment to just stop and appreciate how fucking GOOD we have it right now. Hell even the Atom chip when paired with ION made for a pretty decent HTPC that used less power than a first gen P4 doing nothing, now Intel puts out these chips that just get totally incredible amounts of IPC and at an average of only 55w? That is just crazy, hell my Pentium D used more than that just sitting on the fricking desktop doing nothing.

    So I would say if anything the slowdown in PC sales and the reason i recommend AMD is because Intel upped the game so damned high that even a low end chip is like a top fuel funny car and just blows through any job your average user can come up with without breaking a sweat. If Intel wouldn't have kept raising the bar with the tick tock cycle I wouldn't be able to buy 6 core CPUs for just $100 or get my customers damned nice laptops for less than $500 delivered.

    The amount of power we get today just blows my mind and if you would have told me a decade ago I'd be typing on a website while listening to music, burning a DVD and doing a transcode and NOTHING would lag? Yeah I'd tell you to go back to your Star trek fanfic but here we are, where even the lowest laptop can do 1080P and multitask like crazy and our desktops are just monsters. I predict in 3 years, maybe less, we'll see ARM peter out as they aren't able to scale the IPC while Intel will just scale down a Core2 to where it uses like 2w max and runs rings around the ARM, it'll be like having a supercomputer in your pocket, just incredible.

I tell them to turn to the study of mathematics, for it is only there that they might escape the lusts of the flesh. -- Thomas Mann, "The Magic Mountain"

Working...