Royal Institute Christmas Lectures 147
category9 writes "One of the best xmas tv highlights for us chaps in the UK is the RI Christmas Letures. Once broadcast by the BBC, Channel4 now have the helm. Past lecturers include the world renowed cybernetics engineer, Prof. Kevin Warwick. This year Sir John Sulston, of Human Genome Project fame, will be talking about genetics and the building blocks of life over 5 lectures. This is a must see for anyone interested in artificial intelligence. The lectures are presented in a format which allows technical detail, but in a way very accessible to those outside the particilar scientific fields. The website has transcripts for anyone not able to receive Channel4, perhaps with streams coming at a later date (lobby Channel4 if you must)."
Re: (Score:1)
Re:the us sucks. - flamebait, troll, whatever (Score:1, Interesting)
Re: (Score:1)
Re:the us sucks. - flamebait, troll, whatever (Score:1)
Re:the us sucks. - flamebait, troll, whatever (Score:1)
Re:the us sucks. - flamebait, troll, whatever (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
IMHO (Score:1)
Re:IMHO (Score:1)
When will the Ogg Vorbis streaming be available? (Score:2)
HMm (Score:1)
.uk domains... (Score:1)
Re:Kevin Warwick is a self-promoting egotistical h (Score:2)
From KW's 'Achievements' [rdg.ac.uk] page:
Nice misspelling, there...
Captain Cyborg (Score:4, Informative)
You clearly don't read The Register [theregister.co.uk]. Warwick is a joke in the Artificial Intelligence community, regarded by most as little more than a publicity hound. He used to go around saying that we would all be human slaves in a robot nation by the year 2000. At the time he came to my university to debate some of the professors in our Artificial Intelligence department, and they mopped the floor with him.
Having milked the world of Artificial Intelligence for all the publicity it was worth, he then installed one of those chips they use for tracking dogs [theregister.co.uk] in his arm and started claiming that he was the first Cyborg...
Do a search for "Captain Cyborg" at The Register to learn more about this guy, he gives science a bad name.
The Register is down... (Score:1)
It works for me (Score:2)
Re:It works for me (Score:2, Informative)
If I SSH to my school, which does not cache domain names, I get the following:
Server: non-caching.name.server
Address: 192.168.1.1
*** non-caching.name.server can't find www.theregister.co.uk: Non-existent host/domain
Whereas if I run the same command here, I get:
Server: caching.name.server
Address: 192.168.1.2
Non-authoritative answer:
Name: www.theregister.co.uk
Address: 213.40.196.64
So those without it cached can read it via http://213.40.196.64/ [213.40.196.64] or you can just add it to /etc/hosts or %SYSTEMROOT%\system32\drivers\etc\hosts
Re:The Register is down... (Score:2)
Dave
Re:Captain Cyborg (Score:1)
By the way, The Register isn't available [slashdot.org] via its usual URL at the moment. So here's a direct link [213.40.196.64] to some of their Kevin Warwick coverage.
Re:Captain Cyborg (Score:1)
FEAR KEVIN [kevinwarwick.org.uk]
Re:Kevin Warwick (Score:2)
Re:Kevin Warwick (Score:1)
Name one instance where he has discredited anyone else in his field of study. He may be pushing for the state of the art to be more advanced than it is, but he doesn't say that it is more advanced. Frankly, without the PR that he brings the field (even if the PR goes to him as a representative), funding for real cybernetics research would likely dry up. It's like with NASA: they have to do some things that capture the public imagination, or they couldn't get funding to do real space science. (Not that they've been all that responsible with the money they do get, but that's another thread.)
For example, what is so innovative about implanting a device in his arm that people have been implanting in dogs for quite a while?
Ever heard of the difference between animal trials and human trials for drugs? Dog biology and human biology aren't 100% identical. Yes, this was a small step, but it's a step that needed to be done.
Re:Kevin Warwick (Score:1)
Re:Kevin Warwick (Score:2)
And what is that difference?
You can't comment on what his department do internally, because as a former student - to coin a phrase - it's very, very good shit they get up to, if a little more grounded than Kevin's bluesky concepts.
I can, you know. I worked with Reading people long before you did your 'O' Levels; and still drink, regularly enough, with people in the department. They see Warwick as a threat to their research funding - which is why he's a wee bit semi-detached nowadays. However, we were not commenting on the Department (though don't tempt me into an MIT versus Reading rant), but on the person (don't tempt me into a Rod Brooks vs Warwick rant).
Warwick is a media whore, and deserves the contempt that goes with that tag. Based on his own work, he deserves (at best) to be a plodding lecturer; he debases the currency of the Chair.
Re:Dumbed down for the masses. (Score:1)
This site has got to be a joke. I can't believe even the socialist Brits would do anything this nuts. Check out their roaming "detector vans".
Re:Dumbed down for the masses. (Score:2)
It's this fee that has enabled the BBC to produce great television and not have to have any adverts. Thats right a quality TV station that doesn't have any adverts (apart from ones for BBC properties). It's the license fee that pays for http://news.bbc.co.uk. I think the license fee is great value for money.
No they don't beat down your door, in fact if they just show up at your door they can't come in without a warrant, unless they can see a television. Even if you don't have a license they just ask you to get one, if you don't they take you to court and you are ordered to get one, if you still don't you get a bigger fine and eventually jail.
Re:Dumbed down for the masses. (Score:1)
You use to have to pay for Radio (as in audio) but that was a long time ago.
I'll let you argue over which way is best (Tax TV, pay-for (sky and the like), or completely advert-based TV (Americans have that I believe?). Personal I don't mine paying when you get stuff like Lost World (on last night VERY good) and the like, but it sure is a lot of pennies.
mlk
Re:Dumbed down for the masses. (Score:2)
Other license trivia: there is a discount on a TV license for blind people, but it is only of about £10 [about as scary as the drive-through ATM we used on holiday in Tennessee with Braille-embossed buttons].
Re:Dumbed down for the masses. (Score:1)
/mlk hids his radio under the floor boards.
If you are after free TV in the UK, use a TV which is completely battery powered, and has no option for mains.
Re:Dumbed down for the masses. (Score:1)
Mind you, they could always just buy a radio covering the relevant bands and pay nothing... (Though it would probably be easier to pay to avoid having to convince licensing officials they really don't have a tv - that's probably one of the worst things about the licensing system).
Re:Dumbed down for the masses. (Score:1)
It really *really* sucks that DVD players don't have a 15-pin VGA connector on them though.
Re:Dumbed down for the masses. (Score:1)
I wouldn't mind, but you have to pay for it even if you don't watch it! I mean, what the fuck?
Re:Dumbed down for the masses. (Score:1)
Re:Dumbed down for the masses. (Score:1)
Your comment is a perfect illustration of unthinking acceptance of collectivist/totalitarian arguments.
The whole point of a free society is that the majority ("Most Britons") should not get to impose their will on everyone else, in matters which are not essential to the preservation of the rule of law etc.
Note that I'm not saying that the US is exemplary in this regard (I'm not an American). But there does seem to be more awareness of the value of personal liberty among Americans than among Brits.
Question for Brits.... (Score:1)
Their wording made it seem like they require some sort of locator beacon to be built into every British TV. Is this the case or do their vans just pick up escaped EM radiation from the TV? If there is a beacon, do any of you ever open up your TVs and disable it? Or how about putting your TV inside a Faraday Cage?
I don't know how you guys over there can support this as it seems from some of the other posts, having officers running around in vans and knocking on your door to make sure you don't have something completely harmless in your house without their approval seems way too big brother to me...
Tim
Re:Question for Brits.... (Score:3)
Their wording made it seem like they require some sort of locator beacon to be built into every British TV. Is this the case or do their vans just pick up escaped EM radiation from the TV? If there is a beacon, do any of you ever open up your TVs and disable it? Or how about putting your TV inside a Faraday Cage?
Good luck actually getting a picture of anything other than snow if you ever *do* put your TV inside a Faraday cage.
Basically, it works like this:
1. Your television receiver has a superheterodyning circuit in it. It basically generates a specific frequency, mixes this with the input signal, separates out the beats caused by interference, and amplifies them.
2. Your television is a big glass tube wrapped in metal coils. These coils tweak at a rate of 15kHz (horizontal coil) and 50Hz (vertical coil) [note: these figures for PAL only].
3. Both of these (1 and 2) emit electromagnetic radiation with detectable and verifiable signatures. Using (1) you can even determine what station someone is tuned to. Using (2) confirms that the person has a monitor or TV that is operating.
Think of it as something like TEMPEST.
Simon
Re:Question for Brits.... (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:Question for Brits.... (Score:1, Interesting)
There's a strong suspicion that all the vans contain is an electric motor to rotate the fake aerial on top.
Lately the BBC tried a "name and shame" campaign on the lines of "x homes in Easy Street, Anytown, don't have a TV licence". This led to at least one such poster being graffitied with "That's because I don't have a fscking TV, and you know it."
Re:Question for Brits.... (Score:1)
Re:Question for Brits.... (Score:2)
All Electronic devices emit EM radiation, they pick-up these emmissions from the TV's tube, the 'detectors' are handheld today.
Or how about putting your TV inside a Faraday Cage?
Yes, tempest, prevents them, but it's rather inpractical.
how you guys over there can support this
Do you support tax evasions ? Well neither do we!
A TV license pays for the BBC, we support it because 1) The BBC produces the best quality TV & Radio in the world, certainsly better than satellite or cable alternatives. 2) A TV licence costs about 1/5 the price of Satellite or cable alternatives.
Re:Dumbed down for the masses. (Score:1)
Re:Dumbed down for the masses. (Score:2, Informative)
The 'enforced taxation' troll you dangle so enticingly is the same mechanism that's allowing the BBC to test Ogg streaming, provide one of the world's best news websites, and provide programming for minorities in this country - whether they be minorities by race, age, religion or intellect. If you want a (nearly) pure commercial entertainment look at digital TV - wave after wave of Temptation Island and When Animals Attack. Can you see Sky One dedicating an evening to science more serious than Voyager?
Frankly the only problem with the BBC is BBC1's strategy of chasing ratings. That's what should be left to ITV and the commercial operators. Leave public service broadcasting to the public.
And anyway, aren't the Christmas Lectures supposed to be to introduce children to science?
Oh, and Kevin Warwick is an attention grabbing buffon. Ithankyou.
Did you read the story? (Score:2)
Re:Did you read the story? (Score:1)
Re:Did you read the story? (Score:1)
Re:Did you read the story? (Score:2)
Rich
Re:Dumbed down for the masses. (Score:1)
If you think it's worth paying over a hundred quid a year for endless gardening programs, cookery programs, soaps, repeats and fly-on-the-wall documentaries, you're wrong in the head.
Re:Dumbed down for the masses. (Score:1)
Or look at it this way - if you didn't pay your hundred quid a year, ITV would only have to worry about competing with channel 5 (Channel 4 is a minority market that they wouldn't worry about). How good would TV be then?
Re:Dumbed down for the masses. (Score:1)
There are so many other things that you pay for with out realising, where the fuck do you think your taxes go? (oh yeah, i forgot, they go into bush's pocket lol)
Re:Dumbed down for the masses. (Score:1)
from a country that has the dmca and the death penalty? i prefer having my human rights, and a leader who has more to life than just wanting to ride air-force one.
Re:Dumbed down for the masses. (Score:1)
Why don't the BBC broadcast these anymore? Who knows. Someone obviously thought it was a good ideas to stop a hugely popular braodcast. Luckily C4 have some sense. The only problem is the annoying commercials that the BBC is free of.
Re:Dumbed down for the masses. (Score:1)
I don't think fighting for funding is going to do anything at all to contribute to quality science programming... BBC (including the radio, which probably has more quality science than TV, and of course *doesn't* need a license) and C4 (both with public service commitments) are the only place for quality science programming in .uk. Don't really see much of that on ITV, Discovery, etc. (In fact, with Discovery you're paying for the channel *on top of* advertising! Wow, isn't that great. And the number of subscribers to satellite/cable tv proves that people are happy to pay to watch channels).
Really cool. (Score:2)
Downside: Eventually you get to university and get taught exactly the same thing with the obfuscating crap put back in again. By the same people.
Dave
John Sulston is probably best known for... (Score:3, Informative)
On a related note, at a recent C. elegans seminar I attended, the speaker made mention of Sir John, saying (to paraphrase) "Only Sulston is interested in these long boring projects, like serial EM reconstructions and the human genome project". Said in jest, of course :)
Re:John Sulston is probably best known for... (Score:1)
RI website (Score:4, Informative)
RI is a quaint, somewhat ruritanian institution. Most of the membership are rather stuffy and insist on wearing formal evening dress to the discourses, and there is a tradition that no questions are taken from the floor (you have to buttonhole the speaker afterwards). The staff and the Director, on the other hand. are very unfussy and very helpful. The Director is Susan Greenfield, who is known as a broadcaster on neurology. They do have a lovely old building in Albemarle Street, however, with an absolutely excellent Faraday museum. Research into inorganic chemistry is still carried out in the basement where Faraday had his original labs.
If you get one, get the 1994 one. (Score:1)
Dr. Susan Greenfield
That was, IMHO, the best RI Xmas lecture of them all. Since then, Greenfield has been in the media a lot more (but not in the way Kevin Warwick has) and is certainly a revered expert on matters of the brain.
Much of this lecture contained comparisons of brains and computers, and the way in which they may work together in the future. There were also a lot of practicals.
It's when they're about geology, 'how the earth was formed', plant or human biology that they get mega boring. Who wants to see a plant get cut up? The math and tech ones rock
Re:If you get one, get the 1994 one. (Score:1)
Re:If you get one, get the 1994 one. (Score:1)
Dr. Susan Greenfield
[...]
Much of this lecture contained comparisons of brains and computers, and the way in which they may work together in the future. There were also a lot of practicals.
Traditionally the RI Christmas lecture series features at least one child-gratifying explosion. I shudder to think what Susan Greenfield must have gone through in order to fulfil this brief--whose brain did she blow up, and did she wear a protective rubber suit?
re:warwick (Score:1)
kevin warwick (Score:2, Interesting)
when i said AI, i kind of meant neural nets, alife, and such things. i admit i could have worded it better. oh well, its a first article for me, better luck next time.
Ugh. (Score:1)
Re:Ugh. (Score:2)
Dirty BBC bastards (Score:2, Funny)
Maybe it's just my misanthropic nature, but I can't think of any reason for putting on such a similar programme at the same time that doesn't involve fucking over Channel 4.
Offtopic? Perhaps. But I'm bitter, and needed to get it off my chest.
On an unrelated matter, I recently got hold of the book of a series of Christmas Lectures given by Sir William H. Bragg in the 1920s. It's noteable for the fact that it's not afraid of explaining maths to the audience. He also wrote The Universe of Light, a popular science book that contains actual equations!.
Re:Dirty BBC bastards (Score:1)
But then they have a pretty cynical approach to viewers anyway - someone will decide to kill off a popular programme (e.g. Mastermind) and take a familiar pattern. First you move it around the schedule - if it's a programme enjoyed by older viewers then you should shift it to a late evening slot after they've gone to bed. Then you shift it to a different night. Then you miss a couple of weeks for some sporting event, so that people who make a point of watching the programme don't know whether it's on or not. This should lose you enough viewers that you can say "finished due to falling audiences".
Dunstan
Can I buy video tapes of this? (Score:1)
email me:sager@andrew.cmu.edu
Re:Can I buy video tapes of this? (Score:1)
TV licensing (Score:1)
Re:TV licensing (Score:1)
Ever heard of VCRs?
Channel 4 in Italy? (Score:1)
Shoot some Fish! [happyworm.com]
Re:Channel 4 in Italy? (Score:1)
Quality of the programme (Score:1)