notes.husk.org. scribblings by Paul Mison.

2012-04-17

post/21273291178

quote 18:04:50
“ When you hear a libertarian talking about “disruption” and “innovation” what they usually mean is “opportunities to make a quick buck, however damaging the long-term side effects may be”. ”
Charlie Stross, as part of talking about What Amazon’s ebook strategy means.

2012-03-27

post/20028443207

quote 23:27:06
“ BBEdit has insidiously demonstrated itself to be just plain friendlier than MacVim. (I guess this is a sign of impending dementia on my part.) ”

2012-03-23

post/19783683389

quote 15:14:36
“ Rather than looking up at the stars, I believe the Pirate Bay should be looking down at the sewers. Their robot minions would be better modelled on the humble sewer rat than on the soaring seagull. ”

Charlie Stross on robotic pirate hosts: Pirate Airships: An Alternative (via)

Drones are sexy, but the ground is easier.

(via paperbits)

2011-12-09

post/13981177836

quote 21:15:05
“ Since 1911, democractic government by a republic has gone from being an eccentric minority practice to the default system of government world-wide – there are now more democracies than any other system, and even authoritarian tyrannies find it expedient to ape at least the outward symbolism of democratic forms, via rigged elections and life presidencies. ”
Charlie Stross, in his USENIX 2011 Keynote: Network Security in the Medium Term, 2061-2561. I’ve been thinking about this point for a while, and Stross puts it in a usefully succinct form.

2010-10-08

post/1270172094

quote 18:43:26
“ Driven by the need to fix the decaying federal system before it collapses under a mound of Medicare bills, overseas adventurism, and decaying infrastructure, she’s willing to use self-denial, entrapment, predatory mercantilism, dirty tricks, and any other tool that boosts the bottom line. ”
Charlie Stross in Accelerando, describing a post-conservative. Not bad, as prediction extrapolation goes.

2009-07-19

post/144653965

photo 11:15:13
The Technium: Was Moore’s Law Inevitable?
Of course, it kind of weakens his argument, but I still find it odd that Kevin Kelly doesn’t admit anywhere in this post that the speed curve for rockets he posted turned out to be wrong.
OK, fine, it predicted the first satellite launches and Apollo, but then it broken down catastrophically. The fastest a human has ever travelled was in 1970.
Kelly does address the reason later on:
In this microcosmic realm energy is not very important. We don’t see exponential improvement in efforts to scale up, to keep getting bigger, skyscrapers and space stations.
Multi-stage chemical rockets are the only way we have to hoist payload. Unless and until we shift to nuclear rockets or tease out of particle physics some magic method of propulsion, they’re the only way we have to get to the Moon, and Saturn V and Energia are as big as we’ve made. As Charlie Stross says:
Stick a LEM on the moon and bring the contents back? Easy. Increase the mass that the LEM brings back? Very expensive — the price goes up as the sixth power of the weight you’re returning from the lunar surface (because you have to loft the heavier LEM into Earth orbit to begin with).
This doesn’t really invalidate Kelly’s argument. I just found it a bit of an odd omission.

The Technium: Was Moore’s Law Inevitable?

Of course, it kind of weakens his argument, but I still find it odd that Kevin Kelly doesn’t admit anywhere in this post that the speed curve for rockets he posted turned out to be wrong.

OK, fine, it predicted the first satellite launches and Apollo, but then it broken down catastrophically. The fastest a human has ever travelled was in 1970.

Kelly does address the reason later on:

In this microcosmic realm energy is not very important. We don’t see exponential improvement in efforts to scale up, to keep getting bigger, skyscrapers and space stations.

Multi-stage chemical rockets are the only way we have to hoist payload. Unless and until we shift to nuclear rockets or tease out of particle physics some magic method of propulsion, they’re the only way we have to get to the Moon, and Saturn V and Energia are as big as we’ve made. As Charlie Stross says:

Stick a LEM on the moon and bring the contents back? Easy. Increase the mass that the LEM brings back? Very expensive — the price goes up as the sixth power of the weight you’re returning from the lunar surface (because you have to loft the heavier LEM into Earth orbit to begin with).

This doesn’t really invalidate Kelly’s argument. I just found it a bit of an odd omission.

2008-12-14

what

more