Here's Another Reason to Like Intel These Days...

[celewign]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_hawking#Computer

Good for them.
-cm

 

[badge]

I thought Hawking apologized years ago for being a cutting edge twit and for being so completely wrong for so many decades where any verified and proved logical theories about space and time are concerned. I know He gained back the favor of Robin Williams. A lot of Ph.D. types were relieved when Robin got his just due.

 

[celewign]

Uhh... are you reading about the bet he made? What are you talking about...?
-cm

 

[Thanatos421]

So you're slamming Hawking?? The man is amazing, regardless of what he may be right or wrong about. At least he is trying to figure out what's going on out there. I would think twice about questioning someone's intellect who can handle complex chaos math and string theory IN HIS HEAD. Theories may be wrong, but that's why they are called theory!

 

[wolverinero79]

Yeah, I heard that they helped redesign the interface for him as well so that he could more easily navigate his word program menus so that he can "speak".

In other news, Mr. Hawking was going through zero g flights in an airplane, recently. Looks like he's closer to his dream of visiting that place he talks so much about - space.

As for intel, they're also getting more into the digital health space with something nice for nurses

Here

Their corporate chartiable contributions are pretty huge too. Their tech may not always outpace the competition, but you can't fault their philanthropy. From an Intel site..

"In 2004, Intel's corporate, Foundation and employee giving provided nearly $104 million dollars to communities around the globe." 104 million bucks in a year isn't bad.

 

[Ycon]

Hes probably doing research for Intel *lol*

 

[celewign]

Wtf, I'm not slamming Hawking. He is a great guy, but he isn't even the main topic of this conversation.

I just read that Intel is giving him tons of help with his interface and computer, and though I would give them a kudos. For being an evil corporation ( ) they are doing an awfully good thing here. If Steve Hawking didn't have help with stuff like his he couldn't use his brilliant mind to do amazing things like pioneer the idea of Hawking Radiation and appear on The Simpsons.

Geez, lay off.
-cm

 

[Thanatos421]

My post was @ badge, not you

 

[badge]

Not only was Hawking's life work heavily disputed and disproved from all corners, He was proven not to have done his homework on his Intel based machine.

http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn6151

 

[teh_sutton]

Yeah um Darwins theory of evolution was heavily criticised and mocked, he has since been proved right.

So was the guy that said the world was spherical.

My point is that great scientists tend to be "proved wrong" then many years later people realise they were right all along.

 

[badge]

In Hawking's case it was Robin Williams who uncovered the key to Hawking's faults. Darwin's problem was He had ruffled the hair of Grant and got Lee's ass kicked for political reasons.

 

[Thanatos421]

Name a scientist whose theories haven't been "disputed and disproven"

 

[badge]

Name a scientist whose theories haven't been "disputed and disproven"

My wife's. And that is a fact.

 

[Gary_Busey]

It's not about being 'right', it's about discussion, theories and bringing ideas to the table so that facts can be found. Plus, a theory is just that, a theory. Nothing's set in stone, it's a guess on how something works, a guess used to find out facts, a starting point on the path to truth. If you're concentrating on him being 'right' or not, you're entirely missing the point of theoretical physics, and scientifical research all together.

 

[badge]

Well said Mr. Busey. Points to ponder. Some people make a lot of money working on theory.

 

[shawnpaul3]

Yeah um Darwins theory of evolution was heavily criticised and mocked, he has since been proved right.

So was the guy that said the world was spherical.

My point is that great scientists tend to be "proved wrong" then many years later people realise they were right all along.

What? You are another brain-washed liberal, no doubt. Evolution does NOT in fact have any proof whatsoever. You talk about you ultimate fantasy theory. Just as Thanatos421 stated, a theory is just that, a theory. And, again I reiterate, evolution is still a theory, with no credible proof at all. :roll:

 

[Gary_Busey]

Yeah um Darwins theory of evolution was heavily criticised and mocked, he has since been proved right.

So was the guy that said the world was spherical.

My point is that great scientists tend to be "proved wrong" then many years later people realise they were right all along.

What? You are another brain-washed liberal, no doubt. Evolution does NOT in fact have any proof whatsoever. You talk about you ultimate fantasy theory. Just as Thanatos421 stated, a theory is just that, a theory. And, again I reiterate, evolution is still a theory, with no credible proof at all. :roll:
There are far more facts in favor of evolution than their are for creationism.

 

[sonoran]

What? You are another brain-washed liberal, no doubt. Evolution does NOT in fact have any proof whatsoever.

Yeah, it's not like we're putting evolutionary pressure on disease-causing bacteria, causing them to evolve into drug resistant strains or anything.

I'll leave the discussion of "how did all life get here" to theologians. But to contend that organisms don't evolve over time (just like Darwin inferred) is to ignore what's now blatantly obvious.

 

[Kronos]

For some..there is no "proof" others can discover that they will accept.

 

[Badnatured]

Creationism is a horrible horrible joke in it's current form. Either from a scientific or philosophic standpoint.

 

[bfellow]

I believe in evolutonized creationism. Life did not just "happened" for no reason.

 

[djgandy]

Name a scientist whose theories haven't been "disputed and disproven"

If your points haven't been "disputed and disproven" you are not a scientist.

 

[badge]

Your existence is creation's way of exploring and explaining all of creation itself.

 

[djgandy]

What? You are another brain-washed liberal, no doubt. Evolution does NOT in fact have any proof whatsoever.

Yeah, it's not like we're putting evolutionary pressure on disease-causing bacteria, causing them to evolve into drug resistant strains or anything.

I'll leave the discussion of "how did all life get here" to theologians. But to contend that organisms don't evolve over time (just like Darwin inferred) is to ignore what's now blatantly obvious.

Hospital super bugs. MRSA. Hear a lot about them over here as they are becoming quite a problem. People are scared to go into hospitals!

We are so over nannied and the irony is it is killing people. I rarely see my doctor, infact last time i saw my doctor was when i had extreme kidney pain which was likely a stone and required a shot of morphine to shut me up .
The way I see it is the immune system is like a muscle, or you brain even. If you don't use it, you will lose it. People who go to the doctor every time they have a "cold", well, good luck to them.

With respect to present society you could say a lot of immune systems are "obese" immune systems.

 

[jamiepotter]

I dare you to walk into a university's biology department and say that. Those who aren't laughing at you will probably want to chase you from the premises.

Evolution is not one scientific theory as such: it is an umbrella term for lots of theories that point to very gradual species development over the course of millions of years. Thus, the theory of natural selection is one type of evolutionary theory, and has been confirmed so many times as for it to not even be a scientific question as to whether it is true or not. There are some anomalies, but that is entirely normal in science, and provides impetus for future research.

If you are happy to accept that the theory of natural selection is false, then I suggest you should probably also question the theory of quantum electrodynamics, the general theory of relativity, the ideal gas laws, etc.

One does not 'prove' scientific theories. That is to conflate them with mathematics! One uses them in explanation and prediction of phenomena, as has indeed been done in the above cases to a highly impressive degree.

I'm sorry, but there are no respected biologists who think creationism has any merit whatsoever. It is about as scientifically respectable as the view that the Sun revolves around the Earth.