Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: Current state of the art

Expand Messages
  • markfinnern
    Well J. S. Anderson, More then 4 days of agonizing waiting has passed, but still no reply post from you :-( Looking forward to it, Mark. ...
    Message 1 of 17 , Sep 5, 2002
    • 0 Attachment
      Well J. S. Anderson,

      More then 4 days of agonizing waiting has passed, but still no reply
      post from you :-(

      Looking forward to it, Mark.


      --- In bafuture@y..., Joschka Fisher <grabarkowic@y...> wrote:
      > YOU NOW HAVE 4 DAYS, TO VERIFY YOUR INFORMATION.
      > J.S.ANDERSON
      >
      >
      > --- wayne radinsky <spodware@y...> a écrit :
      > <HR>
      > <html><body>
      >
      >
      > <tt>
      > <BR>
      > Gee that sounds pretty threatening. What good does
      > that do?<BR>
      > We'll all be smarter and better off if we put our
      > heads<BR>
      > together and learn from each other rather than
      > make<BR>
      > threats, no?<BR>
      > <BR>
      > Maybe I am just being naive again.<BR>
      > <BR>
      > Anyway, I don't what you think I was wrong about,
      > but<BR>
      > things seem to check out to me. I said that chip
      > sales<BR>
      > were growing since April.<BR>
      > <BR>
      > Chip Sales Grow 5.8% in June Quarter <BR>
      > <a
      > href="http://www.semichips.org/pre_release.cfm?
      ID=235">http://www.semichips.org/pre_release.cfm?ID=235</a>
      > <BR>
      > <BR>
      > May Chip Sales Reach $11.37 Billion for Worldwide<BR>
      > Semiconductor Industry <BR>
      > <a
      > href="http://www.semichips.org/pre_release.cfm?
      ID=231">http://www.semichips.org/pre_release.cfm?ID=231</a><BR>
      > <BR>
      > This is a more recent article:<BR>
      > <BR>
      > Chip sector releases mixed figures<BR>
      > <a
      >
      href="http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/3/26793.html">http://www.th
      eregister.co.uk/content/3/26793.html</a>
      > <BR>
      > <BR>
      > I interpret this to mean that the waters are still
      > choppy.<BR>
      > Although I suppose you could argue that it's the
      > beginning<BR>
      > of another downturn, but I don't expect that.<BR>
      > <BR>
      > As for communications equipment sales, actually I
      > didn't say<BR>
      > telecom sales were going back up, (only the
      > semiconductor<BR>
      > industry as a whole) and they haven't yet.<BR>
      > <BR>
      > OE Markets - Demand<BR>
      > <a
      >
      href="http://www.oida.org/demand.html">http://www.oida.org/demand.html
      </a>
      > <BR>
      > <BR>
      > OE component sales, 2001 <BR>
      > <a
      >
      href="http://www.oida.org/comprev.html">http://www.oida.org/comprev.ht
      ml</a><BR>
      > <BR>
      > The graphs show 2001 decreased to below 1999
      > levels.<BR>
      > (But not to 0 :) It's for all optoelectronic
      > eqipment.<BR>
      > Telecom specifically took a bigger hit.<BR>
      > <BR>
      > Optical networking's next frontier<BR>
      > <a
      >
      href="http://www.bayarea.com/mld/mercurynews/business/3922499.htm">htt
      p://www.bayarea.com/mld/mercurynews/business/3922499.htm</a><BR>
      > <BR>
      > I said Moore's Law continues in spite of economic
      > recession.<BR>
      > Recently:<BR>
      > <BR>
      > Intel Begins Shipping Itanium 2 Processors<BR>
      > <a
      >
      href="http://www.intel.com/pressroom/archive/releases/20020708comp.htm
      ">http://www.intel.com/pressroom/archive/releases/20020708comp.htm</a>
      <BR>
      > <BR>
      > Intel Ships The World's First 2 Gigahertz
      > Microprocessor For<BR>
      > Mobile PCs <BR>
      > <a
      >
      href="http://www.intel.com/pressroom/archive/releases/20020624comp.htm
      ">http://www.intel.com/pressroom/archive/releases/20020624comp.htm</a>
      <BR>
      > <BR>
      > Intel Unveils World's Most Advanced Chip-Making
      > Process<BR>
      > <a
      >
      href="http://www.intel.com/pressroom/archive/releases/20020813tech.htm
      ">http://www.intel.com/pressroom/archive/releases/20020813tech.htm</a>
      <BR>
      > <BR>
      > And telecom technology is continuing to advance in
      > spite<BR>
      > of the recession as well, and a quick look at any
      > telecom<BR>
      > equipment vendor web site will show.<BR>
      > <BR>
      > Scientists at Bell Labs have used their collective<BR>
      > multidisciplinary expertise to help design
      > LambdaXtreme<BR>
      > Transport, the most advanced long-distance
      > communications<BR>
      > system now on the market.<BR>
      > <a
      > href="http://www.bell-
      labs.com/news/features/feature_01.html">http://www.bell-
      labs.com/news/features/feature_01.html</a>
      > <BR>
      > <BR>
      > JDS Uniphase Announces New Semiconductor Optical
      > Amplifiers<BR>
      > <a
      > href="http://www.jdsu.com/index2.cfm?
      CID=3&NAVCID=3&DSP=PressRelease&ACT=Display&PressID=249&PageName=JDS%
      20Uniphase%20Announces%20New%20Semiconductor%20Optical%
      20Amplifiers">http://www.jdsu.com/index2.cfm?
      CID=3&NAVCID=3&DSP=PressRelease&ACT=Display&PressID=24
      9&PageName=JDS%20Uniphase%20Announces%20New%20Semiconductor%
      20Optical%20Amplifiers</a><BR>
      > <BR>
      > <BR>
      > JDS Uniphase Boosts High-Level Functionality of
      > RX3<BR>
      > Series Multichannel Backreflection Meters with Two
      > New<BR>
      > Features <BR>
      > Unique three-laser wavelength testing and 10 mm
      > InGaAs<BR>
      > detector provide broader testing capabilities,
      > reduce<BR>
      > ownership cost<BR>
      > <a
      > href="http://www.jdsu.com/index2.cfm?
      CID=3&NAVCID=3&DSP=PressRelease&ACT=Display&PressID=231&PageName=JDS%
      20Uniphase%20Boosts%20High%2DLevel%20Functionality%20of%20RX3%
      20Series%20Multichannel%20Backreflection%20Meters%20with%20Two%20New%
      20Features">http://www.jdsu.com/index2.cfm?
      CID=3&NAVCID=3&DSP=PressRelease&ACT=Display&PressID=23
      1&PageName=JDS%20Uniphase%20Boosts%20High%2DLevel%20Functionality%
      20of%20RX3%20Series%20Multichannel%20Backreflection%20Meters%20with%
      20Two%20New%20Features</a><BR>
      > <BR>
      > <BR>
      > JDS Uniphase Announces Dramatic Performance
      > Improvement In Thin<BR>
      > Film Filters for Wideband Applications<BR>
      > <a
      > href="http://www.jdsu.com/index2.cfm?
      CID=3&NAVCID=3&DSP=PressRelease&ACT=Display&PressID=233&PageName=JDS%
      20Uniphase%20Announces%20Dramatic%20Performance%20Improvement%20In%
      20Thin%20Film%20Filters%20for%20Wideband%
      20Applications">http://www.jdsu.com/index2.cfm?
      CID=3&NAVCID=3&DSP=PressRelease&ACT=Display&PressID=23
      3&PageName=JDS%20Uniphase%20Announces%20Dramatic%20Performance%
      20Improvement%20In%20Thin%20Film%20Filters%20for%20Wideband%
      20Applications</a><BR>
      > <BR>
      > <BR>
      > Now what you really want to do is graph out
      > processor<BR>
      > performance per dollar over time. For bandwidth,
      > it's<BR>
      > harder because there are more variables, but what
      > you<BR>
      > want to do is calculate Gb / s / km / dollar for
      > telecom<BR>
      > equipment and show that it is an exponential curve
      > over<BR>
      > long periods of time. This is the whole essence of
      > Gilder's<BR>
      > Law / Huber's Law. I don't have the data to do this
      > but<BR>
      > maybe you can find it and calculate it. The price
      > data<BR>
      > is important because the calculation is per unit
      > cost.<BR>
      > The industry now is focusing more on decreasing
      > cost<BR>
      > on the low end than on advancing the high end.<BR>
      > <BR>
      > Finally, here is an article about the telecom
      > meltdown.<BR>
      > If you think the recession has stopped technology<BR>
      > advancement, you might have the cause and effect
      > backwards.<BR>
      > The author believes that the rapid pace of
      > technology<BR>
      > advancement is one of the *causes* of the telecom
      > meltdown.<BR>
      > As you might expect, if long-distance phone service
      > is<BR>
      > "free", that has severe consequences for the
      > people who<BR>
      > build their business on it. (As I mentioned earlier,
      > <BR>
      > Nathan Myhrvold predicted in 1993 that long distance
      > would<BR>
      > become free.)<BR>
      > <BR>
      > Future not so bright for telecoms<BR>
      > <a
      >
      href="http://www.usatoday.com/life/cyber/invest/2002/07/15/telecom.htm
      ">http://www.usatoday.com/life/cyber/invest/2002/07/15/telecom.htm</a>
      <BR>
      > <BR>
      > Ok, let me have it.<BR>
      > <BR>
      > <BR>
      > --- Joseph Anderson
      > bigwhiskey@e... wrote:<BR>
      > > Uh....Wayne...<BR>
      > > <BR>
      > > Since I'm such a nice guy, I'm gonna give you 7
      > days to check<BR>
      > > your facts on this before I, er...<BR>
      > > <BR>
      > > Let you have it.<BR>
      > > <BR>
      > > j.s.a.<BR>
      > > <BR>
      > > --- wayne radinsky spodware@y...
      > wrote:<BR>
      > > ><BR>
      > > >--- Joseph Anderson
      > bigwhiskey@e... wrote:<BR>
      > > >> Yea...and kudos...but<BR>
      > > >><BR>
      > > >> If there's room at the bottom....<BR>
      > > >><BR>
      > > >> and  aint' nobody buying to
      > maintain a market...<BR>
      > > >><BR>
      > > >> then it's nothing more than nanotech for
      > "nada" or oh!<BR>
      > > >> no-profits?<BR>
      > > ><BR>
      > > >I don't see what you are getting at here.
      > Semiconductor<BR>
      > > >sales started increasing in April. We're
      > already into the<BR>
      > > >next boom cycle. It's pretty weak at this
      > point, but it<BR>
      > > >will grow. There are buyers in the market,
      > and as<BR>
      > > >technology gets more powerful, there will be
      > more products<BR>
      > > >people want to buy.<BR>
      > > ><BR>
      > > >> Pretty soon...your local economy is
      > devastasted and YOU'RE<BR>
      > > >> at the bottom!<BR>
      > > ><BR>
      > > >I don't see what you are getting at here.
      > There are many<BR>
      > > >devastated local economies in the world. This
      > does not<BR>
      > > >affect the accelerating pace of technology
      > development.<BR>
      > > ><BR>
      > > >> Technology has several environments it's
      > responsible for.<BR>
      > > >> Like it or not.  Biological is
      > one.  Economic is certainly<BR>
      > > >> the other.<BR>
      > > >><BR>
      > > >> Or do you pour money into spin-doctors
      > and artificial price<BR>
      > > >> supports via Enron, Anderson Consulting,
      > and WorldCom's<BR>
      > > >> accounting techniques? So...for a while,
      > no-on will notice?<BR>
      > > ><BR>
      > > >Again, the collapse of Enron, Anderson,
      > Global Crossing,<BR>
      > > >WorldCom, etc, does not slow the pace of
      > technology. This<BR>
      > > >may seem counterintuitive, but it has no
      > effect.<BR>
      > > ><BR>
      > > >> On the otherhand...if you can convince
      > people to work for<BR>
      > > >> next to nothing ( especially you
      > California High $$ types )<BR>
      > > >> or are willing to suffer the
      > consequences of globalization<BR>
      > > >> where Government interests and Corp
      > Interest cannot<BR>
      > > >> co-exist. Then...Have yo' technology!!
      > ..and more of it! (<BR>
      > > >> q.v. Sir John Goldsmith's books:<BR>
      > > >><BR>
      > > >> The Trap<BR>
      > > >><BR>
      > > >> The Response<BR>
      > > >><BR>
      > > >> <a
      >
      href="http://www.users.globalnet.co.uk/~ashes/RESPREV2.html">http://ww
      w.users.globalnet.co.uk/~ashes/RESPREV2.html</a><BR>
      > > ><BR>
      > > >Interesting article. Thanks. I'm not sure how
      > it ties in<BR>
      > > >with my post. The theme of this article is
      > "free trade".<BR>
      > > >What's the connection? That semiconductors
      > are manufactured<BR>
      > > >by "free trade"? That technological
      > advancement has not<BR>
      > > >brought economic equality between
      > nations?<BR>
      > > ><BR>
      > > >> Somwhere earlier there was a
      > "joie-de-vivre" on these<BR>
      > > >> Salons regarding technology being able
      > to continue despite<BR>
      > > >> adversity. " For higher silicon
      > evolution!"<BR>
      > > >><BR>
      > > >> You know like war? I think someone
      > particularly mentioned<BR>
      > > >> that "side-track" to
      > technological progress.<BR>
      > > ><BR>
      > > >That was me, yup. But I don't know where you
      > got the " For<BR>
      > > >higher silicon evolution!" part. I'm
      > only saying that, as a<BR>
      > > >matter of fact, economic recession does not
      > slow down the<BR>
      > > >advancement of technology. If you don't
      > believe me, draw a<BR>
      > > >graph. Plot out transistor size, or CPU clock
      > speed, or<BR>
      > > >whatever, and see whether it goes down during
      > the current<BR>
      > > >economic recession.<BR>
      > > ><BR>
      > > >You'll see, it doesn't, it maintains its
      > exponential<BR>
      > > >trajectory. This is not a
      > "joie-de-vivre", this is an<BR>
      > > >empirical fact.<BR>
      > > ><BR>
      > > >> I keep remembering a cartoon in the
      > Village Voice by<BR>
      > > >> Oliphant, during the week the Neutron
      > Bomb was announced,<BR>
      > > >> as a device that did not destroy
      > buildings. Of course, I<BR>
      > > >> don't have to tell you and the NYTimes
      > article never<BR>
      > > >> said...er um but kills a whoppin' lot of
      > people with<BR>
      > > >> high-radiation levels over 3-7
      > days.  It showed a bunch of<BR>
      > > >> accountants jumping for joy on their
      > desks!<BR>
      > > >><BR>
      > > >><BR>
      > > >> This is what gets me most.  The
      > survival instinct when<BR>
      > > >> assuaged by technology for technology
      > sake, opinions and<BR>
      > > >> modern day tech toys...gets overlooked
      > and in the<BR>
      > > >> process...over-ridden.<BR>
      > > ><BR>
      > > >Quite possibly.<BR>
      > > ><BR>
      > > >There seem to be 3 main lines of thought on
      > this sort of<BR>
      > > >thing.<BR>
      > > ><BR>
      > > >1) The optimistic outlook -- technological
      > advancement<BR>
      > > >will, by itself, make everything better. John
      > Smart is<BR>
      > > >definitely in this category. He believes
      > that, as the<BR>
      > > >technological singularity approaches, that we
      > will all be<BR>
      > > >amazed by the speed at which the remaining
      > human problems<BR>
      > > >are solved. He has some of the most clever
      > and unusual<BR>
      > > >arguments of any of the thinkers I know of,
      > such as the<BR>
      > > >idea that as a complex adaptive system
      > increases in<BR>
      > > >complexity, it also increases the
      > concentration on<BR>
      > > >positive-sum interactions, and decreases in
      > violence and<BR>
      > > >other zero-sum or negative-sum interactions.
      > Ray Kurzweil<BR>
      > > >sort of goes in this category -- he likes to
      > talk about how<BR>
      > > >human lifespan is being extended
      > exponentially and so<BR>
      > > >fourth. Kurzweil acknowledges the downside --
      > he has a<BR>
      > > >"Dangerous Futures" section on his
      > website and so on.<BR>
      > > >So he is not 100% in this category, but I
      > think that is<BR>
      > > >the overall theme of his thinking.<BR>
      > > ><BR>
      > > >2) The "we can control the outcome"
      > outlook -- I would  put<BR>
      > > >Foresight (Eric Drexler, Ralph Merkle,
      > Christine Peterson,<BR>
      > > >etc), because Foresight's basic premise is
      > that if you can<BR>
      > > >influence the "initial conditions"
      > of technological<BR>
      > > >development early in the process, then you
      > can influence<BR>
      > > >where the whole trajectory goes and thereby
      > head the system<BR>
      > > >off in the direction of a positive outcome. I
      > would put<BR>
      > > >Eliezer Yudkowsky in this category as well,
      > although he<BR>
      > > >seems to take the view that he personally is
      > going to<BR>
      > > >invent strong AI, preprogram it with Asimov
      > laws, and save<BR>
      > > >the world (more or less). Of course, you can
      > probably guess,<BR>
      > > >by the wording I use, that I'm very skeptical
      > his approach<BR>
      > > >will work. :)<BR>
      > > ><BR>
      > > >3) The "pessimistic" outlook. This
      > is the "technology will<BR>
      > > >make humanity extinct!" point of view
      > expressed by people<BR>
      > > >like Mark Gubrud. And possibly Bill Joy,
      > although I was<BR>
      > > >never sure whether Bill Joy really believes
      > this point of<BR>
      > > >view or whether he was just trying to provoke
      > widespread<BR>
      > > >discussion on the issue. (Which he certainly
      > did in any<BR>
      > > >case). Gubrud takes the moralistic position
      > -- that humans<BR>
      > > >must stop technology because technology will
      > make humanity<BR>
      > > >extinct, and that's morally wrong.<BR>
      > > ><BR>
      > > >For my part, I think I lean towards the
      > pessimistic<BR>
      > > >viewpoint simply because I was once a big
      > believer in the<BR>
      > > >"techno-utopian" viewpoint -- the
      > idea that we'll invent<BR>
      > > >technology that will solve humanity's
      > problems. My time at<BR>
      > > >Microsoft disillusioned me of that concept
      > pretty<BR>
      > > >thoroughly. Sure, Microsoft may make
      > technology that solves<BR>
      > > >human problems. It's just that that's not
      > really<BR>
      > > >Microsoft's *intent* -- it helps them sell
      > software, but<BR>
      > > >it's the selling of software that they really
      > care about.<BR>
      > > >David Gelernter (from Yale University) has
      > written some<BR>
      > > >stuff about how "technology doesn't
      > solve social problems",<BR>
      > > >how he expected technology to solve social
      > problems and<BR>
      > > >went through a similar (though milder :)
      > disillusionment.<BR>
      > > ><BR>
      > > >One of the reasons I have the view that I
      > have is that I<BR>
      > > >now interpret technological development as
      > being part of<BR>
      > > >the same process that drives biological
      > development. And in<BR>
      > > >the biological realm, there is nothing
      > special about the<BR>
      > > >human species -- it is just another species.
      > So I question<BR>
      > > >the argument that John Smart puts fourth,
      > that advanced<BR>
      > > >technology in the future will care about
      > solving human<BR>
      > > >problems. We don't care about other species
      > (we, humans,<BR>
      > > >are causing a mass extinction right now), for
      > the most part<BR>
      > > >-- there are exceptions like Rainforest
      > Action Network and<BR>
      > > >so on. So while the human species
      > unquestionably rules the<BR>
      > > >planet at the moment -- but only at the
      > moment. The process<BR>
      > > >of evolution does not intrinsically favor the
      > human<BR>
      > > >species. So I don't see why future robots
      > with strong AI<BR>
      > > >will care to spend their intelligence solving
      > humanity's<BR>
      > > >problems. On the other hand, I don't agree
      > with Mark Gubrud<BR>
      > > >that extinction is a likely result. I see no
      > evidence that<BR>
      > > >the development of complex species causes the
      > simple ones<BR>
      > > >to go extinct simply because they are simple.
      > Otherwise<BR>
      > > >there would not be microbes and insects and
      > so fourth<BR>
      > > >today. So I would not expect advanced
      > technology to do that<BR>
      > > >either.<BR>
      > > ><BR>
      > > >This reminds me of the brief discussion with
      > Chris Phoenix<BR>
      > > >about uploads, and this gives you some idea
      > of the<BR>
      > > >complexity of the economics behind all this.
      > Chris was<BR>
      > > >saying that "everyone" will be able
      > to upload, because, as<BR>
      > > >technology advances, it gets cheaper, and
      > eventually<BR>
      > > >everyone will be able to afford it. And I was
      > saying, wait<BR>
      > > >a minute, you're looking at only one half of
      > the equation,<BR>
      > > >the buying side. Technology also affects the
      > earning side.<BR>
      > > >If there are computers costing $1000 or $2000
      > that have<BR>
      > > >strong AI -- and can therefore do any job a
      > human can do --<BR>
      > > >will there be any jobs? So to keep up with
      > the machines,<BR>
      > > >everyone has to get cybernetic implants, so
      > their brains<BR>
      > > >can keep up with Moore's Law. And how much
      > does that<BR>
      > > >technology cost? What percentage of the
      > population will be<BR>
      > > >able to afford it? So you see, we're not just
      > talking about<BR>
      > > >how much technology costs to make and sell,
      > but how people<BR>
      > > >will earn the money to buy it -- how these
      > two factors will<BR>
      > > >fit together. That's pretty extremely hard to
      > predict with<BR>
      > > <BR>
      > === message truncated ===<BR>
      > <BR>
      > <BR>
      > __________________________________________________<BR>
      > Do You Yahoo!?<BR>
      > Yahoo! Finance - Get real-time stock quotes<BR>
      > <a
      > href="http://finance.yahoo.com">http://finance.yahoo.com</a><BR>
      > </tt>
      >
      > <br>
      >
      > <!-- |**|begin egp html banner|**| -->
      >
      > <table border=0 cellspacing=0 cellpadding=2>
      > <tr bgcolor=#FFFFCC>
      > <td align=center><font size="-1"
      > color=#003399><b>Yahoo! Groups Sponsor</b></font></td>
      > </tr>
      > <tr bgcolor=#FFFFFF>
      > <td align=center width=470><table border=0
      > cellpadding=0 cellspacing=0><tr><td align=center><font
      > face=arial size=-2>ADVERTISEMENT</font><br><a
      >
      href="http://rd.yahoo.com/M=228862.2128520.3581629.2204139/D=egroupweb
      /S=1705890010:HM/A=1182692/R=0/*http://adfarm.mediaplex.com/ad/ck/990-
      1736-1039-334
      > " target="_top"><img border="0"
      >
      src="http://us.a1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/a/co/columbiahouse/d_300x250_03
      1_4for49p_3.gif"
      > height="250" width="300"></a></td></tr></table></td>
      > </tr>
      > </table>
      >
      > <!-- |**|end egp html banner|**| -->
      >
      >
      > <br>
      > <tt>
      > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:<BR>
      > bafuture-unsubscribe@y...<BR>
      > <BR>
      > </tt>
      > <br>
      >
      > <br>
      > <tt>Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the <a
      > href="http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/">Yahoo! Terms
      > of Service</a>.</tt>
      > </br>
      >
      > </body></html>
      >
      >
      > ___________________________________________________________
      > Do You Yahoo!? -- Une adresse @... gratuite et en français !
      > Yahoo! Mail : http://fr.mail.yahoo.com
    • Joschka Fisher
      Oops! Sorry... Working on Biochemistry homework. I ve give you the skeleton first, then the detailed facts with references later. Give me about 24 hours.
      Message 2 of 17 , Sep 5, 2002
      • 0 Attachment
        Oops!

        Sorry...

        Working on Biochemistry homework.

        I've give you the skeleton first, then the detailed
        facts with references later.

        Give me about 24 hours.

        j.s.anderson

        (Also.....a...memorabilia introit/quiz!)

        Most interesting/intriguing....you'll see!)


        --- markfinnern <markfinnern@...> a écrit :
        <HR>
        <html><body>


        <tt>
        Well J. S. Anderson,<BR>
        <BR>
        More then 4 days of agonizing waiting has passed, but
        still no reply <BR>
        post from you :-(<BR>
        <BR>
        Looking forward to it, Mark. <BR>
        <BR>
        <BR>
        --- In bafuture@y..., Joschka Fisher
        <grabarkowic@y...> wrote:<BR>
        > YOU NOW HAVE 4 DAYS, TO VERIFY YOUR
        INFORMATION.<BR>
        > J.S.ANDERSON <BR>
        > <BR>
        > <BR>
        > --- wayne radinsky <spodware@y...> a
        écrit : <BR>
        > <HR><BR>
        > <html><body><BR>
        > <BR>
        > <BR>
        > <tt><BR>
        > <BR><BR>
        > Gee that sounds pretty threatening. What good
        does<BR>
        > that do?<BR><BR>
        > We'll all be smarter and better off if we put
        our<BR>
        > heads<BR><BR>
        > together and learn from each other rather
        than<BR>
        > make<BR><BR>
        > threats, no?<BR><BR>
        > <BR><BR>
        > Maybe I am just being naive again.<BR><BR>
        > <BR><BR>
        > Anyway, I don't what you think I was wrong
        about,<BR>
        > but<BR><BR>
        > things seem to check out to me. I said that
        chip<BR>
        > sales<BR><BR>
        > were growing since April.<BR><BR>
        > <BR><BR>
        > Chip Sales Grow 5.8% in June Quarter
        <BR><BR>
        > <a<BR>
        > href="<a
        href="http://www.semichips.org/pre_release.cfm?">http://www.semichips.org/pre_release.cfm?</a><BR>
        ID=235"><a
        href="http://www.semichips.org/pre_release.cfm?ID=235">http://www.semichips.org/pre_release.cfm?ID=235</a></a><BR>
        > <BR><BR>
        > <BR><BR>
        > May Chip Sales Reach $11.37 Billion for
        Worldwide<BR><BR>
        > Semiconductor Industry <BR><BR>
        > <a<BR>
        > href="<a
        href="http://www.semichips.org/pre_release.cfm?">http://www.semichips.org/pre_release.cfm?</a><BR>
        ID=231"><a
        href="http://www.semichips.org/pre_release.cfm?ID=231">http://www.semichips.org/pre_release.cfm?ID=231</a></a><BR><BR>
        > <BR><BR>
        > This is a more recent article:<BR><BR>
        > <BR><BR>
        > Chip sector releases mixed figures<BR><BR>
        > <a<BR>
        > <BR>
        href="<a
        href="http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/3/26793.html">http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/3/26793.html</a>"><a
        href="http://www.th">http://www.th</a><BR>
        eregister.co.uk/content/3/26793.html</a><BR>
        > <BR><BR>
        > <BR><BR>
        > I interpret this to mean that the waters are
        still<BR>
        > choppy.<BR><BR>
        > Although I suppose you could argue that it's
        the<BR>
        > beginning<BR><BR>
        > of another downturn, but I don't expect
        that.<BR><BR>
        > <BR><BR>
        > As for communications equipment sales, actually
        I<BR>
        > didn't say<BR><BR>
        > telecom sales were going back up, (only the<BR>
        > semiconductor<BR><BR>
        > industry as a whole) and they haven't
        yet.<BR><BR>
        > <BR><BR>
        > OE Markets - Demand<BR><BR>
        > <a<BR>
        > <BR>
        href="<a
        href="http://www.oida.org/demand.html">http://www.oida.org/demand.html</a>"><a
        href="http://www.oida.org/demand.html">http://www.oida.org/demand.html</a><BR>
        </a><BR>
        > <BR><BR>
        > <BR><BR>
        > OE component sales, 2001 <BR><BR>
        > <a<BR>
        > <BR>
        href="<a
        href="http://www.oida.org/comprev.html">http://www.oida.org/comprev.html</a>"><a
        href="http://www.oida.org/comprev.ht">http://www.oida.org/comprev.ht</a><BR>
        ml</a><BR><BR>
        > <BR><BR>
        > The graphs show 2001 decreased to below 1999<BR>
        > levels.<BR><BR>
        > (But not to 0 :) It's for all optoelectronic<BR>
        > eqipment.<BR><BR>
        > Telecom specifically took a bigger
        hit.<BR><BR>
        > <BR><BR>
        > Optical networking's next frontier<BR><BR>
        > <a<BR>
        > <BR>
        href="<a
        href="http://www.bayarea.com/mld/mercurynews/business/3922499.htm">http://www.bayarea.com/mld/mercurynews/business/3922499.htm</a>">htt<BR>
        p://www.bayarea.com/mld/mercurynews/business/3922499.htm</a><BR><BR>
        > <BR><BR>
        > I said Moore's Law continues in spite of
        economic<BR>
        > recession.<BR><BR>
        > Recently:<BR><BR>
        > <BR><BR>
        > Intel Begins Shipping Itanium 2
        Processors<BR><BR>
        > <a<BR>
        > <BR>
        href="<a
        href="http://www.intel.com/pressroom/archive/releases/20020708comp.htm">http://www.intel.com/pressroom/archive/releases/20020708comp.htm</a><BR>
        "><a
        href="http://www.intel.com/pressroom/archive/releases/20020708comp.htm">http://www.intel.com/pressroom/archive/releases/20020708comp.htm</a></a><BR>
        <BR><BR>
        > <BR><BR>
        > Intel Ships The World's First 2 Gigahertz<BR>
        > Microprocessor For<BR><BR>
        > Mobile PCs <BR><BR>
        > <a<BR>
        > <BR>
        href="<a
        href="http://www.intel.com/pressroom/archive/releases/20020624comp.htm">http://www.intel.com/pressroom/archive/releases/20020624comp.htm</a><BR>
        "><a
        href="http://www.intel.com/pressroom/archive/releases/20020624comp.htm">http://www.intel.com/pressroom/archive/releases/20020624comp.htm</a></a><BR>
        <BR><BR>
        > <BR><BR>
        > Intel Unveils World's Most Advanced
        Chip-Making<BR>
        > Process<BR><BR>
        > <a<BR>
        > <BR>
        href="<a
        href="http://www.intel.com/pressroom/archive/releases/20020813tech.htm">http://www.intel.com/pressroom/archive/releases/20020813tech.htm</a><BR>
        "><a
        href="http://www.intel.com/pressroom/archive/releases/20020813tech.htm">http://www.intel.com/pressroom/archive/releases/20020813tech.htm</a></a><BR>
        <BR><BR>
        > <BR><BR>
        > And telecom technology is continuing to advance
        in<BR>
        > spite<BR><BR>
        > of the recession as well, and a quick look at
        any<BR>
        > telecom<BR><BR>
        > equipment vendor web site will
        show.<BR><BR>
        > <BR><BR>
        > Scientists at Bell Labs have used their
        collective<BR><BR>
        > multidisciplinary expertise to help design<BR>
        > LambdaXtreme<BR><BR>
        > Transport, the most advanced long-distance<BR>
        > communications<BR><BR>
        > system now on the market.<BR><BR>
        > <a<BR>
        > href="<a
        href="http://www.bell-">http://www.bell-</a><BR>
        labs.com/news/features/feature_01.html"><a
        href="http://www.bell-">http://www.bell-</a><BR>
        labs.com/news/features/feature_01.html</a><BR>
        > <BR><BR>
        > <BR><BR>
        > JDS Uniphase Announces New Semiconductor
        Optical<BR>
        > Amplifiers<BR><BR>
        > <a<BR>
        > href="<a
        href="http://www.jdsu.com/index2.cfm?">http://www.jdsu.com/index2.cfm?</a><BR>
        CID=3&NAVCID=3&DSP=PressRelease&ACT=Display&PressID=249&PageName=JDS%<BR>
        20Uniphase%20Announces%20New%20Semiconductor%20Optical%<BR>
        20Amplifiers"><a
        href="http://www.jdsu.com/index2.cfm?">http://www.jdsu.com/index2.cfm?</a><BR>
        CID=3&amp;NAVCID=3&amp;DSP=PressRelease&amp;ACT=Display&amp;PressID=24<BR>
        9&amp;PageName=JDS%20Uniphase%20Announces%20New%20Semiconductor%<BR>
        20Optical%20Amplifiers</a><BR><BR>
        > <BR><BR>
        > <BR><BR>
        > JDS Uniphase Boosts High-Level Functionality
        of<BR>
        > RX3<BR><BR>
        > Series Multichannel Backreflection Meters with
        Two<BR>
        > New<BR><BR>
        > Features <BR><BR>
        > Unique three-laser wavelength testing and 10
        mm<BR>
        > InGaAs<BR><BR>
        > detector provide broader testing
        capabilities,<BR>
        > reduce<BR><BR>
        > ownership cost<BR><BR>
        > <a<BR>
        > href="<a
        href="http://www.jdsu.com/index2.cfm?">http://www.jdsu.com/index2.cfm?</a><BR>
        CID=3&NAVCID=3&DSP=PressRelease&ACT=Display&PressID=231&PageName=JDS%<BR>
        20Uniphase%20Boosts%20High%2DLevel%20Functionality%20of%20RX3%<BR>
        20Series%20Multichannel%20Backreflection%20Meters%20with%20Two%20New%<BR>
        20Features"><a
        href="http://www.jdsu.com/index2.cfm?">http://www.jdsu.com/index2.cfm?</a><BR>
        CID=3&amp;NAVCID=3&amp;DSP=PressRelease&amp;ACT=Display&amp;PressID=23<BR>
        1&amp;PageName=JDS%20Uniphase%20Boosts%20High%2DLevel%20Functionality%<BR>
        20of%20RX3%20Series%20Multichannel%20Backreflection%20Meters%20with%<BR>
        20Two%20New%20Features</a><BR><BR>
        > <BR><BR>
        > <BR><BR>
        > JDS Uniphase Announces Dramatic Performance<BR>
        > Improvement In Thin<BR><BR>
        > Film Filters for Wideband
        Applications<BR><BR>
        > <a<BR>
        > href="<a
        href="http://www.jdsu.com/index2.cfm?">http://www.jdsu.com/index2.cfm?</a><BR>
        CID=3&NAVCID=3&DSP=PressRelease&ACT=Display&PressID=233&PageName=JDS%<BR>
        20Uniphase%20Announces%20Dramatic%20Performance%20Improvement%20In%<BR>
        20Thin%20Film%20Filters%20for%20Wideband%<BR>
        20Applications"><a
        href="http://www.jdsu.com/index2.cfm?">http://www.jdsu.com/index2.cfm?</a><BR>
        CID=3&amp;NAVCID=3&amp;DSP=PressRelease&amp;ACT=Display&amp;PressID=23<BR>
        3&amp;PageName=JDS%20Uniphase%20Announces%20Dramatic%20Performance%<BR>
        20Improvement%20In%20Thin%20Film%20Filters%20for%20Wideband%<BR>
        20Applications</a><BR><BR>
        > <BR><BR>
        > <BR><BR>
        > Now what you really want to do is graph out<BR>
        > processor<BR><BR>
        > performance per dollar over time. For
        bandwidth,<BR>
        > it's<BR><BR>
        > harder because there are more variables, but
        what<BR>
        > you<BR><BR>
        > want to do is calculate Gb / s / km / dollar
        for<BR>
        > telecom<BR><BR>
        > equipment and show that it is an exponential
        curve<BR>
        > over<BR><BR>
        > long periods of time. This is the whole essence
        of<BR>
        > Gilder's<BR><BR>
        > Law / Huber's Law. I don't have the data to do
        this<BR>
        > but<BR><BR>
        > maybe you can find it and calculate it. The
        price<BR>
        > data<BR><BR>
        > is important because the calculation is per
        unit<BR>
        > cost.<BR><BR>
        > The industry now is focusing more on
        decreasing<BR>
        > cost<BR><BR>
        > on the low end than on advancing the high
        end.<BR><BR>
        > <BR><BR>
        > Finally, here is an article about the telecom<BR>
        > meltdown.<BR><BR>
        > If you think the recession has stopped
        technology<BR><BR>
        > advancement, you might have the cause and
        effect<BR>
        > backwards.<BR><BR>
        > The author believes that the rapid pace of<BR>
        > technology<BR><BR>
        > advancement is one of the *causes* of the
        telecom<BR>
        > meltdown.<BR><BR>
        > As you might expect, if long-distance phone
        service<BR>
        > is<BR><BR>
        > &quot;free&quot;, that has severe
        consequences for the<BR>
        > people who<BR><BR>
        > build their business on it. (As I mentioned
        earlier,<BR>
        > <BR><BR>
        > Nathan Myhrvold predicted in 1993 that long
        distance<BR>
        > would<BR><BR>
        > become free.)<BR><BR>
        > <BR><BR>
        > Future not so bright for telecoms<BR><BR>
        > <a<BR>
        > <BR>
        href="<a
        href="http://www.usatoday.com/life/cyber/invest/2002/07/15/telecom.htm">http://www.usatoday.com/life/cyber/invest/2002/07/15/telecom.htm</a><BR>
        "><a
        href="http://www.usatoday.com/life/cyber/invest/2002/07/15/telecom.htm">http://www.usatoday.com/life/cyber/invest/2002/07/15/telecom.htm</a></a><BR>
        <BR><BR>
        > <BR><BR>
        > Ok, let me have it.<BR><BR>
        > <BR><BR>
        > <BR><BR>
        > --- Joseph Anderson<BR>
        > bigwhiskey@e... wrote:<BR><BR>
        > &gt; Uh....Wayne...<BR><BR>
        > &gt; <BR><BR>
        > &gt; Since I'm such a nice guy, I'm gonna
        give you 7<BR>
        > days to check<BR><BR>
        > &gt; your facts on this before I,
        er...<BR><BR>
        > &gt; <BR><BR>
        > &gt; Let you have it.<BR><BR>
        > &gt; <BR><BR>
        > &gt; j.s.a.<BR><BR>
        > &gt; <BR><BR>
        > &gt; --- wayne radinsky spodware@y...<BR>
        > wrote:<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;--- Joseph Anderson<BR>
        > bigwhiskey@e... wrote:<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;&gt; Yea...and
        kudos...but<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;&gt;<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;&gt; If there's room at the
        bottom....<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;&gt;<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;&gt; and&nbsp; aint'
        nobody buying to<BR>
        > maintain a market...<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;&gt;<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;&gt; then it's nothing more
        than nanotech for<BR>
        > &quot;nada&quot; or oh!<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;&gt;
        no-profits?<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;I don't see what you are getting
        at here.<BR>
        > Semiconductor<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;sales started increasing in
        April. We're<BR>
        > already into the<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;next boom cycle. It's pretty
        weak at this<BR>
        > point, but it<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;will grow. There are buyers in
        the market,<BR>
        > and as<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;technology gets more powerful,
        there will be<BR>
        > more products<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;people want to
        buy.<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;&gt; Pretty soon...your
        local economy is<BR>
        > devastasted and YOU'RE<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;&gt; at the
        bottom!<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;I don't see what you are getting
        at here.<BR>
        > There are many<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;devastated local economies in
        the world. This<BR>
        > does not<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;affect the accelerating pace of
        technology<BR>
        > development.<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;&gt; Technology has several
        environments it's<BR>
        > responsible for.<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;&gt; Like it or
        not.&nbsp; Biological is<BR>
        > one.&nbsp; Economic is
        certainly<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;&gt; the
        other.<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;&gt;<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;&gt; Or do you pour money
        into spin-doctors<BR>
        > and artificial price<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;&gt; supports via Enron,
        Anderson Consulting,<BR>
        > and WorldCom's<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;&gt; accounting techniques?
        So...for a while,<BR>
        > no-on will notice?<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;Again, the collapse of Enron,
        Anderson,<BR>
        > Global Crossing,<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;WorldCom, etc, does not slow the
        pace of<BR>
        > technology. This<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;may seem counterintuitive, but
        it has no<BR>
        > effect.<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;&gt; On the otherhand...if
        you can convince<BR>
        > people to work for<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;&gt; next to nothing (
        especially you<BR>
        > California High $$ types )<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;&gt; or are willing to
        suffer the<BR>
        > consequences of globalization<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;&gt; where Government
        interests and Corp<BR>
        > Interest cannot<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;&gt; co-exist. Then...Have
        yo' technology!!<BR>
        > ..and more of it! (<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;&gt; q.v. Sir John
        Goldsmith's books:<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;&gt;<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;&gt; The Trap<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;&gt;<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;&gt; The
        Response<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;&gt;<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;&gt; <a<BR>
        > <BR>
        href="<a
        href="http://www.users.globalnet.co.uk/~ashes/RESPREV2.html">http://www.users.globalnet.co.uk/~ashes/RESPREV2.html</a>"><a
        href="http://ww">http://ww</a><BR>
        w.users.globalnet.co.uk/~ashes/RESPREV2.html</a><BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;Interesting article. Thanks. I'm
        not sure how<BR>
        > it ties in<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;with my post. The theme of this
        article is<BR>
        > &quot;free trade&quot;.<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;What's the connection? That
        semiconductors<BR>
        > are manufactured<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;by &quot;free
        trade&quot;? That technological<BR>
        > advancement has not<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;brought economic equality
        between<BR>
        > nations?<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;&gt; Somwhere earlier there
        was a<BR>
        > &quot;joie-de-vivre&quot; on
        these<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;&gt; Salons regarding
        technology being able<BR>
        > to continue despite<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;&gt; adversity. &quot;
        For higher silicon<BR>
        > evolution!&quot;<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;&gt;<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;&gt; You know like war? I
        think someone<BR>
        > particularly mentioned<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;&gt; that
        &quot;side-track&quot; to<BR>
        > technological progress.<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;That was me, yup. But I don't
        know where you<BR>
        > got the &quot; For<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;higher silicon
        evolution!&quot; part. I'm<BR>
        > only saying that, as a<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;matter of fact, economic
        recession does not<BR>
        > slow down the<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;advancement of technology. If
        you don't<BR>
        > believe me, draw a<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;graph. Plot out transistor size,
        or CPU clock<BR>
        > speed, or<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;whatever, and see whether it
        goes down during<BR>
        > the current<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;economic
        recession.<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;You'll see, it doesn't, it
        maintains its<BR>
        > exponential<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;trajectory. This is not a<BR>
        > &quot;joie-de-vivre&quot;, this is
        an<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;empirical fact.<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;&gt; I keep remembering a
        cartoon in the<BR>
        > Village Voice by<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;&gt; Oliphant, during the
        week the Neutron<BR>
        > Bomb was announced,<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;&gt; as a device that did
        not destroy<BR>
        > buildings. Of course, I<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;&gt; don't have to tell you
        and the NYTimes<BR>
        > article never<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;&gt; said...er um but kills
        a whoppin' lot of<BR>
        > people with<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;&gt; high-radiation levels
        over 3-7<BR>
        > days.&nbsp; It showed a bunch
        of<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;&gt; accountants jumping for
        joy on their<BR>
        > desks!<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;&gt;<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;&gt;<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;&gt; This is what gets me
        most.&nbsp; The<BR>
        > survival instinct when<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;&gt; assuaged by technology
        for technology<BR>
        > sake, opinions and<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;&gt; modern day tech
        toys...gets overlooked<BR>
        > and in the<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;&gt;
        process...over-ridden.<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;Quite possibly.<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;There seem to be 3 main lines of
        thought on<BR>
        > this sort of<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;thing.<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;1) The optimistic outlook --
        technological<BR>
        > advancement<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;will, by itself, make everything
        better. John<BR>
        > Smart is<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;definitely in this category. He
        believes<BR>
        > that, as the<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;technological singularity
        approaches, that we<BR>
        > will all be<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;amazed by the speed at which the
        remaining<BR>
        > human problems<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;are solved. He has some of the
        most clever<BR>
        > and unusual<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;arguments of any of the thinkers
        I know of,<BR>
        > such as the<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;idea that as a complex adaptive
        system<BR>
        > increases in<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;complexity, it also increases
        the<BR>
        > concentration on<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;positive-sum interactions, and
        decreases in<BR>
        > violence and<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;other zero-sum or negative-sum
        interactions.<BR>
        > Ray Kurzweil<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;sort of goes in this category --
        he likes to<BR>
        > talk about how<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;human lifespan is being
        extended<BR>
        > exponentially and so<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;fourth. Kurzweil acknowledges
        the downside --<BR>
        > he has a<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;&quot;Dangerous
        Futures&quot; section on his<BR>
        > website and so on.<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;So he is not 100% in this
        category, but I<BR>
        > think that is<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;the overall theme of his
        thinking.<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;2) The &quot;we can control
        the outcome&quot;<BR>
        > outlook -- I would&nbsp; put<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;Foresight (Eric Drexler, Ralph
        Merkle,<BR>
        > Christine Peterson,<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;etc), because Foresight's basic
        premise is<BR>
        > that if you can<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;influence the &quot;initial
        conditions&quot;<BR>
        > of technological<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;development early in the
        process, then you<BR>
        > can influence<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;where the whole trajectory goes
        and thereby<BR>
        > head the system<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;off in the direction of a
        positive outcome. I<BR>
        > would put<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;Eliezer Yudkowsky in this
        category as well,<BR>
        > although he<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;seems to take the view that he
        personally is<BR>
        > going to<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;invent strong AI, preprogram it
        with Asimov<BR>
        > laws, and save<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;the world (more or less). Of
        course, you can<BR>
        > probably guess,<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;by the wording I use, that I'm
        very skeptical<BR>
        > his approach<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;will work. :)<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;3) The
        &quot;pessimistic&quot; outlook. This<BR>
        > is the &quot;technology will<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;make humanity extinct!&quot;
        point of view<BR>
        > expressed by people<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;like Mark Gubrud. And possibly
        Bill Joy,<BR>
        > although I was<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;never sure whether Bill Joy
        really believes<BR>
        > this point of<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;view or whether he was just
        trying to provoke<BR>
        > widespread<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;discussion on the issue. (Which
        he certainly<BR>
        > did in any<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;case). Gubrud takes the
        moralistic position<BR>
        > -- that humans<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;must stop technology because
        technology will<BR>
        > make humanity<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;extinct, and that's morally
        wrong.<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;For my part, I think I lean
        towards the<BR>
        > pessimistic<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;viewpoint simply because I was
        once a big<BR>
        > believer in the<BR><BR>
        > &gt;
        &gt;&quot;techno-utopian&quot; viewpoint
        -- the<BR>
        > idea that we'll invent<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;technology that will solve
        humanity's<BR>
        > problems. My time at<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;Microsoft disillusioned me of
        that concept<BR>
        > pretty<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;thoroughly. Sure, Microsoft may
        make<BR>
        > technology that solves<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;human problems. It's just that
        that's not<BR>
        > really<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;Microsoft's *intent* -- it helps
        them sell<BR>
        > software, but<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;it's the selling of software
        that they really<BR>
        > care about.<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;David Gelernter (from Yale
        University) has<BR>
        > written some<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;stuff about how
        &quot;technology doesn't<BR>
        > solve social problems&quot;,<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;how he expected technology to
        solve social<BR>
        > problems and<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;went through a similar (though
        milder :)<BR>
        > disillusionment.<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;One of the reasons I have the
        view that I<BR>
        > have is that I<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;now interpret technological
        development as<BR>
        > being part of<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;the same process that drives
        biological<BR>
        > development. And in<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;the biological realm, there is
        nothing<BR>
        > special about the<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;human species -- it is just
        another species.<BR>
        > So I question<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;the argument that John Smart
        puts fourth,<BR>
        > that advanced<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;technology in the future will
        care about<BR>
        > solving human<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;problems. We don't care about
        other species<BR>
        > (we, humans,<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;are causing a mass extinction
        right now), for<BR>
        > the most part<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;-- there are exceptions like
        Rainforest<BR>
        > Action Network and<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;so on. So while the human
        species<BR>
        > unquestionably rules the<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;planet at the moment -- but only
        at the<BR>
        > moment. The process<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;of evolution does not
        intrinsically favor the<BR>
        > human<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;species. So I don't see why
        future robots<BR>
        > with strong AI<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;will care to spend their
        intelligence solving<BR>
        > humanity's<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;problems. On the other hand, I
        don't agree<BR>
        > with Mark Gubrud<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;that extinction is a likely
        result. I see no<BR>
        > evidence that<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;the development of complex
        species causes the<BR>
        > simple ones<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;to go extinct simply because
        they are simple.<BR>
        > Otherwise<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;there would not be microbes and
        insects and<BR>
        > so fourth<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;today. So I would not expect
        advanced<BR>
        > technology to do that<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;either.<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;This reminds me of the brief
        discussion with<BR>
        > Chris Phoenix<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;about uploads, and this gives
        you some idea<BR>
        > of the<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;complexity of the economics
        behind all this.<BR>
        > Chris was<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;saying that
        &quot;everyone&quot; will be able<BR>
        > to upload, because, as<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;technology advances, it gets
        cheaper, and<BR>
        > eventually<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;everyone will be able to afford
        it. And I was<BR>
        > saying, wait<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;a minute, you're looking at only
        one half of<BR>
        > the equation,<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;the buying side. Technology also
        affects the<BR>
        > earning side.<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;If there are computers costing
        $1000 or $2000<BR>
        > that have<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;strong AI -- and can therefore
        do any job a<BR>
        > human can do --<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;will there be any jobs? So to
        keep up with<BR>
        > the machines,<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;everyone has to get cybernetic
        implants, so<BR>
        > their brains<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;can keep up with Moore's Law.
        And how much<BR>
        > does that<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;technology cost? What percentage
        of the<BR>
        > population will be<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;able to afford it? So you see,
        we're not just<BR>
        > talking about<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;how much technology costs to
        make and sell,<BR>
        > but how people<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;will earn the money to buy it --
        how these<BR>
        > two factors will<BR><BR>
        > &gt; &gt;fit together. That's pretty
        extremely hard to<BR>
        > predict with<BR><BR>
        > &gt; <BR><BR>
        > === message truncated ===<BR><BR>
        > <BR><BR>
        > <BR><BR>
        >
        __________________________________________________<BR><BR>
        > Do You Yahoo!?<BR><BR>
        > Yahoo! Finance - Get real-time stock
        quotes<BR><BR>
        > <a<BR>
        > href="<a
        href="http://finance.yahoo.com">http://finance.yahoo.com</a>"><a
        href="http://finance.yahoo.com">http://finance.yahoo.com</a></a><BR><BR>
        > </tt><BR>
        > <BR>
        > <br><BR>
        > <BR>
        > <!-- |**|begin egp html banner|**| --><BR>
        > <BR>
        > <table border=0 cellspacing=0
        cellpadding=2><BR>
        > <tr bgcolor=#FFFFCC><BR>
        > <td align=center><font
        size="-1"<BR>
        > color=#003399><b>Yahoo! Groups
        Sponsor</b></font></td><BR>
        > </tr><BR>
        > <tr bgcolor=#FFFFFF><BR>
        > <td align=center width=470><table
        border=0<BR>
        > cellpadding=0 cellspacing=0><tr><td
        align=center><font<BR>
        > face=arial
        size=-2>ADVERTISEMENT</font><br><a<BR>
        > <BR>
        href="<a
        href="http://rd.yahoo.com/M=228862.2128520.3581629.2204139/D=egroupweb">http://rd.yahoo.com/M=228862.2128520.3581629.2204139/D=egroupweb</a><BR>
        /S=1705890010:HM/A=1182692/R=0/*<a
        href="http://adfarm.mediaplex.com/ad/ck/990-">http://adfarm.mediaplex.com/ad/ck/990-</a><BR>
        1736-1039-334<BR>
        > " target="_top"><img
        border="0"<BR>
        > <BR>
        src="<a
        href="http://us.a1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/a/co/columbiahouse/d_300x250_03">http://us.a1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/a/co/columbiahouse/d_300x250_03</a><BR>
        1_4for49p_3.gif"<BR>
        > height="250"
        width="300"></a></td></tr></table></td><BR>
        > </tr><BR>
        > </table><BR>
        > <BR>
        > <!-- |**|end egp html banner|**| --><BR>
        > <BR>
        > <BR>
        > <br><BR>
        > <tt><BR>
        > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email
        to:<BR><BR>
        > bafuture-unsubscribe@y...<BR><BR>
        > <BR><BR>
        > </tt><BR>
        > <br><BR>
        > <BR>
        > <br><BR>
        > <tt>Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
        the <a<BR>
        > href="<a
        href="http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/">http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/</a>">Yahoo!
        Terms<BR>
        > of Service</a>.</tt><BR>
        > </br><BR>
        > <BR>
        > </body></html><BR>
        > <BR>
        > <BR>
        >
        ___________________________________________________________<BR>
        > Do You Yahoo!? -- Une adresse @... gratuite
        et en français !<BR>
        > Yahoo! Mail : <a
        href="http://fr.mail.yahoo.com">http://fr.mail.yahoo.com</a><BR>
        <BR>
        </tt>

        <br>

        <!-- |**|begin egp html banner|**| -->

        <table border=0 cellspacing=0 cellpadding=2>
        <tr bgcolor=#FFFFCC>
        <td align=center><font size="-1"
        color=#003399><b>Yahoo! Groups Sponsor</b></font></td>
        </tr>
        <tr bgcolor=#FFFFFF>
        <td align=center width=470><table border=0
        cellpadding=0 cellspacing=0><tr><td align=center><font
        face=arial size=-2>ADVERTISEMENT</font><br><a
        href="http://rd.yahoo.com/M=229441.2336363.3766536.2225242/D=egroupweb/S=1705890010:HM/A=1189560/R=0/*http://www.bmgmusic.com/acq/ee/q6/enroll/mhn/10/"
        target=_top><img
        src="http://us.a1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/a/bm/bmg/strongartist_12_300x250.gif"
        alt="" width="300" height="250"
        border="0"></a></td></tr></table></td>
        </tr>
        </table>

        <!-- |**|end egp html banner|**| -->


        <br>
        <tt>
        To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:<BR>
        bafuture-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com<BR>
        <BR>
        </tt>
        <br>

        <br>
        <tt>Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the <a
        href="http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/">Yahoo! Terms
        of Service</a>.</tt>
        </br>

        </body></html>


        ___________________________________________________________
        Do You Yahoo!? -- Une adresse @... gratuite et en français !
        Yahoo! Mail : http://fr.mail.yahoo.com
      • Joschka Fisher
        Ok...this is a skeleton/outline of my objections to your assessment of the chip industry and is perceived cyclical comeback. It s also a criticism of Yea
        Message 3 of 17 , Sep 5, 2002
        • 0 Attachment
          Ok...this is a skeleton/outline of my objections to
          your assessment of the chip industry and is perceived
          cyclical comeback.

          It's also a criticism of "Yea technology improves but
          who gets to use it", from the Economics point of view.

          Do remember that the Japanese just beat the sh** out
          of us in building the world's fastest computer using
          10+ year old technology. ( Still looking for that
          article!)

          "er was it you or Wayne Radinsky?" this is submitted
          to?

          Either way a lot of data and I've got one Economist
          article I'm trying to get but I can't afford the
          $60.00 subscription so I have to break-into the
          Stanford Business School computers to get the article.
          Sorry but it should take about 24 hours to get it..and
          a few other items. "Heee Hee".

          I'll fill in the rest within the next couple days
          since this is time consuming, but damned interesting.


          Anderson Evaluations: The Problem with Technology for
          Technology Sake and argument against Wayne's
          assessment!

          SIA organization, the source of your data and the
          reporting systems, in general!
          1. My general disklike/distrust of SIA reports and
          good reasons why:
          2. Reporting alternatives and their “accuracy” over

          past 3 years!

          Current effort/trends of countries to build
          semiconductor/foundry plants. ( is Rally round the
          Maypole, a good idea?)
          1. Source of talent
          2. Salaries
          3. Saturation and market glut

          The costs of semiconductor and foundry construction or
          retooling
          1. Defining semiconductor vs. foundry industries
          2. Why Foundries were only recently included in the
          semiconductor industry.

          Record of projected profit margins vs.actual over past
          3 years

          1. By different reporting agencies (including SIA)
          2. Markets the Semi/Foundry serve

          Demand markets behaviour for such technology in the
          current and future arena

          1. So who’s buying "said new technology" and what
          are they being used for?
          2. Profitability & Market thresholds of these “end-
          user”-industries over past 3 years.

          The high-tech pollution problem: assessment and costs
          to the industry.

          Evaluation of Semi/Foundry under the John Goldsmith
          Economics

          1. The economics of Zu Schleuderpreisen and its
          problems around the world in the Semi/Foundry
          industry!

          Why Technology for Technology sake, is a near
          aliteration of s', as in: is seriously short-sigted,
          silly and the end of evolution!


          --- markfinnern <markfinnern@...> a écrit :
          <HR>
          <html><body>


          <tt>
          Well J. S. Anderson,<BR>
          <BR>
          More then 4 days of agonizing waiting has passed, but
          still no reply <BR>
          post from you :-(<BR>
          <BR>
          Looking forward to it, Mark. <BR>
          <BR>
          <BR>
          --- In bafuture@y..., Joschka Fisher
          <grabarkowic@y...> wrote:<BR>
          > YOU NOW HAVE 4 DAYS, TO VERIFY YOUR
          INFORMATION.<BR>
          > J.S.ANDERSON <BR>
          > <BR>
          > <BR>
          > --- wayne radinsky <spodware@y...> a
          écrit : <BR>
          > <HR><BR>
          > <html><body><BR>
          > <BR>
          > <BR>
          > <tt><BR>
          > <BR><BR>
          > Gee that sounds pretty threatening. What good
          does<BR>
          > that do?<BR><BR>
          > We'll all be smarter and better off if we put
          our<BR>
          > heads<BR><BR>
          > together and learn from each other rather
          than<BR>
          > make<BR><BR>
          > threats, no?<BR><BR>
          > <BR><BR>
          > Maybe I am just being naive again.<BR><BR>
          > <BR><BR>
          > Anyway, I don't what you think I was wrong
          about,<BR>
          > but<BR><BR>
          > things seem to check out to me. I said that
          chip<BR>
          > sales<BR><BR>
          > were growing since April.<BR><BR>
          > <BR><BR>
          > Chip Sales Grow 5.8% in June Quarter
          <BR><BR>
          > <a<BR>
          > href="<a
          href="http://www.semichips.org/pre_release.cfm?">http://www.semichips.org/pre_release.cfm?</a><BR>
          ID=235"><a
          href="http://www.semichips.org/pre_release.cfm?ID=235">http://www.semichips.org/pre_release.cfm?ID=235</a></a><BR>
          > <BR><BR>
          > <BR><BR>
          > May Chip Sales Reach $11.37 Billion for
          Worldwide<BR><BR>
          > Semiconductor Industry <BR><BR>
          > <a<BR>
          > href="<a
          href="http://www.semichips.org/pre_release.cfm?">http://www.semichips.org/pre_release.cfm?</a><BR>
          ID=231"><a
          href="http://www.semichips.org/pre_release.cfm?ID=231">http://www.semichips.org/pre_release.cfm?ID=231</a></a><BR><BR>
          > <BR><BR>
          > This is a more recent article:<BR><BR>
          > <BR><BR>
          > Chip sector releases mixed figures<BR><BR>
          > <a<BR>
          > <BR>
          href="<a
          href="http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/3/26793.html">http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/3/26793.html</a>"><a
          href="http://www.th">http://www.th</a><BR>
          eregister.co.uk/content/3/26793.html</a><BR>
          > <BR><BR>
          > <BR><BR>
          > I interpret this to mean that the waters are
          still<BR>
          > choppy.<BR><BR>
          > Although I suppose you could argue that it's
          the<BR>
          > beginning<BR><BR>
          > of another downturn, but I don't expect
          that.<BR><BR>
          > <BR><BR>
          > As for communications equipment sales, actually
          I<BR>
          > didn't say<BR><BR>
          > telecom sales were going back up, (only the<BR>
          > semiconductor<BR><BR>
          > industry as a whole) and they haven't
          yet.<BR><BR>
          > <BR><BR>
          > OE Markets - Demand<BR><BR>
          > <a<BR>
          > <BR>
          href="<a
          href="http://www.oida.org/demand.html">http://www.oida.org/demand.html</a>"><a
          href="http://www.oida.org/demand.html">http://www.oida.org/demand.html</a><BR>
          </a><BR>
          > <BR><BR>
          > <BR><BR>
          > OE component sales, 2001 <BR><BR>
          > <a<BR>
          > <BR>
          href="<a
          href="http://www.oida.org/comprev.html">http://www.oida.org/comprev.html</a>"><a
          href="http://www.oida.org/comprev.ht">http://www.oida.org/comprev.ht</a><BR>
          ml</a><BR><BR>
          > <BR><BR>
          > The graphs show 2001 decreased to below 1999<BR>
          > levels.<BR><BR>
          > (But not to 0 :) It's for all optoelectronic<BR>
          > eqipment.<BR><BR>
          > Telecom specifically took a bigger
          hit.<BR><BR>
          > <BR><BR>
          > Optical networking's next frontier<BR><BR>
          > <a<BR>
          > <BR>
          href="<a
          href="http://www.bayarea.com/mld/mercurynews/business/3922499.htm">http://www.bayarea.com/mld/mercurynews/business/3922499.htm</a>">htt<BR>
          p://www.bayarea.com/mld/mercurynews/business/3922499.htm</a><BR><BR>
          > <BR><BR>
          > I said Moore's Law continues in spite of
          economic<BR>
          > recession.<BR><BR>
          > Recently:<BR><BR>
          > <BR><BR>
          > Intel Begins Shipping Itanium 2
          Processors<BR><BR>
          > <a<BR>
          > <BR>
          href="<a
          href="http://www.intel.com/pressroom/archive/releases/20020708comp.htm">http://www.intel.com/pressroom/archive/releases/20020708comp.htm</a><BR>
          "><a
          href="http://www.intel.com/pressroom/archive/releases/20020708comp.htm">http://www.intel.com/pressroom/archive/releases/20020708comp.htm</a></a><BR>
          <BR><BR>
          > <BR><BR>
          > Intel Ships The World's First 2 Gigahertz<BR>
          > Microprocessor For<BR><BR>
          > Mobile PCs <BR><BR>
          > <a<BR>
          > <BR>
          href="<a
          href="http://www.intel.com/pressroom/archive/releases/20020624comp.htm">http://www.intel.com/pressroom/archive/releases/20020624comp.htm</a><BR>
          "><a
          href="http://www.intel.com/pressroom/archive/releases/20020624comp.htm">http://www.intel.com/pressroom/archive/releases/20020624comp.htm</a></a><BR>
          <BR><BR>
          > <BR><BR>
          > Intel Unveils World's Most Advanced
          Chip-Making<BR>
          > Process<BR><BR>
          > <a<BR>
          > <BR>
          href="<a
          href="http://www.intel.com/pressroom/archive/releases/20020813tech.htm">http://www.intel.com/pressroom/archive/releases/20020813tech.htm</a><BR>
          "><a
          href="http://www.intel.com/pressroom/archive/releases/20020813tech.htm">http://www.intel.com/pressroom/archive/releases/20020813tech.htm</a></a><BR>
          <BR><BR>
          > <BR><BR>
          > And telecom technology is continuing to advance
          in<BR>
          > spite<BR><BR>
          > of the recession as well, and a quick look at
          any<BR>
          > telecom<BR><BR>
          > equipment vendor web site will
          show.<BR><BR>
          > <BR><BR>
          > Scientists at Bell Labs have used their
          collective<BR><BR>
          > multidisciplinary expertise to help design<BR>
          > LambdaXtreme<BR><BR>
          > Transport, the most advanced long-distance<BR>
          > communications<BR><BR>
          > system now on the market.<BR><BR>
          > <a<BR>
          > href="<a
          href="http://www.bell-">http://www.bell-</a><BR>
          labs.com/news/features/feature_01.html"><a
          href="http://www.bell-">http://www.bell-</a><BR>
          labs.com/news/features/feature_01.html</a><BR>
          > <BR><BR>
          > <BR><BR>
          > JDS Uniphase Announces New Semiconductor
          Optical<BR>
          > Amplifiers<BR><BR>
          > <a<BR>
          > href="<a
          href="http://www.jdsu.com/index2.cfm?">http://www.jdsu.com/index2.cfm?</a><BR>
          CID=3&NAVCID=3&DSP=PressRelease&ACT=Display&PressID=249&PageName=JDS%<BR>
          20Uniphase%20Announces%20New%20Semiconductor%20Optical%<BR>
          20Amplifiers"><a
          href="http://www.jdsu.com/index2.cfm?">http://www.jdsu.com/index2.cfm?</a><BR>
          CID=3&amp;NAVCID=3&amp;DSP=PressRelease&amp;ACT=Display&amp;PressID=24<BR>
          9&amp;PageName=JDS%20Uniphase%20Announces%20New%20Semiconductor%<BR>
          20Optical%20Amplifiers</a><BR><BR>
          > <BR><BR>
          > <BR><BR>
          > JDS Uniphase Boosts High-Level Functionality
          of<BR>
          > RX3<BR><BR>
          > Series Multichannel Backreflection Meters with
          Two<BR>
          > New<BR><BR>
          > Features <BR><BR>
          > Unique three-laser wavelength testing and 10
          mm<BR>
          > InGaAs<BR><BR>
          > detector provide broader testing
          capabilities,<BR>
          > reduce<BR><BR>
          > ownership cost<BR><BR>
          > <a<BR>
          > href="<a
          href="http://www.jdsu.com/index2.cfm?">http://www.jdsu.com/index2.cfm?</a><BR>
          CID=3&NAVCID=3&DSP=PressRelease&ACT=Display&PressID=231&PageName=JDS%<BR>
          20Uniphase%20Boosts%20High%2DLevel%20Functionality%20of%20RX3%<BR>
          20Series%20Multichannel%20Backreflection%20Meters%20with%20Two%20New%<BR>
          20Features"><a
          href="http://www.jdsu.com/index2.cfm?">http://www.jdsu.com/index2.cfm?</a><BR>
          CID=3&amp;NAVCID=3&amp;DSP=PressRelease&amp;ACT=Display&amp;PressID=23<BR>
          1&amp;PageName=JDS%20Uniphase%20Boosts%20High%2DLevel%20Functionality%<BR>
          20of%20RX3%20Series%20Multichannel%20Backreflection%20Meters%20with%<BR>
          20Two%20New%20Features</a><BR><BR>
          > <BR><BR>
          > <BR><BR>
          > JDS Uniphase Announces Dramatic Performance<BR>
          > Improvement In Thin<BR><BR>
          > Film Filters for Wideband
          Applications<BR><BR>
          > <a<BR>
          > href="<a
          href="http://www.jdsu.com/index2.cfm?">http://www.jdsu.com/index2.cfm?</a><BR>
          CID=3&NAVCID=3&DSP=PressRelease&ACT=Display&PressID=233&PageName=JDS%<BR>
          20Uniphase%20Announces%20Dramatic%20Performance%20Improvement%20In%<BR>
          20Thin%20Film%20Filters%20for%20Wideband%<BR>
          20Applications"><a
          href="http://www.jdsu.com/index2.cfm?">http://www.jdsu.com/index2.cfm?</a><BR>
          CID=3&amp;NAVCID=3&amp;DSP=PressRelease&amp;ACT=Display&amp;PressID=23<BR>
          3&amp;PageName=JDS%20Uniphase%20Announces%20Dramatic%20Performance%<BR>
          20Improvement%20In%20Thin%20Film%20Filters%20for%20Wideband%<BR>
          20Applications</a><BR><BR>
          > <BR><BR>
          > <BR><BR>
          > Now what you really want to do is graph out<BR>
          > processor<BR><BR>
          > performance per dollar over time. For
          bandwidth,<BR>
          > it's<BR><BR>
          > harder because there are more variables, but
          what<BR>
          > you<BR><BR>
          > want to do is calculate Gb / s / km / dollar
          for<BR>
          > telecom<BR><BR>
          > equipment and show that it is an exponential
          curve<BR>
          > over<BR><BR>
          > long periods of time. This is the whole essence
          of<BR>
          > Gilder's<BR><BR>
          > Law / Huber's Law. I don't have the data to do
          this<BR>
          > but<BR><BR>
          > maybe you can find it and calculate it. The
          price<BR>
          > data<BR><BR>
          > is important because the calculation is per
          unit<BR>
          > cost.<BR><BR>
          > The industry now is focusing more on
          decreasing<BR>
          > cost<BR><BR>
          > on the low end than on advancing the high
          end.<BR><BR>
          > <BR><BR>
          > Finally, here is an article about the telecom<BR>
          > meltdown.<BR><BR>
          > If you think the recession has stopped
          technology<BR><BR>
          > advancement, you might have the cause and
          effect<BR>
          > backwards.<BR><BR>
          > The author believes that the rapid pace of<BR>
          > technology<BR><BR>
          > advancement is one of the *causes* of the
          telecom<BR>
          > meltdown.<BR><BR>
          > As you might expect, if long-distance phone
          service<BR>
          > is<BR><BR>
          > &quot;free&quot;, that has severe
          consequences for the<BR>
          > people who<BR><BR>
          > build their business on it. (As I mentioned
          earlier,<BR>
          > <BR><BR>
          > Nathan Myhrvold predicted in 1993 that long
          distance<BR>
          > would<BR><BR>
          > become free.)<BR><BR>
          > <BR><BR>
          > Future not so bright for telecoms<BR><BR>
          > <a<BR>
          > <BR>
          href="<a
          href="http://www.usatoday.com/life/cyber/invest/2002/07/15/telecom.htm">http://www.usatoday.com/life/cyber/invest/2002/07/15/telecom.htm</a><BR>
          "><a
          href="http://www.usatoday.com/life/cyber/invest/2002/07/15/telecom.htm">http://www.usatoday.com/life/cyber/invest/2002/07/15/telecom.htm</a></a><BR>
          <BR><BR>
          > <BR><BR>
          > Ok, let me have it.<BR><BR>
          > <BR><BR>
          > <BR><BR>
          > --- Joseph Anderson<BR>
          > bigwhiskey@e... wrote:<BR><BR>
          > &gt; Uh....Wayne...<BR><BR>
          > &gt; <BR><BR>
          > &gt; Since I'm such a nice guy, I'm gonna
          give you 7<BR>
          > days to check<BR><BR>
          > &gt; your facts on this before I,
          er...<BR><BR>
          > &gt; <BR><BR>
          > &gt; Let you have it.<BR><BR>
          > &gt; <BR><BR>
          > &gt; j.s.a.<BR><BR>
          > &gt; <BR><BR>
          > &gt; --- wayne radinsky spodware@y...<BR>
          > wrote:<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;--- Joseph Anderson<BR>
          > bigwhiskey@e... wrote:<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;&gt; Yea...and
          kudos...but<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;&gt;<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;&gt; If there's room at the
          bottom....<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;&gt;<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;&gt; and&nbsp; aint'
          nobody buying to<BR>
          > maintain a market...<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;&gt;<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;&gt; then it's nothing more
          than nanotech for<BR>
          > &quot;nada&quot; or oh!<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;&gt;
          no-profits?<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;I don't see what you are getting
          at here.<BR>
          > Semiconductor<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;sales started increasing in
          April. We're<BR>
          > already into the<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;next boom cycle. It's pretty
          weak at this<BR>
          > point, but it<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;will grow. There are buyers in
          the market,<BR>
          > and as<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;technology gets more powerful,
          there will be<BR>
          > more products<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;people want to
          buy.<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;&gt; Pretty soon...your
          local economy is<BR>
          > devastasted and YOU'RE<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;&gt; at the
          bottom!<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;I don't see what you are getting
          at here.<BR>
          > There are many<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;devastated local economies in
          the world. This<BR>
          > does not<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;affect the accelerating pace of
          technology<BR>
          > development.<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;&gt; Technology has several
          environments it's<BR>
          > responsible for.<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;&gt; Like it or
          not.&nbsp; Biological is<BR>
          > one.&nbsp; Economic is
          certainly<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;&gt; the
          other.<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;&gt;<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;&gt; Or do you pour money
          into spin-doctors<BR>
          > and artificial price<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;&gt; supports via Enron,
          Anderson Consulting,<BR>
          > and WorldCom's<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;&gt; accounting techniques?
          So...for a while,<BR>
          > no-on will notice?<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;Again, the collapse of Enron,
          Anderson,<BR>
          > Global Crossing,<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;WorldCom, etc, does not slow the
          pace of<BR>
          > technology. This<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;may seem counterintuitive, but
          it has no<BR>
          > effect.<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;&gt; On the otherhand...if
          you can convince<BR>
          > people to work for<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;&gt; next to nothing (
          especially you<BR>
          > California High $$ types )<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;&gt; or are willing to
          suffer the<BR>
          > consequences of globalization<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;&gt; where Government
          interests and Corp<BR>
          > Interest cannot<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;&gt; co-exist. Then...Have
          yo' technology!!<BR>
          > ..and more of it! (<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;&gt; q.v. Sir John
          Goldsmith's books:<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;&gt;<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;&gt; The Trap<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;&gt;<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;&gt; The
          Response<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;&gt;<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;&gt; <a<BR>
          > <BR>
          href="<a
          href="http://www.users.globalnet.co.uk/~ashes/RESPREV2.html">http://www.users.globalnet.co.uk/~ashes/RESPREV2.html</a>"><a
          href="http://ww">http://ww</a><BR>
          w.users.globalnet.co.uk/~ashes/RESPREV2.html</a><BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;Interesting article. Thanks. I'm
          not sure how<BR>
          > it ties in<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;with my post. The theme of this
          article is<BR>
          > &quot;free trade&quot;.<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;What's the connection? That
          semiconductors<BR>
          > are manufactured<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;by &quot;free
          trade&quot;? That technological<BR>
          > advancement has not<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;brought economic equality
          between<BR>
          > nations?<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;&gt; Somwhere earlier there
          was a<BR>
          > &quot;joie-de-vivre&quot; on
          these<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;&gt; Salons regarding
          technology being able<BR>
          > to continue despite<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;&gt; adversity. &quot;
          For higher silicon<BR>
          > evolution!&quot;<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;&gt;<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;&gt; You know like war? I
          think someone<BR>
          > particularly mentioned<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;&gt; that
          &quot;side-track&quot; to<BR>
          > technological progress.<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;That was me, yup. But I don't
          know where you<BR>
          > got the &quot; For<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;higher silicon
          evolution!&quot; part. I'm<BR>
          > only saying that, as a<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;matter of fact, economic
          recession does not<BR>
          > slow down the<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;advancement of technology. If
          you don't<BR>
          > believe me, draw a<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;graph. Plot out transistor size,
          or CPU clock<BR>
          > speed, or<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;whatever, and see whether it
          goes down during<BR>
          > the current<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;economic
          recession.<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;You'll see, it doesn't, it
          maintains its<BR>
          > exponential<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;trajectory. This is not a<BR>
          > &quot;joie-de-vivre&quot;, this is
          an<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;empirical fact.<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;&gt; I keep remembering a
          cartoon in the<BR>
          > Village Voice by<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;&gt; Oliphant, during the
          week the Neutron<BR>
          > Bomb was announced,<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;&gt; as a device that did
          not destroy<BR>
          > buildings. Of course, I<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;&gt; don't have to tell you
          and the NYTimes<BR>
          > article never<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;&gt; said...er um but kills
          a whoppin' lot of<BR>
          > people with<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;&gt; high-radiation levels
          over 3-7<BR>
          > days.&nbsp; It showed a bunch
          of<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;&gt; accountants jumping for
          joy on their<BR>
          > desks!<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;&gt;<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;&gt;<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;&gt; This is what gets me
          most.&nbsp; The<BR>
          > survival instinct when<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;&gt; assuaged by technology
          for technology<BR>
          > sake, opinions and<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;&gt; modern day tech
          toys...gets overlooked<BR>
          > and in the<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;&gt;
          process...over-ridden.<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;Quite possibly.<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;There seem to be 3 main lines of
          thought on<BR>
          > this sort of<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;thing.<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;1) The optimistic outlook --
          technological<BR>
          > advancement<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;will, by itself, make everything
          better. John<BR>
          > Smart is<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;definitely in this category. He
          believes<BR>
          > that, as the<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;technological singularity
          approaches, that we<BR>
          > will all be<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;amazed by the speed at which the
          remaining<BR>
          > human problems<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;are solved. He has some of the
          most clever<BR>
          > and unusual<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;arguments of any of the thinkers
          I know of,<BR>
          > such as the<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;idea that as a complex adaptive
          system<BR>
          > increases in<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;complexity, it also increases
          the<BR>
          > concentration on<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;positive-sum interactions, and
          decreases in<BR>
          > violence and<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;other zero-sum or negative-sum
          interactions.<BR>
          > Ray Kurzweil<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;sort of goes in this category --
          he likes to<BR>
          > talk about how<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;human lifespan is being
          extended<BR>
          > exponentially and so<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;fourth. Kurzweil acknowledges
          the downside --<BR>
          > he has a<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;&quot;Dangerous
          Futures&quot; section on his<BR>
          > website and so on.<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;So he is not 100% in this
          category, but I<BR>
          > think that is<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;the overall theme of his
          thinking.<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;2) The &quot;we can control
          the outcome&quot;<BR>
          > outlook -- I would&nbsp; put<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;Foresight (Eric Drexler, Ralph
          Merkle,<BR>
          > Christine Peterson,<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;etc), because Foresight's basic
          premise is<BR>
          > that if you can<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;influence the &quot;initial
          conditions&quot;<BR>
          > of technological<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;development early in the
          process, then you<BR>
          > can influence<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;where the whole trajectory goes
          and thereby<BR>
          > head the system<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;off in the direction of a
          positive outcome. I<BR>
          > would put<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;Eliezer Yudkowsky in this
          category as well,<BR>
          > although he<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;seems to take the view that he
          personally is<BR>
          > going to<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;invent strong AI, preprogram it
          with Asimov<BR>
          > laws, and save<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;the world (more or less). Of
          course, you can<BR>
          > probably guess,<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;by the wording I use, that I'm
          very skeptical<BR>
          > his approach<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;will work. :)<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;3) The
          &quot;pessimistic&quot; outlook. This<BR>
          > is the &quot;technology will<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;make humanity extinct!&quot;
          point of view<BR>
          > expressed by people<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;like Mark Gubrud. And possibly
          Bill Joy,<BR>
          > although I was<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;never sure whether Bill Joy
          really believes<BR>
          > this point of<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;view or whether he was just
          trying to provoke<BR>
          > widespread<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;discussion on the issue. (Which
          he certainly<BR>
          > did in any<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;case). Gubrud takes the
          moralistic position<BR>
          > -- that humans<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;must stop technology because
          technology will<BR>
          > make humanity<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;extinct, and that's morally
          wrong.<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;For my part, I think I lean
          towards the<BR>
          > pessimistic<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;viewpoint simply because I was
          once a big<BR>
          > believer in the<BR><BR>
          > &gt;
          &gt;&quot;techno-utopian&quot; viewpoint
          -- the<BR>
          > idea that we'll invent<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;technology that will solve
          humanity's<BR>
          > problems. My time at<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;Microsoft disillusioned me of
          that concept<BR>
          > pretty<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;thoroughly. Sure, Microsoft may
          make<BR>
          > technology that solves<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;human problems. It's just that
          that's not<BR>
          > really<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;Microsoft's *intent* -- it helps
          them sell<BR>
          > software, but<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;it's the selling of software
          that they really<BR>
          > care about.<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;David Gelernter (from Yale
          University) has<BR>
          > written some<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;stuff about how
          &quot;technology doesn't<BR>
          > solve social problems&quot;,<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;how he expected technology to
          solve social<BR>
          > problems and<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;went through a similar (though
          milder :)<BR>
          > disillusionment.<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;One of the reasons I have the
          view that I<BR>
          > have is that I<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;now interpret technological
          development as<BR>
          > being part of<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;the same process that drives
          biological<BR>
          > development. And in<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;the biological realm, there is
          nothing<BR>
          > special about the<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;human species -- it is just
          another species.<BR>
          > So I question<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;the argument that John Smart
          puts fourth,<BR>
          > that advanced<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;technology in the future will
          care about<BR>
          > solving human<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;problems. We don't care about
          other species<BR>
          > (we, humans,<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;are causing a mass extinction
          right now), for<BR>
          > the most part<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;-- there are exceptions like
          Rainforest<BR>
          > Action Network and<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;so on. So while the human
          species<BR>
          > unquestionably rules the<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;planet at the moment -- but only
          at the<BR>
          > moment. The process<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;of evolution does not
          intrinsically favor the<BR>
          > human<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;species. So I don't see why
          future robots<BR>
          > with strong AI<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;will care to spend their
          intelligence solving<BR>
          > humanity's<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;problems. On the other hand, I
          don't agree<BR>
          > with Mark Gubrud<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;that extinction is a likely
          result. I see no<BR>
          > evidence that<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;the development of complex
          species causes the<BR>
          > simple ones<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;to go extinct simply because
          they are simple.<BR>
          > Otherwise<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;there would not be microbes and
          insects and<BR>
          > so fourth<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;today. So I would not expect
          advanced<BR>
          > technology to do that<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;either.<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;This reminds me of the brief
          discussion with<BR>
          > Chris Phoenix<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;about uploads, and this gives
          you some idea<BR>
          > of the<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;complexity of the economics
          behind all this.<BR>
          > Chris was<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;saying that
          &quot;everyone&quot; will be able<BR>
          > to upload, because, as<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;technology advances, it gets
          cheaper, and<BR>
          > eventually<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;everyone will be able to afford
          it. And I was<BR>
          > saying, wait<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;a minute, you're looking at only
          one half of<BR>
          > the equation,<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;the buying side. Technology also
          affects the<BR>
          > earning side.<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;If there are computers costing
          $1000 or $2000<BR>
          > that have<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;strong AI -- and can therefore
          do any job a<BR>
          > human can do --<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;will there be any jobs? So to
          keep up with<BR>
          > the machines,<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;everyone has to get cybernetic
          implants, so<BR>
          > their brains<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;can keep up with Moore's Law.
          And how much<BR>
          > does that<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;technology cost? What percentage
          of the<BR>
          > population will be<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;able to afford it? So you see,
          we're not just<BR>
          > talking about<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;how much technology costs to
          make and sell,<BR>
          > but how people<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;will earn the money to buy it --
          how these<BR>
          > two factors will<BR><BR>
          > &gt; &gt;fit together. That's pretty
          extremely hard to<BR>
          > predict with<BR><BR>
          > &gt; <BR><BR>
          > === message truncated ===<BR><BR>
          > <BR><BR>
          > <BR><BR>
          >
          __________________________________________________<BR><BR>
          > Do You Yahoo!?<BR><BR>
          > Yahoo! Finance - Get real-time stock
          quotes<BR><BR>
          > <a<BR>
          > href="<a
          href="http://finance.yahoo.com">http://finance.yahoo.com</a>"><a
          href="http://finance.yahoo.com">http://finance.yahoo.com</a></a><BR><BR>
          > </tt><BR>
          > <BR>
          > <br><BR>
          > <BR>
          > <!-- |**|begin egp html banner|**| --><BR>
          > <BR>
          > <table border=0 cellspacing=0
          cellpadding=2><BR>
          > <tr bgcolor=#FFFFCC><BR>
          > <td align=center><font
          size="-1"<BR>
          > color=#003399><b>Yahoo! Groups
          Sponsor</b></font></td><BR>
          > </tr><BR>
          > <tr bgcolor=#FFFFFF><BR>
          > <td align=center width=470><table
          border=0<BR>
          > cellpadding=0 cellspacing=0><tr><td
          align=center><font<BR>
          > face=arial
          size=-2>ADVERTISEMENT</font><br><a<BR>
          > <BR>
          href="<a
          href="http://rd.yahoo.com/M=228862.2128520.3581629.2204139/D=egroupweb">http://rd.yahoo.com/M=228862.2128520.3581629.2204139/D=egroupweb</a><BR>
          /S=1705890010:HM/A=1182692/R=0/*<a
          href="http://adfarm.mediaplex.com/ad/ck/990-">http://adfarm.mediaplex.com/ad/ck/990-</a><BR>
          1736-1039-334<BR>
          > " target="_top"><img
          border="0"<BR>
          > <BR>
          src="<a
          href="http://us.a1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/a/co/columbiahouse/d_300x250_03">http://us.a1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/a/co/columbiahouse/d_300x250_03</a><BR>
          1_4for49p_3.gif"<BR>
          > height="250"
          width="300"></a></td></tr></table></td><BR>
          > </tr><BR>
          > </table><BR>
          > <BR>
          > <!-- |**|end egp html banner|**| --><BR>
          > <BR>
          > <BR>
          > <br><BR>
          > <tt><BR>
          > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email
          to:<BR><BR>
          > bafuture-unsubscribe@y...<BR><BR>
          > <BR><BR>
          > </tt><BR>
          > <br><BR>
          > <BR>
          > <br><BR>
          > <tt>Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
          the <a<BR>
          > href="<a
          href="http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/">http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/</a>">Yahoo!
          Terms<BR>
          > of Service</a>.</tt><BR>
          > </br><BR>
          > <BR>
          > </body></html><BR>
          > <BR>
          > <BR>
          >
          ___________________________________________________________<BR>
          > Do You Yahoo!? -- Une adresse @... gratuite
          et en français !<BR>
          > Yahoo! Mail : <a
          href="http://fr.mail.yahoo.com">http://fr.mail.yahoo.com</a><BR>
          <BR>
          </tt>

          <br>

          <!-- |**|begin egp html banner|**| -->

          <table border=0 cellspacing=0 cellpadding=2>
          <tr bgcolor=#FFFFCC>
          <td align=center><font size="-1"
          color=#003399><b>Yahoo! Groups Sponsor</b></font></td>
          </tr>
          <tr bgcolor=#FFFFFF>
          <td align=center width=470><table border=0
          cellpadding=0 cellspacing=0><tr><td align=center><font
          face=arial size=-2>ADVERTISEMENT</font><br><a
          href="http://rd.yahoo.com/M=229441.2336363.3766536.2225242/D=egroupweb/S=1705890010:HM/A=1189560/R=0/*http://www.bmgmusic.com/acq/ee/q6/enroll/mhn/10/"
          target=_top><img
          src="http://us.a1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/a/bm/bmg/strongartist_12_300x250.gif"
          alt="" width="300" height="250"
          border="0"></a></td></tr></table></td>
          </tr>
          </table>

          <!-- |**|end egp html banner|**| -->


          <br>
          <tt>
          To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:<BR>
          bafuture-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com<BR>
          <BR>
          </tt>
          <br>

          <br>
          <tt>Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the <a
          href="http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/">Yahoo! Terms
          of Service</a>.</tt>
          </br>

          </body></html>


          ___________________________________________________________
          Do You Yahoo!? -- Une adresse @... gratuite et en français !
          Yahoo! Mail : http://fr.mail.yahoo.com
        • Joschka Fisher
          Hey! Any man makes it to Foreign Secretary in Germany, with footage available of him some years earlier not only at a protest but beating the *&^#& out of a
          Message 4 of 17 , Sep 9, 2002
          • 0 Attachment
            Hey!

            Any man makes it to Foreign Secretary in Germany, with
            footage available of him some years earlier not only
            at a protest but "beating the *&^#& out of a
            policman....gets my vote!!!



            --- markfinnern <markfinnern@...> a écrit :
            <HR>
            <html><body>


            <tt>
            Uhu, all in caps, 'VERIFY YOUR INFORMATION'<BR>
            All your base are belong to us, or what? <BR>
            (See:<a
            href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/Archive/Article/0,4273,4143466,00.html)">http://www.guardian.co.uk/Archive/Article/0,4273,4143466,00.html)</a><BR>
            <BR>
            Well I felt compelled to check my passport, just to
            'verify my <BR>
            infordentity'. Still the same old, same old, which is
            reaffirming. <BR>
            <BR>
            There is some nice anticipation building up here, the
            expectations <BR>
            are high, hope your post lives up to the hype. <BR>
            <BR>
            Darn, another 4 days. <BR>
            Can't wait, Mark. <BR>
            P.S. Like your fake Joschka Fischer email identity. Is
            that in homage <BR>
            to him? <BR>
            <BR>
            --- In bafuture@y..., Joschka Fisher
            <grabarkowic@y...> wrote:<BR>
            > YOU NOW HAVE 4 DAYS, TO VERIFY YOUR
            INFORMATION.<BR>
            > J.S.ANDERSON <BR>
            > <BR>
            > <BR>
            > --- wayne radinsky <spodware@y...> a
            écrit : <BR>
            > <HR><BR>
            > <html><body><BR>
            > <BR>
            > <BR>
            > <tt><BR>
            > <BR><BR>
            > Gee that sounds pretty threatening. What good
            does<BR>
            > that do?<BR><BR>
            > We'll all be smarter and better off if we put
            our<BR>
            > heads<BR><BR>
            > together and learn from each other rather
            than<BR>
            > make<BR><BR>
            > threats, no?<BR><BR>
            > <BR><BR>
            > Maybe I am just being naive again.<BR><BR>
            > <BR><BR>
            > Anyway, I don't what you think I was wrong
            about,<BR>
            > but<BR><BR>
            > things seem to check out to me. I said that
            chip<BR>
            > sales<BR><BR>
            > were growing since April.<BR><BR>
            > <BR><BR>
            > Chip Sales Grow 5.8% in June Quarter
            <BR><BR>
            > <a<BR>
            > href="<a
            href="http://www.semichips.org/pre_release.cfm?">http://www.semichips.org/pre_release.cfm?</a><BR>
            ID=235"><a
            href="http://www.semichips.org/pre_release.cfm?ID=235">http://www.semichips.org/pre_release.cfm?ID=235</a></a><BR>
            > <BR><BR>
            > <BR><BR>
            > May Chip Sales Reach $11.37 Billion for
            Worldwide<BR><BR>
            > Semiconductor Industry <BR><BR>
            > <a<BR>
            > href="<a
            href="http://www.semichips.org/pre_release.cfm?">http://www.semichips.org/pre_release.cfm?</a><BR>
            ID=231"><a
            href="http://www.semichips.org/pre_release.cfm?ID=231">http://www.semichips.org/pre_release.cfm?ID=231</a></a><BR><BR>
            > <BR><BR>
            > This is a more recent article:<BR><BR>
            > <BR><BR>
            > Chip sector releases mixed figures<BR><BR>
            > <a<BR>
            > <BR>
            href="<a
            href="http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/3/26793.html">http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/3/26793.html</a>"><a
            href="http://www.th">http://www.th</a><BR>
            eregister.co.uk/content/3/26793.html</a><BR>
            > <BR><BR>
            > <BR><BR>
            > I interpret this to mean that the waters are
            still<BR>
            > choppy.<BR><BR>
            > Although I suppose you could argue that it's
            the<BR>
            > beginning<BR><BR>
            > of another downturn, but I don't expect
            that.<BR><BR>
            > <BR><BR>
            > As for communications equipment sales, actually
            I<BR>
            > didn't say<BR><BR>
            > telecom sales were going back up, (only the<BR>
            > semiconductor<BR><BR>
            > industry as a whole) and they haven't
            yet.<BR><BR>
            > <BR><BR>
            > OE Markets - Demand<BR><BR>
            > <a<BR>
            > <BR>
            href="<a
            href="http://www.oida.org/demand.html">http://www.oida.org/demand.html</a>"><a
            href="http://www.oida.org/demand.html">http://www.oida.org/demand.html</a><BR>
            </a><BR>
            > <BR><BR>
            > <BR><BR>
            > OE component sales, 2001 <BR><BR>
            > <a<BR>
            > <BR>
            href="<a
            href="http://www.oida.org/comprev.html">http://www.oida.org/comprev.html</a>"><a
            href="http://www.oida.org/comprev.ht">http://www.oida.org/comprev.ht</a><BR>
            ml</a><BR><BR>
            > <BR><BR>
            > The graphs show 2001 decreased to below 1999<BR>
            > levels.<BR><BR>
            > (But not to 0 :) It's for all optoelectronic<BR>
            > eqipment.<BR><BR>
            > Telecom specifically took a bigger
            hit.<BR><BR>
            > <BR><BR>
            > Optical networking's next frontier<BR><BR>
            > <a<BR>
            > <BR>
            href="<a
            href="http://www.bayarea.com/mld/mercurynews/business/3922499.htm">http://www.bayarea.com/mld/mercurynews/business/3922499.htm</a>">htt<BR>
            p://www.bayarea.com/mld/mercurynews/business/3922499.htm</a><BR><BR>
            > <BR><BR>
            > I said Moore's Law continues in spite of
            economic<BR>
            > recession.<BR><BR>
            > Recently:<BR><BR>
            > <BR><BR>
            > Intel Begins Shipping Itanium 2
            Processors<BR><BR>
            > <a<BR>
            > <BR>
            href="<a
            href="http://www.intel.com/pressroom/archive/releases/20020708comp.htm">http://www.intel.com/pressroom/archive/releases/20020708comp.htm</a><BR>
            "><a
            href="http://www.intel.com/pressroom/archive/releases/20020708comp.htm">http://www.intel.com/pressroom/archive/releases/20020708comp.htm</a></a><BR>
            <BR><BR>
            > <BR><BR>
            > Intel Ships The World's First 2 Gigahertz<BR>
            > Microprocessor For<BR><BR>
            > Mobile PCs <BR><BR>
            > <a<BR>
            > <BR>
            href="<a
            href="http://www.intel.com/pressroom/archive/releases/20020624comp.htm">http://www.intel.com/pressroom/archive/releases/20020624comp.htm</a><BR>
            "><a
            href="http://www.intel.com/pressroom/archive/releases/20020624comp.htm">http://www.intel.com/pressroom/archive/releases/20020624comp.htm</a></a><BR>
            <BR><BR>
            > <BR><BR>
            > Intel Unveils World's Most Advanced
            Chip-Making<BR>
            > Process<BR><BR>
            > <a<BR>
            > <BR>
            href="<a
            href="http://www.intel.com/pressroom/archive/releases/20020813tech.htm">http://www.intel.com/pressroom/archive/releases/20020813tech.htm</a><BR>
            "><a
            href="http://www.intel.com/pressroom/archive/releases/20020813tech.htm">http://www.intel.com/pressroom/archive/releases/20020813tech.htm</a></a><BR>
            <BR><BR>
            > <BR><BR>
            > And telecom technology is continuing to advance
            in<BR>
            > spite<BR><BR>
            > of the recession as well, and a quick look at
            any<BR>
            > telecom<BR><BR>
            > equipment vendor web site will
            show.<BR><BR>
            > <BR><BR>
            > Scientists at Bell Labs have used their
            collective<BR><BR>
            > multidisciplinary expertise to help design<BR>
            > LambdaXtreme<BR><BR>
            > Transport, the most advanced long-distance<BR>
            > communications<BR><BR>
            > system now on the market.<BR><BR>
            > <a<BR>
            > href="<a
            href="http://www.bell-">http://www.bell-</a><BR>
            labs.com/news/features/feature_01.html"><a
            href="http://www.bell-">http://www.bell-</a><BR>
            labs.com/news/features/feature_01.html</a><BR>
            > <BR><BR>
            > <BR><BR>
            > JDS Uniphase Announces New Semiconductor
            Optical<BR>
            > Amplifiers<BR><BR>
            > <a<BR>
            > href="<a
            href="http://www.jdsu.com/index2.cfm?">http://www.jdsu.com/index2.cfm?</a><BR>
            CID=3&NAVCID=3&DSP=PressRelease&ACT=Display&PressID=249&PageName=JDS%<BR>
            20Uniphase%20Announces%20New%20Semiconductor%20Optical%<BR>
            20Amplifiers"><a
            href="http://www.jdsu.com/index2.cfm?">http://www.jdsu.com/index2.cfm?</a><BR>
            CID=3&amp;NAVCID=3&amp;DSP=PressRelease&amp;ACT=Display&amp;PressID=24<BR>
            9&amp;PageName=JDS%20Uniphase%20Announces%20New%20Semiconductor%<BR>
            20Optical%20Amplifiers</a><BR><BR>
            > <BR><BR>
            > <BR><BR>
            > JDS Uniphase Boosts High-Level Functionality
            of<BR>
            > RX3<BR><BR>
            > Series Multichannel Backreflection Meters with
            Two<BR>
            > New<BR><BR>
            > Features <BR><BR>
            > Unique three-laser wavelength testing and 10
            mm<BR>
            > InGaAs<BR><BR>
            > detector provide broader testing
            capabilities,<BR>
            > reduce<BR><BR>
            > ownership cost<BR><BR>
            > <a<BR>
            > href="<a
            href="http://www.jdsu.com/index2.cfm?">http://www.jdsu.com/index2.cfm?</a><BR>
            CID=3&NAVCID=3&DSP=PressRelease&ACT=Display&PressID=231&PageName=JDS%<BR>
            20Uniphase%20Boosts%20High%2DLevel%20Functionality%20of%20RX3%<BR>
            20Series%20Multichannel%20Backreflection%20Meters%20with%20Two%20New%<BR>
            20Features"><a
            href="http://www.jdsu.com/index2.cfm?">http://www.jdsu.com/index2.cfm?</a><BR>
            CID=3&amp;NAVCID=3&amp;DSP=PressRelease&amp;ACT=Display&amp;PressID=23<BR>
            1&amp;PageName=JDS%20Uniphase%20Boosts%20High%2DLevel%20Functionality%<BR>
            20of%20RX3%20Series%20Multichannel%20Backreflection%20Meters%20with%<BR>
            20Two%20New%20Features</a><BR><BR>
            > <BR><BR>
            > <BR><BR>
            > JDS Uniphase Announces Dramatic Performance<BR>
            > Improvement In Thin<BR><BR>
            > Film Filters for Wideband
            Applications<BR><BR>
            > <a<BR>
            > href="<a
            href="http://www.jdsu.com/index2.cfm?">http://www.jdsu.com/index2.cfm?</a><BR>
            CID=3&NAVCID=3&DSP=PressRelease&ACT=Display&PressID=233&PageName=JDS%<BR>
            20Uniphase%20Announces%20Dramatic%20Performance%20Improvement%20In%<BR>
            20Thin%20Film%20Filters%20for%20Wideband%<BR>
            20Applications"><a
            href="http://www.jdsu.com/index2.cfm?">http://www.jdsu.com/index2.cfm?</a><BR>
            CID=3&amp;NAVCID=3&amp;DSP=PressRelease&amp;ACT=Display&amp;PressID=23<BR>
            3&amp;PageName=JDS%20Uniphase%20Announces%20Dramatic%20Performance%<BR>
            20Improvement%20In%20Thin%20Film%20Filters%20for%20Wideband%<BR>
            20Applications</a><BR><BR>
            > <BR><BR>
            > <BR><BR>
            > Now what you really want to do is graph out<BR>
            > processor<BR><BR>
            > performance per dollar over time. For
            bandwidth,<BR>
            > it's<BR><BR>
            > harder because there are more variables, but
            what<BR>
            > you<BR><BR>
            > want to do is calculate Gb / s / km / dollar
            for<BR>
            > telecom<BR><BR>
            > equipment and show that it is an exponential
            curve<BR>
            > over<BR><BR>
            > long periods of time. This is the whole essence
            of<BR>
            > Gilder's<BR><BR>
            > Law / Huber's Law. I don't have the data to do
            this<BR>
            > but<BR><BR>
            > maybe you can find it and calculate it. The
            price<BR>
            > data<BR><BR>
            > is important because the calculation is per
            unit<BR>
            > cost.<BR><BR>
            > The industry now is focusing more on
            decreasing<BR>
            > cost<BR><BR>
            > on the low end than on advancing the high
            end.<BR><BR>
            > <BR><BR>
            > Finally, here is an article about the telecom<BR>
            > meltdown.<BR><BR>
            > If you think the recession has stopped
            technology<BR><BR>
            > advancement, you might have the cause and
            effect<BR>
            > backwards.<BR><BR>
            > The author believes that the rapid pace of<BR>
            > technology<BR><BR>
            > advancement is one of the *causes* of the
            telecom<BR>
            > meltdown.<BR><BR>
            > As you might expect, if long-distance phone
            service<BR>
            > is<BR><BR>
            > &quot;free&quot;, that has severe
            consequences for the<BR>
            > people who<BR><BR>
            > build their business on it. (As I mentioned
            earlier,<BR>
            > <BR><BR>
            > Nathan Myhrvold predicted in 1993 that long
            distance<BR>
            > would<BR><BR>
            > become free.)<BR><BR>
            > <BR><BR>
            > Future not so bright for telecoms<BR><BR>
            > <a<BR>
            > <BR>
            href="<a
            href="http://www.usatoday.com/life/cyber/invest/2002/07/15/telecom.htm">http://www.usatoday.com/life/cyber/invest/2002/07/15/telecom.htm</a><BR>
            "><a
            href="http://www.usatoday.com/life/cyber/invest/2002/07/15/telecom.htm">http://www.usatoday.com/life/cyber/invest/2002/07/15/telecom.htm</a></a><BR>
            <BR><BR>
            > <BR><BR>
            > Ok, let me have it.<BR><BR>
            > <BR><BR>
            > <BR><BR>
            > --- Joseph Anderson<BR>
            > bigwhiskey@e... wrote:<BR><BR>
            > &gt; Uh....Wayne...<BR><BR>
            > &gt; <BR><BR>
            > &gt; Since I'm such a nice guy, I'm gonna
            give you 7<BR>
            > days to check<BR><BR>
            > &gt; your facts on this before I,
            er...<BR><BR>
            > &gt; <BR><BR>
            > &gt; Let you have it.<BR><BR>
            > &gt; <BR><BR>
            > &gt; j.s.a.<BR><BR>
            > &gt; <BR><BR>
            > &gt; --- wayne radinsky spodware@y...<BR>
            > wrote:<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;--- Joseph Anderson<BR>
            > bigwhiskey@e... wrote:<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;&gt; Yea...and
            kudos...but<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;&gt;<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;&gt; If there's room at the
            bottom....<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;&gt;<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;&gt; and&nbsp; aint'
            nobody buying to<BR>
            > maintain a market...<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;&gt;<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;&gt; then it's nothing more
            than nanotech for<BR>
            > &quot;nada&quot; or oh!<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;&gt;
            no-profits?<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;I don't see what you are getting
            at here.<BR>
            > Semiconductor<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;sales started increasing in
            April. We're<BR>
            > already into the<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;next boom cycle. It's pretty
            weak at this<BR>
            > point, but it<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;will grow. There are buyers in
            the market,<BR>
            > and as<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;technology gets more powerful,
            there will be<BR>
            > more products<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;people want to
            buy.<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;&gt; Pretty soon...your
            local economy is<BR>
            > devastasted and YOU'RE<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;&gt; at the
            bottom!<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;I don't see what you are getting
            at here.<BR>
            > There are many<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;devastated local economies in
            the world. This<BR>
            > does not<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;affect the accelerating pace of
            technology<BR>
            > development.<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;&gt; Technology has several
            environments it's<BR>
            > responsible for.<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;&gt; Like it or
            not.&nbsp; Biological is<BR>
            > one.&nbsp; Economic is
            certainly<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;&gt; the
            other.<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;&gt;<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;&gt; Or do you pour money
            into spin-doctors<BR>
            > and artificial price<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;&gt; supports via Enron,
            Anderson Consulting,<BR>
            > and WorldCom's<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;&gt; accounting techniques?
            So...for a while,<BR>
            > no-on will notice?<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;Again, the collapse of Enron,
            Anderson,<BR>
            > Global Crossing,<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;WorldCom, etc, does not slow the
            pace of<BR>
            > technology. This<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;may seem counterintuitive, but
            it has no<BR>
            > effect.<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;&gt; On the otherhand...if
            you can convince<BR>
            > people to work for<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;&gt; next to nothing (
            especially you<BR>
            > California High $$ types )<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;&gt; or are willing to
            suffer the<BR>
            > consequences of globalization<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;&gt; where Government
            interests and Corp<BR>
            > Interest cannot<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;&gt; co-exist. Then...Have
            yo' technology!!<BR>
            > ..and more of it! (<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;&gt; q.v. Sir John
            Goldsmith's books:<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;&gt;<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;&gt; The Trap<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;&gt;<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;&gt; The
            Response<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;&gt;<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;&gt; <a<BR>
            > <BR>
            href="<a
            href="http://www.users.globalnet.co.uk/~ashes/RESPREV2.html">http://www.users.globalnet.co.uk/~ashes/RESPREV2.html</a>"><a
            href="http://ww">http://ww</a><BR>
            w.users.globalnet.co.uk/~ashes/RESPREV2.html</a><BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;Interesting article. Thanks. I'm
            not sure how<BR>
            > it ties in<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;with my post. The theme of this
            article is<BR>
            > &quot;free trade&quot;.<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;What's the connection? That
            semiconductors<BR>
            > are manufactured<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;by &quot;free
            trade&quot;? That technological<BR>
            > advancement has not<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;brought economic equality
            between<BR>
            > nations?<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;&gt; Somwhere earlier there
            was a<BR>
            > &quot;joie-de-vivre&quot; on
            these<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;&gt; Salons regarding
            technology being able<BR>
            > to continue despite<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;&gt; adversity. &quot;
            For higher silicon<BR>
            > evolution!&quot;<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;&gt;<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;&gt; You know like war? I
            think someone<BR>
            > particularly mentioned<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;&gt; that
            &quot;side-track&quot; to<BR>
            > technological progress.<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;That was me, yup. But I don't
            know where you<BR>
            > got the &quot; For<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;higher silicon
            evolution!&quot; part. I'm<BR>
            > only saying that, as a<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;matter of fact, economic
            recession does not<BR>
            > slow down the<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;advancement of technology. If
            you don't<BR>
            > believe me, draw a<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;graph. Plot out transistor size,
            or CPU clock<BR>
            > speed, or<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;whatever, and see whether it
            goes down during<BR>
            > the current<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;economic
            recession.<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;You'll see, it doesn't, it
            maintains its<BR>
            > exponential<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;trajectory. This is not a<BR>
            > &quot;joie-de-vivre&quot;, this is
            an<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;empirical fact.<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;&gt; I keep remembering a
            cartoon in the<BR>
            > Village Voice by<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;&gt; Oliphant, during the
            week the Neutron<BR>
            > Bomb was announced,<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;&gt; as a device that did
            not destroy<BR>
            > buildings. Of course, I<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;&gt; don't have to tell you
            and the NYTimes<BR>
            > article never<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;&gt; said...er um but kills
            a whoppin' lot of<BR>
            > people with<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;&gt; high-radiation levels
            over 3-7<BR>
            > days.&nbsp; It showed a bunch
            of<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;&gt; accountants jumping for
            joy on their<BR>
            > desks!<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;&gt;<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;&gt;<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;&gt; This is what gets me
            most.&nbsp; The<BR>
            > survival instinct when<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;&gt; assuaged by technology
            for technology<BR>
            > sake, opinions and<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;&gt; modern day tech
            toys...gets overlooked<BR>
            > and in the<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;&gt;
            process...over-ridden.<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;Quite possibly.<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;There seem to be 3 main lines of
            thought on<BR>
            > this sort of<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;thing.<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;1) The optimistic outlook --
            technological<BR>
            > advancement<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;will, by itself, make everything
            better. John<BR>
            > Smart is<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;definitely in this category. He
            believes<BR>
            > that, as the<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;technological singularity
            approaches, that we<BR>
            > will all be<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;amazed by the speed at which the
            remaining<BR>
            > human problems<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;are solved. He has some of the
            most clever<BR>
            > and unusual<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;arguments of any of the thinkers
            I know of,<BR>
            > such as the<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;idea that as a complex adaptive
            system<BR>
            > increases in<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;complexity, it also increases
            the<BR>
            > concentration on<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;positive-sum interactions, and
            decreases in<BR>
            > violence and<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;other zero-sum or negative-sum
            interactions.<BR>
            > Ray Kurzweil<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;sort of goes in this category --
            he likes to<BR>
            > talk about how<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;human lifespan is being
            extended<BR>
            > exponentially and so<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;fourth. Kurzweil acknowledges
            the downside --<BR>
            > he has a<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;&quot;Dangerous
            Futures&quot; section on his<BR>
            > website and so on.<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;So he is not 100% in this
            category, but I<BR>
            > think that is<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;the overall theme of his
            thinking.<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;2) The &quot;we can control
            the outcome&quot;<BR>
            > outlook -- I would&nbsp; put<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;Foresight (Eric Drexler, Ralph
            Merkle,<BR>
            > Christine Peterson,<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;etc), because Foresight's basic
            premise is<BR>
            > that if you can<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;influence the &quot;initial
            conditions&quot;<BR>
            > of technological<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;development early in the
            process, then you<BR>
            > can influence<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;where the whole trajectory goes
            and thereby<BR>
            > head the system<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;off in the direction of a
            positive outcome. I<BR>
            > would put<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;Eliezer Yudkowsky in this
            category as well,<BR>
            > although he<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;seems to take the view that he
            personally is<BR>
            > going to<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;invent strong AI, preprogram it
            with Asimov<BR>
            > laws, and save<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;the world (more or less). Of
            course, you can<BR>
            > probably guess,<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;by the wording I use, that I'm
            very skeptical<BR>
            > his approach<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;will work. :)<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;3) The
            &quot;pessimistic&quot; outlook. This<BR>
            > is the &quot;technology will<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;make humanity extinct!&quot;
            point of view<BR>
            > expressed by people<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;like Mark Gubrud. And possibly
            Bill Joy,<BR>
            > although I was<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;never sure whether Bill Joy
            really believes<BR>
            > this point of<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;view or whether he was just
            trying to provoke<BR>
            > widespread<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;discussion on the issue. (Which
            he certainly<BR>
            > did in any<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;case). Gubrud takes the
            moralistic position<BR>
            > -- that humans<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;must stop technology because
            technology will<BR>
            > make humanity<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;extinct, and that's morally
            wrong.<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;For my part, I think I lean
            towards the<BR>
            > pessimistic<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;viewpoint simply because I was
            once a big<BR>
            > believer in the<BR><BR>
            > &gt;
            &gt;&quot;techno-utopian&quot; viewpoint
            -- the<BR>
            > idea that we'll invent<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;technology that will solve
            humanity's<BR>
            > problems. My time at<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;Microsoft disillusioned me of
            that concept<BR>
            > pretty<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;thoroughly. Sure, Microsoft may
            make<BR>
            > technology that solves<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;human problems. It's just that
            that's not<BR>
            > really<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;Microsoft's *intent* -- it helps
            them sell<BR>
            > software, but<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;it's the selling of software
            that they really<BR>
            > care about.<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;David Gelernter (from Yale
            University) has<BR>
            > written some<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;stuff about how
            &quot;technology doesn't<BR>
            > solve social problems&quot;,<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;how he expected technology to
            solve social<BR>
            > problems and<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;went through a similar (though
            milder :)<BR>
            > disillusionment.<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;One of the reasons I have the
            view that I<BR>
            > have is that I<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;now interpret technological
            development as<BR>
            > being part of<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;the same process that drives
            biological<BR>
            > development. And in<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;the biological realm, there is
            nothing<BR>
            > special about the<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;human species -- it is just
            another species.<BR>
            > So I question<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;the argument that John Smart
            puts fourth,<BR>
            > that advanced<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;technology in the future will
            care about<BR>
            > solving human<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;problems. We don't care about
            other species<BR>
            > (we, humans,<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;are causing a mass extinction
            right now), for<BR>
            > the most part<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;-- there are exceptions like
            Rainforest<BR>
            > Action Network and<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;so on. So while the human
            species<BR>
            > unquestionably rules the<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;planet at the moment -- but only
            at the<BR>
            > moment. The process<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;of evolution does not
            intrinsically favor the<BR>
            > human<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;species. So I don't see why
            future robots<BR>
            > with strong AI<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;will care to spend their
            intelligence solving<BR>
            > humanity's<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;problems. On the other hand, I
            don't agree<BR>
            > with Mark Gubrud<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;that extinction is a likely
            result. I see no<BR>
            > evidence that<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;the development of complex
            species causes the<BR>
            > simple ones<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;to go extinct simply because
            they are simple.<BR>
            > Otherwise<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;there would not be microbes and
            insects and<BR>
            > so fourth<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;today. So I would not expect
            advanced<BR>
            > technology to do that<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;either.<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;This reminds me of the brief
            discussion with<BR>
            > Chris Phoenix<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;about uploads, and this gives
            you some idea<BR>
            > of the<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;complexity of the economics
            behind all this.<BR>
            > Chris was<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;saying that
            &quot;everyone&quot; will be able<BR>
            > to upload, because, as<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;technology advances, it gets
            cheaper, and<BR>
            > eventually<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;everyone will be able to afford
            it. And I was<BR>
            > saying, wait<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;a minute, you're looking at only
            one half of<BR>
            > the equation,<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;the buying side. Technology also
            affects the<BR>
            > earning side.<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;If there are computers costing
            $1000 or $2000<BR>
            > that have<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;strong AI -- and can therefore
            do any job a<BR>
            > human can do --<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;will there be any jobs? So to
            keep up with<BR>
            > the machines,<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;everyone has to get cybernetic
            implants, so<BR>
            > their brains<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;can keep up with Moore's Law.
            And how much<BR>
            > does that<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;technology cost? What percentage
            of the<BR>
            > population will be<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;able to afford it? So you see,
            we're not just<BR>
            > talking about<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;how much technology costs to
            make and sell,<BR>
            > but how people<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;will earn the money to buy it --
            how these<BR>
            > two factors will<BR><BR>
            > &gt; &gt;fit together. That's pretty
            extremely hard to<BR>
            > predict with<BR><BR>
            > &gt; <BR><BR>
            > === message truncated ===<BR><BR>
            > <BR><BR>
            > <BR><BR>
            >
            __________________________________________________<BR><BR>
            > Do You Yahoo!?<BR><BR>
            > Yahoo! Finance - Get real-time stock
            quotes<BR><BR>
            > <a<BR>
            > href="<a
            href="http://finance.yahoo.com">http://finance.yahoo.com</a>"><a
            href="http://finance.yahoo.com">http://finance.yahoo.com</a></a><BR><BR>
            > </tt><BR>
            > <BR>
            > <br><BR>
            > <BR>
            > <!-- |**|begin egp html banner|**| --><BR>
            > <BR>
            > <table border=0 cellspacing=0
            cellpadding=2><BR>
            > <tr bgcolor=#FFFFCC><BR>
            > <td align=center><font
            size="-1"<BR>
            > color=#003399><b>Yahoo! Groups
            Sponsor</b></font></td><BR>
            > </tr><BR>
            > <tr bgcolor=#FFFFFF><BR>
            > <td align=center width=470><table
            border=0<BR>
            > cellpadding=0 cellspacing=0><tr><td
            align=center><font<BR>
            > face=arial
            size=-2>ADVERTISEMENT</font><br><a<BR>
            > <BR>
            href="<a
            href="http://rd.yahoo.com/M=228862.2128520.3581629.2204139/D=egroupweb">http://rd.yahoo.com/M=228862.2128520.3581629.2204139/D=egroupweb</a><BR>
            /S=1705890010:HM/A=1182692/R=0/*<a
            href="http://adfarm.mediaplex.com/ad/ck/990-">http://adfarm.mediaplex.com/ad/ck/990-</a><BR>
            1736-1039-334<BR>
            > " target="_top"><img
            border="0"<BR>
            > <BR>
            src="<a
            href="http://us.a1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/a/co/columbiahouse/d_300x250_03">http://us.a1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/a/co/columbiahouse/d_300x250_03</a><BR>
            1_4for49p_3.gif"<BR>
            > height="250"
            width="300"></a></td></tr></table></td><BR>
            > </tr><BR>
            > </table><BR>
            > <BR>
            > <!-- |**|end egp html banner|**| --><BR>
            > <BR>
            > <BR>
            > <br><BR>
            > <tt><BR>
            > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email
            to:<BR><BR>
            > bafuture-unsubscribe@y...<BR><BR>
            > <BR><BR>
            > </tt><BR>
            > <br><BR>
            > <BR>
            > <br><BR>
            > <tt>Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
            the <a<BR>
            > href="<a
            href="http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/">http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/</a>">Yahoo!
            Terms<BR>
            > of Service</a>.</tt><BR>
            > </br><BR>
            > <BR>
            > </body></html><BR>
            > <BR>
            > <BR>
            >
            ___________________________________________________________<BR>
            > Do You Yahoo!? -- Une adresse @... gratuite
            et en français !<BR>
            > Yahoo! Mail : <a
            href="http://fr.mail.yahoo.com">http://fr.mail.yahoo.com</a><BR>
            <BR>
            </tt>


            <br>
            <tt>
            To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:<BR>
            bafuture-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com<BR>
            <BR>
            </tt>
            <br>

            <br>
            <tt>Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the <a
            href="http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/">Yahoo! Terms
            of Service</a>.</tt>
            </br>

            </body></html>


            ___________________________________________________________
            Do You Yahoo!? -- Une adresse @... gratuite et en français !
            Yahoo! Mail : http://fr.mail.yahoo.com
          • wayne radinsky
            By the way, I m still waiting the fleshed-out response. This looks to be interesting. ...
            Message 5 of 17 , Sep 18, 2002
            • 0 Attachment
              By the way, I'm still waiting the fleshed-out response.
              This looks to be interesting.

              --- Joschka Fisher <grabarkowic@...> wrote:
              > Ok...this is a skeleton/outline of my objections to
              > your assessment of the chip industry and is perceived
              > cyclical comeback.
              >
              > It's also a criticism of "Yea technology improves but
              > who gets to use it", from the Economics point of view.
              >
              > Do remember that the Japanese just beat the sh** out
              > of us in building the world's fastest computer using
              > 10+ year old technology. ( Still looking for that
              > article!)
              >
              > "er was it you or Wayne Radinsky?" this is submitted
              > to?
              >
              > Either way a lot of data and I've got one Economist
              > article I'm trying to get but I can't afford the
              > $60.00 subscription so I have to break-into the
              > Stanford Business School computers to get the article.
              > Sorry but it should take about 24 hours to get it..and
              > a few other items. "Heee Hee".
              >
              > I'll fill in the rest within the next couple days
              > since this is time consuming, but damned interesting.
              >
              >
              > Anderson Evaluations: The Problem with Technology for
              > Technology Sake and argument against Wayne's
              > assessment!
              >
              > SIA organization, the source of your data and the
              > reporting systems, in general!
              > 1. My general disklike/distrust of SIA reports and
              > good reasons why:
              > 2. Reporting alternatives and their �accuracy� over
              >
              > past 3 years!
              >
              > Current effort/trends of countries to build
              > semiconductor/foundry plants. ( is Rally round the
              > Maypole, a good idea?)
              > 1. Source of talent
              > 2. Salaries
              > 3. Saturation and market glut
              >
              > The costs of semiconductor and foundry construction or
              > retooling
              > 1. Defining semiconductor vs. foundry industries
              > 2. Why Foundries were only recently included in the
              > semiconductor industry.
              >
              > Record of projected profit margins vs.actual over past
              > 3 years
              >
              > 1. By different reporting agencies (including SIA)
              > 2. Markets the Semi/Foundry serve
              >
              > Demand markets behaviour for such technology in the
              > current and future arena
              >
              > 1. So who�s buying "said new technology" and what
              > are they being used for?
              > 2. Profitability & Market thresholds of these �end-
              > user�-industries over past 3 years.
              >
              > The high-tech pollution problem: assessment and costs
              > to the industry.
              >
              > Evaluation of Semi/Foundry under the John Goldsmith
              > Economics
              >
              > 1. The economics of Zu Schleuderpreisen and its
              > problems around the world in the Semi/Foundry
              > industry!
              >
              > Why Technology for Technology sake, is a near
              > aliteration of s', as in: is seriously short-sigted,
              > silly and the end of evolution!
              >
              >
              > --- markfinnern <markfinnern@...> a �crit�:
              > <HR>
              > <html><body>
              >
              >
              > <tt>
              > Well J. S. Anderson,<BR>
              > <BR>
              > More then 4 days of agonizing waiting has passed, but
              > still no reply <BR>
              > post from you :-(<BR>
              > <BR>
              > Looking forward to it, Mark. <BR>
              > <BR>
              > <BR>
              > --- In bafuture@y..., Joschka Fisher
              > <grabarkowic@y...> wrote:<BR>
              > > YOU NOW HAVE 4 DAYS, TO VERIFY YOUR
              > INFORMATION.<BR>
              > > J.S.ANDERSON <BR>
              > > <BR>
              > > <BR>
              > > --- wayne radinsky <spodware@y...> a
              > �crit�: <BR>
              > > <HR><BR>
              > > <html><body><BR>
              > > <BR>
              > > <BR>
              > > <tt><BR>
              > > <BR><BR>
              > > Gee that sounds pretty threatening. What good
              > does<BR>
              > > that do?<BR><BR>
              > > We'll all be smarter and better off if we put
              > our<BR>
              > > heads<BR><BR>
              > > together and learn from each other rather
              > than<BR>
              > > make<BR><BR>
              > > threats, no?<BR><BR>
              > > <BR><BR>
              > > Maybe I am just being naive again.<BR><BR>
              > > <BR><BR>
              > > Anyway, I don't what you think I was wrong
              > about,<BR>
              > > but<BR><BR>
              > > things seem to check out to me. I said that
              > chip<BR>
              > > sales<BR><BR>
              > > were growing since April.<BR><BR>
              > > <BR><BR>
              > > Chip Sales Grow 5.8% in June Quarter
              > <BR><BR>
              > > <a<BR>
              > > href="<a
              >
              href="http://www.semichips.org/pre_release.cfm?">http://www.semichips.org/pre_release.cfm?</a><BR>
              > ID=235"><a
              >
              href="http://www.semichips.org/pre_release.cfm?ID=235">http://www.semichips.org/pre_release.cfm?ID=235</a></a><BR>
              > > <BR><BR>
              > > <BR><BR>
              > > May Chip Sales Reach $11.37 Billion for
              > Worldwide<BR><BR>
              > > Semiconductor Industry <BR><BR>
              > > <a<BR>
              > > href="<a
              >
              href="http://www.semichips.org/pre_release.cfm?">http://www.semichips.org/pre_release.cfm?</a><BR>
              > ID=231"><a
              >
              href="http://www.semichips.org/pre_release.cfm?ID=231">http://www.semichips.org/pre_release.cfm?ID=231</a></a><BR><BR>
              > > <BR><BR>
              > > This is a more recent article:<BR><BR>
              > > <BR><BR>
              > > Chip sector releases mixed figures<BR><BR>
              > > <a<BR>
              > > <BR>
              > href="<a
              >
              href="http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/3/26793.html">http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/3/26793.html</a>"><a
              > href="http://www.th">http://www.th</a><BR>
              > eregister.co.uk/content/3/26793.html</a><BR>
              > > <BR><BR>
              > > <BR><BR>
              > > I interpret this to mean that the waters are
              > still<BR>
              > > choppy.<BR><BR>
              > > Although I suppose you could argue that it's
              > the<BR>
              > > beginning<BR><BR>
              > > of another downturn, but I don't expect
              > that.<BR><BR>
              > > <BR><BR>
              > > As for communications equipment sales, actually
              > I<BR>
              > > didn't say<BR><BR>
              > > telecom sales were going back up, (only the<BR>
              > > semiconductor<BR><BR>
              > > industry as a whole) and they haven't
              > yet.<BR><BR>
              > > <BR><BR>
              > > OE Markets - Demand<BR><BR>
              > > <a<BR>
              > > <BR>
              > href="<a
              >
              href="http://www.oida.org/demand.html">http://www.oida.org/demand.html</a>"><a
              >
              href="http://www.oida.org/demand.html">http://www.oida.org/demand.html</a><BR>
              > </a><BR>
              > > <BR><BR>
              > > <BR><BR>
              > > OE component sales, 2001 <BR><BR>
              > > <a<BR>
              > > <BR>
              > href="<a
              >
              href="http://www.oida.org/comprev.html">http://www.oida.org/comprev.html</a>"><a
              >
              href="http://www.oida.org/comprev.ht">http://www.oida.org/comprev.ht</a><BR>
              > ml</a><BR><BR>
              > > <BR><BR>
              > > The graphs show 2001 decreased to below 1999<BR>
              > > levels.<BR><BR>
              > > (But not to 0 :) It's for all optoelectronic<BR>
              > > eqipment.<BR><BR>
              > > Telecom specifically took a bigger
              > hit.<BR><BR>
              > > <BR><BR>
              >
              === message truncated ===


              __________________________________________________
              Do you Yahoo!?
              Yahoo! News - Today's headlines
              http://news.yahoo.com
            • Joschka Fisher
              Are you sure? ( Regarding Content of the Delivery!!) Are you sure you’ll spare the life of Barabbas for the death of Jesus? Are you sure that’s it’s
              Message 6 of 17 , Sep 18, 2002
              • 0 Attachment
                Are you sure? ( Regarding Content of the Delivery!!)

                Are you sure you’ll spare the life of Barabbas
                for the death of Jesus?

                Are you sure that’s it’s Tangiers, Langston Hughes
                wanted instead of the hangman’s noose? (rhymes with
                Jesus…see!! You weren’t sure!)
                http://www.cindydrew.com/sr/other/p1text.shtml

                Did Rodger Waters & Pink Floyd, get it right at this
                tender late age:
                “Did you exchange a walk-on part in a war…for a
                leading role in a cage?”
                http://www.songlyrics.co.nz/lyrics/p/pinkfloyd/wish.htm

                Are you sure, that “Romance at short notice
                philistine” , is the consumer role you wish to play?:

                A futurist technophile,
                in bed with quick quips,
                …short-riffs, and
                cut-and-paste, wireless, T1-ethernet, information ..
                er,…without delay?

                While content & questions waste aside…

                ..or as in Simon & Garfunkel’s “Dangling
                Conversation”
                http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Rhodes/9574/lyrics_dangling_conversation.htm

                …just a superficial sigh?

                Never reaching the heart of the matter. But bantering
                through time!!!

                A cell phoned, high-tech’d Sisyphys…like the rest of
                us, queuing up for the next advertised line?

                Are you truly sure, that you know, what you’re wishing
                for?

                Joseph S. Anderson
                [Needless to say, I’m close to delivering…Another week
                of this research…and I’m applying to Rand, Ford
                Foundation or Brookings Institution!]




                --- wayne radinsky <spodware@...> a écrit : >
                > By the way, I'm still waiting the fleshed-out
                > response.
                > This looks to be interesting.
                >
                > --- Joschka Fisher <grabarkowic@...> wrote:
                > > Ok...this is a skeleton/outline of my objections
                > to
                > > your assessment of the chip industry and is
                > perceived
                > > cyclical comeback.
                > >
                > > It's also a criticism of "Yea technology improves
                > but
                > > who gets to use it", from the Economics point of
                > view.
                > >
                > > Do remember that the Japanese just beat the sh**
                > out
                > > of us in building the world's fastest computer
                > using
                > > 10+ year old technology. ( Still looking for that
                > > article!)
                > >
                > > "er was it you or Wayne Radinsky?" this is
                > submitted
                > > to?
                > >
                > > Either way a lot of data and I've got one
                > Economist
                > > article I'm trying to get but I can't afford the
                > > $60.00 subscription so I have to break-into the
                > > Stanford Business School computers to get the
                > article.
                > > Sorry but it should take about 24 hours to get
                > it..and
                > > a few other items. "Heee Hee".
                > >
                > > I'll fill in the rest within the next couple days
                > > since this is time consuming, but damned
                > interesting.
                > >
                > >
                > > Anderson Evaluations: The Problem with Technology
                > for
                > > Technology Sake and argument against Wayne's
                > > assessment!
                > >
                > > SIA organization, the source of your data and the
                > > reporting systems, in general!
                > > 1. My general disklike/distrust of SIA reports
                > and
                > > good reasons why:
                > > 2. Reporting alternatives and their “accuracy”
                > over
                > >
                > > past 3 years!
                > >
                > > Current effort/trends of countries to build
                > > semiconductor/foundry plants. ( is Rally round the
                > > Maypole, a good idea?)
                > > 1. Source of talent
                > > 2. Salaries
                > > 3. Saturation and market glut
                > >
                > > The costs of semiconductor and foundry
                > construction or
                > > retooling
                > > 1. Defining semiconductor vs. foundry industries
                > > 2. Why Foundries were only recently included in
                > the
                > > semiconductor industry.
                > >
                > > Record of projected profit margins vs.actual over
                > past
                > > 3 years
                > >
                > > 1. By different reporting agencies (including
                > SIA)
                > > 2. Markets the Semi/Foundry serve
                > >
                > > Demand markets behaviour for such technology in
                > the
                > > current and future arena
                > >
                > > 1. So who’s buying "said new technology" and
                > what
                > > are they being used for?
                > > 2. Profitability & Market thresholds of these
                > “end-
                > > user”-industries over past 3 years.
                > >
                > > The high-tech pollution problem: assessment and
                > costs
                > > to the industry.
                > >
                > > Evaluation of Semi/Foundry under the John
                > Goldsmith
                > > Economics
                > >
                > > 1. The economics of Zu Schleuderpreisen and its
                > > problems around the world in the
                > Semi/Foundry
                > > industry!
                > >
                > > Why Technology for Technology sake, is a near
                > > aliteration of s', as in: is seriously
                > short-sigted,
                > > silly and the end of evolution!
                > >
                > >
                > > --- markfinnern <markfinnern@...> a écrit :
                > > <HR>
                > > <html><body>
                > >
                > >
                > > <tt>
                > > Well J. S. Anderson,<BR>
                > > <BR>
                > > More then 4 days of agonizing waiting has passed,
                > but
                > > still no reply <BR>
                > > post from you :-(<BR>
                > > <BR>
                > > Looking forward to it, Mark. <BR>
                > > <BR>
                > > <BR>
                > > --- In bafuture@y..., Joschka Fisher
                > > <grabarkowic@y...> wrote:<BR>
                > > > YOU NOW HAVE 4 DAYS, TO VERIFY YOUR
                > > INFORMATION.<BR>
                > > > J.S.ANDERSON <BR>
                > > > <BR>
                > > > <BR>
                > > > --- wayne radinsky <spodware@y...> a
                > > écrit : <BR>
                > > > <HR><BR>
                > > > <html><body><BR>
                > > > <BR>
                > > > <BR>
                > > > <tt><BR>
                > > > <BR><BR>
                > > > Gee that sounds pretty threatening. What good
                > > does<BR>
                > > > that do?<BR><BR>
                > > > We'll all be smarter and better off if we put
                > > our<BR>
                > > > heads<BR><BR>
                > > > together and learn from each other rather
                > > than<BR>
                > > > make<BR><BR>
                > > > threats, no?<BR><BR>
                > > > <BR><BR>
                > > > Maybe I am just being naive
                > again.<BR><BR>
                > > > <BR><BR>
                > > > Anyway, I don't what you think I was wrong
                > > about,<BR>
                > > > but<BR><BR>
                > > > things seem to check out to me. I said that
                > > chip<BR>
                > > > sales<BR><BR>
                > > > were growing since April.<BR><BR>
                > > > <BR><BR>
                > > > Chip Sales Grow 5.8% in June Quarter
                > > <BR><BR>
                > > > <a<BR>
                > > > href="<a
                > >
                >
                href="http://www.semichips.org/pre_release.cfm?">http://www.semichips.org/pre_release.cfm?</a><BR>
                > > ID=235"><a
                > >
                >
                href="http://www.semichips.org/pre_release.cfm?ID=235">http://www.semichips.org/pre_release.cfm?ID=235</a></a><BR>
                > > > <BR><BR>
                > > > <BR><BR>
                > > > May Chip Sales Reach $11.37 Billion for
                > > Worldwide<BR><BR>
                > > > Semiconductor Industry <BR><BR>
                > > > <a<BR>
                > > > href="<a
                > >
                >
                href="http://www.semichips.org/pre_release.cfm?">http://www.semichips.org/pre_release.cfm?</a><BR>
                > > ID=231"><a
                > >
                >
                href="http://www.semichips.org/pre_release.cfm?ID=231">http://www.semichips.org/pre_release.cfm?ID=231</a></a><BR><BR>
                > > > <BR><BR>
                > > > This is a more recent article:<BR><BR>
                > > > <BR><BR>
                > > > Chip sector releases mixed
                > figures<BR><BR>
                > > > <a<BR>
                > > > <BR>
                > > href="<a
                > >
                >
                href="http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/3/26793.html">http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/3/26793.html</a>"><a
                > > href="http://www.th">http://www.th</a><BR>
                > > eregister.co.uk/content/3/26793.html</a><BR>
                > > > <BR><BR>
                > > > <BR><BR>
                > > > I interpret this to mean that the waters are
                > > still<BR>
                >
                === message truncated ===

                ___________________________________________________________
                Do You Yahoo!? -- Une adresse @... gratuite et en français !
                Yahoo! Mail : http://fr.mail.yahoo.com
              • wayne radinsky
                Joseph, I m still waiting for the response to Current State of the Art . Are you ever going to post it? Or just drop mysterious threats of destroying my
                Message 7 of 17 , Oct 24, 2002
                • 0 Attachment
                  Joseph,

                  I'm still waiting for the response to "Current State of the
                  Art". Are you ever going to post it? Or just drop mysterious
                  threats of destroying my worldview, then disappear?

                  - - -

                  OIDA has posted new data on the optoelectronics
                  industry [pdf format]. OIDA's data is flawed -- you say --
                  but why?
                  http://www.oida.org/pdfs/oidanews/oidanews1002.pdf

                  Intel's Fab 11x means bigger, better chips
                  Transitioning to 90-nm fabs
                  http://zdnet.com.com/2100-1103-963065.html

                  Samsung Electronics is building 90-nm fab
                  http://www.eetimes.com/semi/news/OEG20021023S0032

                  Semiconductor industry turned down in September
                  SEMI's data is flawed -- you say -- but why?
                  http://www.siliconstrategies.com/story/OEG20021017S0045

                  - - -

                  > Are you sure? ( Regarding Content of the Delivery!!)

                  Yes!

                  > Are you sure you�ll spare the life of Barabbas
                  > for the death of Jesus?

                  Yes! (Well, not literally).

                  > Are you sure that�s it�s Tangiers, Langston Hughes
                  > wanted instead of the hangman�s noose? (rhymes with
                  > Jesus -- see!! You weren�t sure!)
                  > http://www.cindydrew.com/sr/other/p1text.shtml

                  Yup.

                  > Did Rodger Waters & Pink Floyd, get it right at this
                  > tender late age:
                  > �Did you exchange a walk-on part in a war�for a
                  > leading role in a cage?�
                  > http://www.songlyrics.co.nz/lyrics/p/pinkfloyd/wish.htm

                  Oh yes, they got it exactly right...

                  > Are you sure, that �Romance at short notice
                  > philistine� , is the consumer role you wish to play?:

                  Yes.

                  > A futurist technophile,
                  > in bed with quick quips,
                  > �short-riffs, and
                  > cut-and-paste, wireless, T1-ethernet, information ..
                  > er,�without delay?

                  Yes I'm sure.

                  > While content & questions waste aside�
                  >
                  > ..or as in Simon & Garfunkel�s �Dangling
                  > Conversation�
                  >
                  http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Rhodes/9574/lyrics_dangling_conversation.htm
                  >
                  > �just a superficial sigh?
                  >
                  > Never reaching the heart of the matter. But bantering
                  > through time!!!
                  >
                  > A cell phoned, high-tech�d Sisyphys�like the rest of
                  > us, queuing up for the next advertised line?

                  Yes! Post it.

                  Did you mean Sisyphus?

                  > Are you truly sure, that you know, what you�re wishing
                  > for?

                  YES!!! Post it already!

                  Why is OIDA data incorrect? Why is SEMI data incorrect?
                  Where on this planet can you get better data?
                  If there's a flaw in my logic and reasoning, where is it?
                  If Moore's Law can't be extrapolated, what's going
                  to stop it?

                  Sincerely,
                  Wayne L. Radinsky
                  Supposed Futurist On Superficial High

                  p.s. Actually I don't own a cell phone.



                  __________________________________________________
                  Do you Yahoo!?
                  Y! Web Hosting - Let the expert host your web site
                  http://webhosting.yahoo.com/
                • wayne radinsky
                  You may recall that Moore s Law is computing power per dollar . Right now the industry is focused on cutting costs. This article is about How the shift to
                  Message 8 of 17 , Dec 6, 2002
                  • 0 Attachment
                    You may recall that Moore's Law is computing power
                    "per dollar". Right now the industry is focused on
                    cutting costs.

                    This article is about "How the shift to larger wafers
                    and thin circuits" will lower the cost of chip
                    production and "transform the industry."


                    Chips on Monster Wafers
                    http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/02_45/b3807002.htm


                    - - -
                    AMD's upcoming processor will be a "100 million transistor
                    machine", 2.5 times the number of transistors as the current
                    Athlon chip. And that's even without using "monster wafers"
                    (from above article).


                    "Hammer" to hold 100 million transistors
                    http://zdnet.com.com/2100-1103-975510.html


                    - - -
                    The other big bit of news is the Toshiba/Sony 65-nanometer
                    technology announcement.


                    Toshiba, Sony shrink LSIs
                    "Toshiba Corp and Sony Corp said Tuesday they have jointly
                    developed a technology to limit the width of electric
                    circuits on a system large-scale integrated circuit (LSI)
                    chip to 65 nanometers for the first time in the world."
                    http://www.japantoday.com/e/?content=news&cat=4&id=241290

                    Enabling the shift towards "ubiquitous computing," Japan's
                    Toshiba Corp. and Sony Corp. late Monday announced the
                    world's first 65-nm CMOS process technology for embedded
                    memories
                    http://www.siliconstrategies.com/story/OEG20021202S0091

                    Toshiba, Sony unveil 65-nm embedded memory process
                    http://www.eetimes.com/semi/news/OEG20021202S0091


                    - - -
                    More talk of 65-nm and 45-nm process technology:


                    IBM signs chip manufacturing deal with Chartered Semi
                    "The deal with IBM will give Chartered access to
                    300-millimeter manufacturing capacity using IBM's
                    90-nanometer process technology from the third quarter of
                    next year and ease some of the competitive pressure it
                    faces from TSMC and UMC, the companies said in a statement.
                    In addition to giving each company access to manufacturing
                    capacity, IBM and Chartered will jointly develop
                    90-nanometer and 65-nanometer processes for production on
                    300-millimeter wafers. Down the road, the companies said an
                    option exists to extend that agreement to include
                    45-nanometer process technology."
                    http://www.itworld.com/Comp/1622/021127ibmchartered/


                    - - -
                    IBM is also in the news because of their "3D" technology.
                    Semiconductors currently are limited to 2 dimensional
                    designs, so 3D manufacturing is the next logical step.


                    3D IC design promises to boost chip performance
                    http://www.eetasia.com/article_content.php3?article_id=8800285653

                    IBM Claims 3D Chip Breakthrough
                    http://www.lightreading.com/document.asp?site=lightreading&doc_id=24146

                    IBM develops 3-D stacking technology for ICs
                    http://www.siliconstrategies.com/story/OEG20021111S0014


                    - - -
                    Some articles on the overall economic climate:


                    SEMI survey shows '02 fab-tool market to fall 32%
                    http://www.siliconstrategies.com/story/OEG20021204S0046

                    Metro WDM: What Carriers Think (5 page report)
                    http://www.lightreading.com/document.asp?doc_id=23979

                    'Raw' SIA data shows October semi sales at $11.7 billion
                    http://www.siliconstrategies.com/story/OEG20021203S0040

                    Chip equipment vendors step carefully through downturn
                    http://www.eetimes.com/semi/news/OEG20021125S0052

                    Growth in chip sales slows, Europe hot, U.S. flat
                    http://www.eetimes.com/semi/news/OEG20021129S0007

                    Mark your calendars. There's an upturn coming in the
                    semiconductors industry, and it starts on June 21, 2003.
                    http://www.forbes.com/2002/11/20/cx_ah_1120halla.html


                    - - -
                    Other assorted news items that might or might not (but might)
                    be of interest... (or might not...)


                    Meet the New Silicon Speed Demon
                    "At 350 gigahertz, this IBM transistor is the fastest ever.
                    And it's just the first of a new generation of tiny
                    powerhouses"
                    http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/nov2002/tc2002115_0584.htm

                    NTT researchers develop 100Gbit/s multiplexer IC
                    http://www.commsdesign.com/news/tech_beat/OEG20021204S0012

                    Another article on NTT
                    http://compoundsemiconductor.net/articles/news/6/11/20/1

                    Chipmakers bang away at metal gates
                    More on the 65 nm technology
                    http://www.eetasia.com/article_content.php3?article_id=8800288936

                    AlGaN/GaN HEMTs break records at IEDM
                    http://compoundsemiconductor.net/articles/news/6/12/3/1

                    Memory in a spin
                    http://www.dialelectronics.com.au/articles/6f/0c012f6f.asp

                    Startup debuts 'nanoimprint' litho tool for 20-nm designs
                    "The Imprio 100 is not a conventional photolithography
                    scanner, but rather the tool is an 'electron-beam
                    replicator' that utilizes ultraviolet (UV) and liquid
                    emersion technologies to enable or 'imprint' patterns on a
                    wafer."
                    http://www.eetimes.com/semi/news/OEG20021202S0082


                    Wayne






                    --- wayne radinsky <spodware@...> wrote:
                    >
                    > Joseph,
                    >
                    > I'm still waiting for the response to "Current State of the
                    > Art". Are you ever going to post it? Or just drop mysterious
                    > threats of destroying my worldview, then disappear?
                    >
                    > - - -
                    >
                    > OIDA has posted new data on the optoelectronics
                    > industry [pdf format]. OIDA's data is flawed -- you say --
                    > but why?
                    > http://www.oida.org/pdfs/oidanews/oidanews1002.pdf
                    >
                    > Intel's Fab 11x means bigger, better chips
                    > Transitioning to 90-nm fabs
                    > http://zdnet.com.com/2100-1103-963065.html
                    >
                    > Samsung Electronics is building 90-nm fab
                    > http://www.eetimes.com/semi/news/OEG20021023S0032
                    >
                    > Semiconductor industry turned down in September
                    > SEMI's data is flawed -- you say -- but why?
                    > http://www.siliconstrategies.com/story/OEG20021017S0045
                    >
                    > - - -
                    >
                    > > Are you sure? ( Regarding Content of the Delivery!!)
                    >
                    > Yes!
                    >
                    > > Are you sure you�ll spare the life of Barabbas
                    > > for the death of Jesus?
                    >
                    > Yes! (Well, not literally).
                    >
                    > > Are you sure that�s it�s Tangiers, Langston Hughes
                    > > wanted instead of the hangman�s noose? (rhymes with
                    > > Jesus -- see!! You weren�t sure!)
                    > > http://www.cindydrew.com/sr/other/p1text.shtml
                    >
                    > Yup.
                    >
                    > > Did Rodger Waters & Pink Floyd, get it right at this
                    > > tender late age:
                    > > �Did you exchange a walk-on part in a war�for a
                    > > leading role in a cage?�
                    > > http://www.songlyrics.co.nz/lyrics/p/pinkfloyd/wish.htm
                    >
                    > Oh yes, they got it exactly right...
                    >
                    > > Are you sure, that �Romance at short notice
                    > > philistine� , is the consumer role you wish to play?:
                    >
                    > Yes.
                    >
                    > > A futurist technophile,
                    > > in bed with quick quips,
                    > > �short-riffs, and
                    > > cut-and-paste, wireless, T1-ethernet, information ..
                    > > er,�without delay?
                    >
                    > Yes I'm sure.
                    >
                    > > While content & questions waste aside�
                    > >
                    > > ..or as in Simon & Garfunkel�s �Dangling
                    > > Conversation�
                    > >
                    >
                    http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Rhodes/9574/lyrics_dangling_conversation.htm
                    > >
                    > > �just a superficial sigh?
                    > >
                    > > Never reaching the heart of the matter. But bantering
                    > > through time!!!
                    > >
                    > > A cell phoned, high-tech�d Sisyphys�like the rest of
                    > > us, queuing up for the next advertised line?
                    >
                    > Yes! Post it.
                    >
                    > Did you mean Sisyphus?
                    >
                    > > Are you truly sure, that you know, what you�re wishing
                    > > for?
                    >
                    > YES!!! Post it already!
                    >
                    > Why is OIDA data incorrect? Why is SEMI data incorrect?
                    > Where on this planet can you get better data?
                    > If there's a flaw in my logic and reasoning, where is it?
                    > If Moore's Law can't be extrapolated, what's going
                    > to stop it?
                    >
                    > Sincerely,
                    > Wayne L. Radinsky
                    > Supposed Futurist On Superficial High
                    >
                    > p.s. Actually I don't own a cell phone.
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    > __________________________________________________
                    > Do you Yahoo!?
                    > Y! Web Hosting - Let the expert host your web site
                    > http://webhosting.yahoo.com/
                    >
                    > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
                    >
                    > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                    > bafuture-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
                    > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                    >
                    >


                    __________________________________________________
                    Do you Yahoo!?
                    Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.
                    http://mailplus.yahoo.com
                  • Joschka Fisher
                    The Past Revisited: The Following Article is from Financial Times: Feb 7th ww.ft.com/infotech ( but ya need a subscription so I just typed it ) If I remember
                    Message 9 of 17 , Feb 9, 2003
                    • 0 Attachment
                      The Past Revisited:

                      The Following Article is from Financial Times: Feb 7th
                      ww.ft.com/infotech ( but ya need a subscription so I
                      just typed it )

                      If I remember this...I thought the predictions about
                      the chip market were severely wrong, plus I sent a
                      follow-up indicating the chip makers were not posting
                      information to the USA or anyone else. Yes it's
                      voluntary for a number of quarters...but it suggested
                      strongly that the SIA ( who's predictions are always
                      wrong) et al were up to no good and in deep doodoo
                      with chip sales.

                      Additionally, I believe I said that the cost of
                      building a plant vs the profit you make on chips is a
                      becoming a point of no return. I later found out this
                      is called Moore's 2nd Law!!

                      Well...here's the article after-the fact!

                      Financial Times by Tom Foremski in San Francisco:

                      GLOBAL CHIP SALES ROSE A MEAGER 1.3% IN 2002, BARELY
                      RECOVERING FROM 2001'S 32% PLUNGE AND MISSING ALL
                      PROJECTIONS FOR THE YEAR.

                      But the Semiconductor industry, Associates ( SIA),
                      the leading trade body, said it was a "remarkable
                      performance" and that the industry should grow mnearly
                      20% in 2003.

                      The SIA's predictions have been consistenly inacc
                      urate. It forecast 2002 was to produce 6% growth but
                      the predition was halved by the sumer.

                      Similarly, 2001 was to have ben another
                      record-setting year of growth for the global chip
                      sector, producing about $240bn, a miss of more than
                      $100bn.

                      The chip and chip equipment sectors continue to
                      suffer from a glut, together with production capacity
                      and prices that have hit 10 y6ear lows.

                      George Scalise, SIA president pointed to growth in
                      wireless communications chips and some signs of rising
                      demand in the stagnant PC market - which accounts for
                      30% of chip sales.

                      "We expect the momentum built in both cell phones
                      an dPCs throughout 2002 to increase in 2003. As a
                      result for the first time since 2000, we believe IT
                      spending on hardware will register an increase", he
                      said.

                      Chip sales in 2002 were $140.7bn and the SIA
                      predicting a rise to $169bn this year

                      But Wall St. Analyst are far less bullishon the
                      sector and expect a fragile first quarter with little
                      visibility into market conditions. December sales
                      figures showed weak growth in the forth quarter -
                      traditionally a strong period as electronic goods and
                      PC makers gear up for the holiday season.

                      The Philadelphia Semiconductor Index, a basket of
                      leading chip and chip equipment companies, finished
                      the day down 0.4% at 270.56. The index continues to
                      languish at low levels; it traded as high as 614 last
                      March on hpes of a strong recovery in demand.

                      The Asia Pacific market grew an unprecedented 29%
                      last year. This is the fastest growth in a regional
                      market and compared with declines of 13% in the
                      Americas, 8% in Japan and 8% in Europe.

                      The failure of any rebound in chp sales has hurt
                      chip equipment makers as m anufacturers have sharply
                      curtailed capital investments in new failities
                      ======


                      --- markfinnern <markfinnern@...> a écrit :
                      ---------------------------------
                      Uhu, all in caps, 'VERIFY YOUR INFORMATION'
                      All your base are belong to us, or what?
                      (See:http://www.guardian.co.uk/Archive/Article/0,4273,4143466,00.html)

                      Well I felt compelled to check my passport, just to
                      'verify my
                      infordentity'. Still the same old, same old, which is
                      reaffirming.

                      There is some nice anticipation building up here, the
                      expectations
                      are high, hope your post lives up to the hype.

                      Darn, another 4 days.
                      Can't wait, Mark.
                      P.S. Like your fake Joschka Fischer email identity. Is
                      that in homage
                      to him?

                      --- In bafuture@y..., Joschka Fisher
                      <grabarkowic@y...> wrote:
                      > YOU NOW HAVE 4 DAYS, TO VERIFY YOUR INFORMATION.
                      > J.S.ANDERSON
                      >
                      >
                      > --- wayne radinsky <spodware@y...> a écrit :
                      > <HR>
                      > <html><body>
                      >
                      >
                      > <tt>
                      > <BR>
                      > Gee that sounds pretty threatening. What good does
                      > that do?<BR>
                      > We'll all be smarter and better off if we put our
                      > heads<BR>
                      > together and learn from each other rather than
                      > make<BR>
                      > threats, no?<BR>
                      > <BR>
                      > Maybe I am just being naive again.<BR>
                      > <BR>
                      > Anyway, I don't what you think I was wrong about,
                      > but<BR>
                      > things seem to check out to me. I said that chip
                      > sales<BR>
                      > were growing since April.<BR>
                      > <BR>
                      > Chip Sales Grow 5.8% in June Quarter <BR>
                      > <a
                      > href="http://www.semichips.org/pre_release.cfm?
                      ID=235">http://www.semichips.org/pre_release.cfm?ID=235</a>
                      > <BR>
                      > <BR>
                      > May Chip Sales Reach $11.37 Billion for
                      Worldwide<BR>
                      > Semiconductor Industry <BR>
                      > <a
                      > href="http://www.semichips.org/pre_release.cfm?
                      ID=231">http://www.semichips.org/pre_release.cfm?ID=231</a><BR>
                      > <BR>
                      > This is a more recent article:<BR>
                      > <BR>
                      > Chip sector releases mixed figures<BR>
                      > <a
                      >
                      href="http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/3/26793.html">http://www.th
                      eregister.co.uk/content/3/26793.html</a>
                      > <BR>
                      > <BR>
                      > I interpret this to mean that the waters are still
                      > choppy.<BR>
                      > Although I suppose you could argue that it's the
                      > beginning<BR>
                      > of another downturn, but I don't expect that.<BR>
                      > <BR>
                      > As for communications equipment sales, actually I
                      > didn't say<BR>
                      > telecom sales were going back up, (only the
                      > semiconductor<BR>
                      > industry as a whole) and they haven't yet.<BR>
                      > <BR>
                      > OE Markets - Demand<BR>
                      > <a
                      >
                      href="http://www.oida.org/demand.html">http://www.oida.org/demand.html
                      </a>
                      > <BR>
                      > <BR>
                      > OE component sales, 2001 <BR>
                      > <a
                      >
                      href="http://www.oida.org/comprev.html">http://www.oida.org/comprev.ht
                      ml</a><BR>
                      > <BR>
                      > The graphs show 2001 decreased to below 1999
                      > levels.<BR>
                      > (But not to 0 :) It's for all optoelectronic
                      > eqipment.<BR>
                      > Telecom specifically took a bigger hit.<BR>
                      > <BR>
                      > Optical networking's next frontier<BR>
                      > <a
                      >
                      href="http://www.bayarea.com/mld/mercurynews/business/3922499.htm">htt
                      p://www.bayarea.com/mld/mercurynews/business/3922499.htm</a><BR>
                      > <BR>
                      > I said Moore's Law continues in spite of economic
                      > recession.<BR>
                      > Recently:<BR>
                      > <BR>
                      > Intel Begins Shipping Itanium 2 Processors<BR>
                      > <a
                      >
                      href="http://www.intel.com/pressroom/archive/releases/20020708comp.htm
                      ">http://www.intel.com/pressroom/archive/releases/20020708comp.htm</a>
                      <BR>
                      > <BR>
                      > Intel Ships The World's First 2 Gigahertz
                      > Microprocessor For<BR>
                      > Mobile PCs <BR>
                      > <a
                      >
                      href="http://www.intel.com/pressroom/archive/releases/20020624comp.htm
                      ">http://www.intel.com/pressroom/archive/releases/20020624comp.htm</a>
                      <BR>
                      > <BR>
                      > Intel Unveils World's Most Advanced Chip-Making
                      > Process<BR>
                      > <a
                      >
                      href="http://www.intel.com/pressroom/archive/releases/20020813tech.htm
                      ">http://www.intel.com/pressroom/archive/releases/20020813tech.htm</a>
                      <BR>
                      > <BR>
                      > And telecom technology is continuing to advance in
                      > spite<BR>
                      > of the recession as well, and a quick look at any
                      > telecom<BR>
                      > equipment vendor web site will show.<BR>
                      > <BR>
                      > Scientists at Bell Labs have used their
                      collective<BR>
                      > multidisciplinary expertise to help design
                      > LambdaXtreme<BR>
                      > Transport, the most advanced long-distance
                      > communications<BR>
                      > system now on the market.<BR>
                      > <a
                      > href="http://www.bell-
                      labs.com/news/features/feature_01.html">http://www.bell-
                      labs.com/news/features/feature_01.html</a>
                      > <BR>
                      > <BR>
                      > JDS Uniphase Announces New Semiconductor Optical
                      > Amplifiers<BR>
                      > <a
                      > href="http://www.jdsu.com/index2.cfm?
                      CID=3&NAVCID=3&DSP=PressRelease&ACT=Display&PressID=249&PageName=JDS%
                      20Uniphase%20Announces%20New%20Semiconductor%20Optical%
                      20Amplifiers">http://www.jdsu.com/index2.cfm?
                      CID=3&NAVCID=3&DSP=PressRelease&ACT=Display&PressID=24
                      9&PageName=JDS%20Uniphase%20Announces%20New%20Semiconductor%
                      20Optical%20Amplifiers</a><BR>
                      > <BR>
                      > <BR>
                      > JDS Uniphase Boosts High-Level Functionality of
                      > RX3<BR>
                      > Series Multichannel Backreflection Meters with Two
                      > New<BR>
                      > Features <BR>
                      > Unique three-laser wavelength testing and 10 mm
                      > InGaAs<BR>
                      > detector provide broader testing capabilities,
                      > reduce<BR>
                      > ownership cost<BR>
                      > <a
                      > href="http://www.jdsu.com/index2.cfm?
                      CID=3&NAVCID=3&DSP=PressRelease&ACT=Display&PressID=231&PageName=JDS%
                      20Uniphase%20Boosts%20High%2DLevel%20Functionality%20of%20RX3%
                      20Series%20Multichannel%20Backreflection%20Meters%20with%20Two%20New%
                      20Features">http://www.jdsu.com/index2.cfm?
                      CID=3&NAVCID=3&DSP=PressRelease&ACT=Display&PressID=23
                      1&PageName=JDS%20Uniphase%20Boosts%20High%2DLevel%20Functionality%
                      20of%20RX3%20Series%20Multichannel%20Backreflection%20Meters%20with%
                      20Two%20New%20Features</a><BR>
                      > <BR>
                      > <BR>
                      > JDS Uniphase Announces Dramatic Performance
                      > Improvement In Thin<BR>
                      > Film Filters for Wideband Applications<BR>
                      > <a
                      > href="http://www.jdsu.com/index2.cfm?
                      CID=3&NAVCID=3&DSP=PressRelease&ACT=Display&PressID=233&PageName=JDS%
                      20Uniphase%20Announces%20Dramatic%20Performance%20Improvement%20In%
                      20Thin%20Film%20Filters%20for%20Wideband%
                      20Applications">http://www.jdsu.com/index2.cfm?
                      CID=3&NAVCID=3&DSP=PressRelease&ACT=Display&PressID=23
                      3&PageName=JDS%20Uniphase%20Announces%20Dramatic%20Performance%
                      20Improvement%20In%20Thin%20Film%20Filters%20for%20Wideband%
                      20Applications</a><BR>
                      > <BR>
                      > <BR>
                      > Now what you really want to do is graph out
                      > processor<BR>
                      > performance per dollar over time. For bandwidth,
                      > it's<BR>
                      > harder because there are more variables, but what
                      > you<BR>
                      > want to do is calculate Gb / s / km / dollar for
                      > telecom<BR>
                      > equipment and show that it is an exponential curve
                      > over<BR>
                      > long periods of time. This is the whole essence of
                      > Gilder's<BR>
                      > Law / Huber's Law. I don't have the data to do this
                      > but<BR>
                      > maybe you can find it and calculate it. The price
                      > data<BR>
                      > is important because the calculation is per unit
                      > cost.<BR>
                      > The industry now is focusing more on decreasing
                      > cost<BR>
                      > on the low end than on advancing the high end.<BR>
                      > <BR>
                      > Finally, here is an article about the telecom
                      > meltdown.<BR>
                      > If you think the recession has stopped
                      technology<BR>
                      > advancement, you might have the cause and effect
                      > backwards.<BR>
                      > The author believes that the rapid pace of
                      > technology<BR>
                      > advancement is one of the *causes* of the telecom
                      > meltdown.<BR>
                      > As you might expect, if long-distance phone service
                      > is<BR>
                      > "free", that has severe consequences for
                      the
                      > people who<BR>
                      > build their business on it. (As I mentioned earlier,
                      > <BR>
                      > Nathan Myhrvold predicted in 1993 that long distance
                      > would<BR>
                      > become free.)<BR>
                      > <BR>
                      > Future not so bright for telecoms<BR>
                      > <a
                      >
                      href="http://www.usatoday.com/life/cyber/invest/2002/07/15/telecom.htm
                      ">http://www.usatoday.com/life/cyber/invest/2002/07/15/telecom.htm</a>
                      <BR>
                      > <BR>
                      > Ok, let me have it.<BR>
                      > <BR>
                      > <BR>
                      > --- Joseph Anderson
                      > bigwhiskey@e... wrote:<BR>
                      > > Uh....Wayne...<BR>
                      > > <BR>
                      > > Since I'm such a nice guy, I'm gonna give you 7
                      > days to check<BR>
                      > > your facts on this before I, er...<BR>
                      > > <BR>
                      > > Let you have it.<BR>
                      > > <BR>
                      > > j.s.a.<BR>
                      > > <BR>
                      > > --- wayne radinsky spodware@y...
                      > wrote:<BR>
                      > > ><BR>
                      > > >--- Joseph Anderson
                      > bigwhiskey@e... wrote:<BR>
                      > > >> Yea...and kudos...but<BR>
                      > > >><BR>
                      > > >> If there's room at the bottom....<BR>
                      > > >><BR>
                      > > >> and  aint' nobody buying to
                      > maintain a market...<BR>
                      > > >><BR>
                      > > >> then it's nothing more than nanotech
                      for
                      > "nada" or oh!<BR>
                      > > >> no-profits?<BR>
                      > > ><BR>
                      > > >I don't see what you are getting at here.
                      > Semiconductor<BR>
                      > > >sales started increasing in April. We're
                      > already into the<BR>
                      > > >next boom cycle. It's pretty weak at this
                      > point, but it<BR>
                      > > >will grow. There are buyers in the market,
                      > and as<BR>
                      > > >technology gets more powerful, there will
                      be
                      > more products<BR>
                      > > >people want to buy.<BR>
                      > > ><BR>
                      > > >> Pretty soon...your local economy is
                      > devastasted and YOU'RE<BR>
                      > > >> at the bottom!<BR>
                      > > ><BR>
                      > > >I don't see what you are getting at here.
                      > There are many<BR>
                      > > >devastated local economies in the world.
                      This
                      > does not<BR>
                      > > >affect the accelerating pace of technology
                      > development.<BR>
                      > > ><BR>
                      > > >> Technology has several environments
                      it's
                      > responsible for.<BR>
                      > > >> Like it or not.  Biological is
                      > one.  Economic is certainly<BR>
                      > > >> the other.<BR>
                      > > >><BR>
                      > > >> Or do you pour money into spin-doctors
                      > and artificial price<BR>
                      > > >> supports via Enron, Anderson
                      Consulting,
                      > and WorldCom's<BR>
                      > > >> accounting techniques? So...for a
                      while,
                      > no-on will notice?<BR>
                      > > ><BR>
                      > > >Again, the collapse of Enron, Anderson,
                      > Global Crossing,<BR>
                      > > >WorldCom, etc, does not slow the pace of
                      > technology. This<BR>
                      > > >may seem counterintuitive, but it has no
                      > effect.<BR>
                      > > ><BR>
                      > > >> On the otherhand...if you can convince
                      > people to work for<BR>
                      > > >> next to nothing ( especially you
                      > California High $$ types )<BR>
                      > > >> or are willing to suffer the
                      > consequences of globalization<BR>
                      > > >> where Government interests and Corp
                      > Interest cannot<BR>
                      > > >> co-exist. Then...Have yo' technology!!
                      > ..and more of it! (<BR>
                      > > >> q.v. Sir John Goldsmith's books:<BR>
                      > > >><BR>
                      > > >> The Trap<BR>
                      > > >><BR>
                      > > >> The Response<BR>
                      > > >><BR>
                      > > >> <a
                      >
                      href="http://www.users.globalnet.co.uk/~ashes/RESPREV2.html">http://ww
                      w.users.globalnet.co.uk/~ashes/RESPREV2.html</a><BR>
                      > > ><BR>
                      > > >Interesting article. Thanks. I'm not sure
                      how
                      > it ties in<BR>
                      > > >with my post. The theme of this article is
                      > "free trade".<BR>
                      > > >What's the connection? That semiconductors
                      > are manufactured<BR>
                      > > >by "free trade"? That
                      technological
                      > advancement has not<BR>
                      > > >brought economic equality between
                      > nations?<BR>
                      > > ><BR>
                      > > >> Somwhere earlier there was a
                      > "joie-de-vivre" on these<BR>
                      > > >> Salons regarding technology being able
                      > to continue despite<BR>
                      > > >> adversity. " For higher silicon
                      > evolution!"<BR>
                      > > >><BR>
                      > > >> You know like war? I think someone
                      > particularly mentioned<BR>
                      > > >> that "side-track" to
                      > technological progress.<BR>
                      > > ><BR>
                      > > >That was me, yup. But I don't know where
                      you
                      > got the " For<BR>
                      > > >higher silicon evolution!" part. I'm
                      > only saying that, as a<BR>
                      > > >matter of fact, economic recession does not
                      > slow down the<BR>
                      > > >advancement of technology. If you don't
                      > believe me, draw a<BR>
                      > > >graph. Plot out transistor size, or CPU
                      clock
                      > speed, or<BR>
                      > > >whatever, and see whether it goes down
                      during
                      > the current<BR>
                      > > >economic recession.<BR>
                      > > ><BR>
                      > > >You'll see, it doesn't, it maintains its
                      > exponential<BR>
                      > > >trajectory. This is not a
                      > "joie-de-vivre", this is an<BR>
                      > > >empirical fact.<BR>
                      > > ><BR>
                      > > >> I keep remembering a cartoon in the
                      > Village Voice by<BR>
                      > > >> Oliphant, during the week the Neutron
                      > Bomb was announced,<BR>
                      > > >> as a device that did not destroy
                      > buildings. Of course, I<BR>
                      > > >> don't have to tell you and the NYTimes
                      > article never<BR>
                      > > >> said...er um but kills a whoppin' lot
                      of
                      > people with<BR>
                      > > >> high-radiation levels over 3-7
                      > days.  It showed a bunch of<BR>
                      > > >> accountants jumping for joy on their
                      > desks!<BR>
                      > > >><BR>
                      > > >><BR>
                      > > >> This is what gets me most.  The
                      > survival instinct when<BR>
                      > > >> assuaged by technology for technology
                      > sake, opinions and<BR>
                      > > >> modern day tech toys...gets overlooked
                      > and in the<BR>
                      > > >> process...over-ridden.<BR>
                      > > ><BR>
                      > > >Quite possibly.<BR>
                      > > ><BR>
                      > > >There seem to be 3 main lines of thought on
                      > this sort of<BR>
                      > > >thing.<BR>
                      > > ><BR>
                      > > >1) The optimistic outlook -- technological
                      > advancement<BR>
                      > > >will, by itself, make everything better.
                      John
                      > Smart is<BR>
                      > > >definitely in this category. He believes
                      > that, as the<BR>
                      > > >technological singularity approaches, that
                      we
                      > will all be<BR>
                      > > >amazed by the speed at which the remaining
                      > human problems<BR>
                      > > >are solved. He has some of the most clever
                      > and unusual<BR>
                      > > >arguments of any of the thinkers I know of,
                      > such as the<BR>
                      > > >idea that as a complex adaptive system
                      > increases in<BR>
                      > > >complexity, it also increases the
                      > concentration on<BR>
                      > > >positive-sum interactions, and decreases in
                      > violence and<BR>
                      > > >other zero-sum or negative-sum
                      interactions.
                      > Ray Kurzweil<BR>
                      > > >sort of goes in this category -- he likes
                      to
                      > talk about how<BR>
                      > > >human lifespan is being extended
                      > exponentially and so<BR>
                      > > >fourth. Kurzweil acknowledges the downside
                      --
                      > he has a<BR>
                      > > >"Dangerous Futures" section on
                      his
                      > website and so on.<BR>
                      > > >So he is not 100% in this category, but I
                      > think that is<BR>
                      > > >the overall theme of his thinking.<BR>
                      > > ><BR>
                      > > >2) The "we can control the
                      outcome"
                      > outlook -- I would  put<BR>
                      > > >Foresight (Eric Drexler, Ralph Merkle,
                      > Christine Peterson,<BR>
                      > > >etc), because Foresight's basic premise is
                      > that if you can<BR>
                      > > >influence the "initial
                      conditions"
                      > of technological<BR>
                      > > >development early in the process, then you
                      > can influence<BR>
                      > > >where the whole trajectory goes and thereby
                      > head the system<BR>
                      > > >off in the direction of a positive outcome.
                      I
                      > would put<BR>
                      > > >Eliezer Yudkowsky in this category as well,
                      > although he<BR>
                      > > >seems to take the view that he personally
                      is
                      > going to<BR>
                      > > >invent strong AI, preprogram it with Asimov
                      > laws, and save<BR>
                      > > >the world (more or less). Of course, you
                      can
                      > probably guess,<BR>
                      > > >by the wording I use, that I'm very
                      skeptical
                      > his approach<BR>
                      > > >will work. :)<BR>
                      > > ><BR>
                      > > >3) The "pessimistic" outlook.
                      This
                      > is the "technology will<BR>
                      > > >make humanity extinct!" point of view
                      > expressed by people<BR>
                      > > >like Mark Gubrud. And possibly Bill Joy,
                      > although I was<BR>
                      > > >never sure whether Bill Joy really believes
                      > this point of<BR>
                      > > >view or whether he was just trying to
                      provoke
                      > widespread<BR>
                      > > >discussion on the issue. (Which he
                      certainly
                      > did in any<BR>
                      > > >case). Gubrud takes the moralistic position
                      > -- that humans<BR>
                      > > >must stop technology because technology
                      will
                      > make humanity<BR>
                      > > >extinct, and that's morally wrong.<BR>
                      > > ><BR>
                      > > >For my part, I think I lean towards the
                      > pessimistic<BR>
                      > > >viewpoint simply because I was once a big
                      > believer in the<BR>
                      > > >"techno-utopian" viewpoint -- the
                      > idea that we'll invent<BR>
                      > > >technology that will solve humanity's
                      > problems. My time at<BR>
                      > > >Microsoft disillusioned me of that concept
                      > pretty<BR>
                      > > >thoroughly. Sure, Microsoft may make
                      > technology that solves<BR>
                      > > >human problems. It's just that that's not
                      > really<BR>
                      > > >Microsoft's *intent* -- it helps them sell
                      > software, but<BR>
                      > > >it's the selling of software that they
                      really
                      > care about.<BR>
                      > > >David Gelernter (from Yale University) has
                      > written some<BR>
                      > > >stuff about how "technology doesn't
                      > solve social problems",<BR>
                      > > >how he expected technology to solve social
                      > problems and<BR>
                      > > >went through a similar (though milder :)
                      > disillusionment.<BR>
                      > > ><BR>
                      > > >One of the reasons I have the view that I
                      > have is that I<BR>
                      > > >now interpret technological development as
                      > being part of<BR>
                      > > >the same process that drives biological
                      > development. And in<BR>
                      > > >the biological realm, there is nothing
                      > special about the<BR>
                      > > >human species -- it is just another
                      species.
                      > So I question<BR>
                      > > >the argument that John Smart puts fourth,
                      > that advanced<BR>
                      > > >technology in the future will care about
                      > solving human<BR>
                      > > >problems. We don't care about other species
                      > (we, humans,<BR>
                      > > >are causing a mass extinction right now),
                      for
                      > the most part<BR>
                      > > >-- there are exceptions like Rainforest
                      > Action Network and<BR>
                      > > >so on. So while the human species
                      > unquestionably rules the<BR>
                      > > >planet at the moment -- but only at the
                      > moment. The process<BR>
                      > > >of evolution does not intrinsically favor
                      the
                      > human<BR>
                      > > >species. So I don't see why future robots
                      > with strong AI<BR>
                      > > >will care to spend their intelligence
                      solving
                      > humanity's<BR>
                      > > >problems. On the other hand, I don't agree
                      > with Mark Gubrud<BR>
                      > > >that extinction is a likely result. I see
                      no
                      > evidence that<BR>
                      > > >the development of complex species causes
                      the
                      > simple ones<BR>
                      > > >to go extinct simply because they are
                      simple.
                      > Otherwise<BR>
                      > > >there would not be microbes and insects and
                      > so fourth<BR>
                      > > >today. So I would not expect advanced
                      > technology to do that<BR>
                      > > >either.<BR>
                      > > ><BR>
                      > > >This reminds me of the brief discussion
                      with
                      > Chris Phoenix<BR>
                      > > >about uploads, and this gives you some idea
                      > of the<BR>
                      > > >complexity of the economics behind all
                      this.
                      > Chris was<BR>
                      > > >saying that "everyone" will be
                      able
                      > to upload, because, as<BR>
                      > > >technology advances, it gets cheaper, and
                      > eventually<BR>
                      > > >everyone will be able to afford it. And I
                      was
                      > saying, wait<BR>
                      > > >a minute, you're looking at only one half
                      of
                      > the equation,<BR>
                      > > >the buying side. Technology also affects
                      the
                      > earning side.<BR>
                      > > >If there are computers costing $1000 or
                      $2000
                      > that have<BR>
                      > > >strong AI -- and can therefore do any job a
                      > human can do --<BR>
                      > > >will there be any jobs? So to keep up with
                      > the machines,<BR>
                      > > >everyone has to get cybernetic implants, so
                      > their brains<BR>
                      > > >can keep up with Moore's Law. And how much
                      > does that<BR>
                      > > >technology cost? What percentage of the
                      > population will be<BR>
                      > > >able to afford it? So you see, we're not
                      just
                      > talking about<BR>
                      > > >how much technology costs to make and sell,
                      > but how people<BR>
                      > > >will earn the money to buy it -- how these
                      > two factors will<BR>
                      > > >fit together. That's pretty extremely hard
                      to
                      > predict with<BR>
                      > > <BR>
                      > === message truncated ===<BR>
                      > <BR>
                      > <BR>
                      >
                      __________________________________________________<BR>
                      > Do You Yahoo!?<BR>
                      > Yahoo! Finance - Get real-time stock quotes<BR>
                      > <a
                      >
                      href="http://finance.yahoo.com">http://finance.yahoo.com</a><BR>
                      > </tt>
                      >
                      > <br>
                      >
                      > <!-- |**|begin egp html banner|**| -->
                      >
                      > <table border=0 cellspacing=0 cellpadding=2>
                      > <tr bgcolor=#FFFFCC>
                      > <td align=center><font size="-1"
                      > color=#003399><b>Yahoo! Groups
                      Sponsor</b></font></td>
                      > </tr>
                      > <tr bgcolor=#FFFFFF>
                      > <td align=center width=470><table border=0
                      > cellpadding=0 cellspacing=0><tr><td
                      align=center><font
                      > face=arial size=-2>ADVERTISEMENT</font><br><a
                      >
                      href="http://rd.yahoo.com/M=228862.2128520.3581629.2204139/D=egroupweb
                      /S=1705890010:HM/A=1182692/R=0/*http://adfarm.mediaplex.com/ad/ck/990-
                      1736-1039-334
                      > " target="_top"><img border="0"
                      >
                      src="http://us.a1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/a/co/columbiahouse/d_300x250_03
                      1_4for49p_3.gif"
                      > height="250" width="300"></a></td></tr></table></td>
                      > </tr>
                      > </table>
                      >
                      > <!-- |**|end egp html banner|**| -->
                      >
                      >
                      > <br>
                      > <tt>
                      > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email
                      to:<BR>
                      > bafuture-unsubscribe@y...<BR>
                      > <BR>
                      > </tt>
                      > <br>
                      >
                      > <br>
                      > <tt>Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the <a
                      > href="http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/">Yahoo!
                      Terms
                      > of Service</a>.</tt>
                      > </br>
                      >
                      > </body></html>
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      ___________________________________________________________
                      > Do You Yahoo!? -- Une adresse @... gratuite et
                      en français !
                      > Yahoo! Mail : http://fr.mail.yahoo.com


                      To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                      bafuture-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com



                      Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo!
                      Terms of Service.

                      ___________________________________________________________
                      Do You Yahoo!? -- Une adresse @... gratuite et en français !
                      Yahoo! Mail : http://fr.mail.yahoo.com
                    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.