MIT Center for Bits and Atoms

Mr. FoRK fork_list at hotmail.com
Wed Apr 23 23:13:13 PDT 2003


Here we go...
http://cba.mit.edu/docs/02.06.exec/

----- Original Message -----
From: "Mr. FoRK" <fork_list at hotmail.com>
To: <fork at xent.com>
Sent: Wednesday, April 23, 2003 10:08 PM
Subject: MIT Center for Bits and Atoms


> (possibly old bits, but very cool for me)
>
> I just attended a presentation by Neil Gershenfeld who is Director of the
> MIT Center for Bits and Atoms - a very mind expanding talk.
> http://cba.mit.edu
> http://web.media.mit.edu/~neilg/
>
> I'm looking for some content to attach, but in lieu of that, I'll write
down
> what I remember.
> (here a smaller presentation similar to the one I saw...)
> http://cba.mit.edu/docs/02.07.CBA/02.07.CBA_files/frame.htm
>
> He mentioned 'Internet 0' - which was a counter to 'Internet 2' goal of
> more-faster internet. 'Internet 0' is a distributed data, algorithm,
routing
> thing... slower but fully ad-hoc. With a protocol stack that cuts out the
> message passing between layers & just does it direct (shrinking code size
> down to micro-embeddable size).
> http://cba.mit.edu/events/02.07.IP/agenda.html
>
>
> Some provocative statements:
>  Digital logic was a bad idea
>  Bugs will have programs
>  Engineers will not design complex systems
>  The future of personal computation is personal fabrication
>  The most advanced technologies are needed in the least-developed places
>
> My remembrences:
> Digital logic was a bad idea
>  - they did some 'atomic computing' using atoms & bonds of a molecule as
> logic gates. The molecule has resonance and energy states - use that as a
> 'machine' and program state changes via rf signals. Not quite
retrogressing
> to analog circuits - there are 'probability circuits' that carry
probabilty
> along. Don't digitize information early & process in the digital domain,
> keep it as 'probabilities' during computation & then digitize on output
> (like for sound transforms).
>
> Bugs will have programs
> Natural phenomena (like energy states of a molecule, shapes of molecules)
> don't exactly model a particular problem - but so what, use it anyway.
>
> Engineers will not design complex systems
> Things are getting too complex - system will evolve. You can build a
perfect
> system from imperfect parts if you build in self-correction along the way.
>
> The future of personal computation is personal fabrication
> The 'bit revolution' has been won - no need to keep having it. Move on to
> the boundary between bits and atoms. Just like mainframes in the early
days
> of IBM had high maintenence & limited market, machine tools today have the
> same. We need a revolution in fabrication.
>
> The most advanced technologies are needed in the least-developed places.
> There is a lot of need for one-off technical solutions to real world
> problems in areas without the supply chain or profitibility of mass
produced
> solutions.
>
>
>
>
>
>


More information about the FoRK mailing list