Reminded That I Live in the Future

It really was like the first 7 chapters of a 10 chapter book I already own, but made slightly more long winded. :) And it was a Dutch translation of a French book, not sure if it was ever translated to English.

It's this one:

https://www.abebooks.co.uk/Encyclope...20204866173/bd

Apparently it should be in two parts. Hmmm next time I'm at the shop I'll check if it indeed has the "1" on it. I wonder what's in part two, given they covered almost everything in part 1 already. They didn't have any part 2 in the shop though.

I just learned that I can adjust my home’s thermostat using my phone.
We have a utility-provided thermostat that allows them to disable our air conditioner for brief periods of peak load. Someone at the power company figured out that they could link it to the phone app that reports usage and billing. It turns out that the remote control features are more extensive than just on/off.

Of course, anything that can be controlled via the Internet can be controlled from the far reaches of the planet or some hacker’s basement, so I worry a little about security.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Extravoice

Of course, anything that can be controlled via the Internet can be controlled from the far reaches of the planet or some hacker’s basement, so I worry a little about security.

---

And when the network goes down, so does your house.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Noclevername

And when the network goes down, so does your house.

---

I suspect that only remote control of the thermostat is lost in the event of a network outage. If it doesn’t continue local operation, it would be a really bad design.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Extravoice

I suspect that only remote control of the thermostat is lost in the event of a network outage. If it doesn’t continue local operation, it would be a really bad design.

---

That's certainly how ours works. The boiler, heating and hot water programs continue as normal when the internet's down, and the local adjustment from the wifi control in the hallway continues to work, if I don't want to walk as far as the hard-wired control in the utility room.
But I can turn the heating in the house from "frost prevention" back to "inhabited" settings while I'm standing in the boarding queue at a foreign airport, and then start the water heating while I'm waiting at the baggage claim in my local terminal (assuming such things ever happen in my life again).
Oh, and there's a proximity setting which turns everything to "frost prevention" as soon as my phone gets more than some specified distance from the house. I feel my wife might object to that, though, if the heating shut down every time I went hillwalking.

Grant Hutchison

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Extravoice

I suspect that only remote control of the thermostat is lost in the event of a network outage. If it doesn’t continue local operation, it would be a really bad design.

---

That's how ours works too (we have a Honeywell thermostat). If the Internet or our wifi go down, local operation still works just fine. It uses a Honeywell app that you can load on your phone.

I'm not a particular fan of smart devices (because of the security concerns), but it is the one that came with our new furnace/AC. And it is otherwise a nice thermostat and the app is actually kind of cool (no pun intended).

Our house is just two years old. We can connect the HVAC, garage doors, generator, fridge, and who knows what else to the network. I have no intention of doing any of them.

I don’t know how this thermostat talks to the power utility. It doesn’t rely on WiFi, so either it connects directly to the cellular system, via a dedicated radio network, or through the power line.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Trebuchet

Our house is just two years old. We can connect the HVAC, garage doors, generator, fridge, and who knows what else to the network. I have no intention of doing any of them.

---

I always wonder how long that would work anyway. Phone apps have to be updated now and then to keep up with phone OS updates. Big established companies are more likely stay in business to do that, but how long will they bother? I’ve seen stories about smart speakers losing support after only five years from one major company, although the hardware still works fine. Big appliances can easily last twenty years or more. I pulled out an early 2000s PDA and got it working a bit just to try it again. It can only connect on an unencrypted wi-fi connection since it only supports an early, easily broken encryption standard no longer supported by modern routers. At that, I’m using an older router, how long before the old, slow wi-fi standard used by the PDA is no longer supported? The PDA’s browser is virtually useless since it can’t handle modern web pages. So that’s an example of the sort of things appliances might be faced with in future years.

Then there are the appliances that depend on the company maintaining a site for the appliance to connect to. What happens when that goes away? Google bought Nest and has already switched over to a different scheme that caused owners to lose features.

I wouldn’t buy any appliance and count on the wifi features lasting more than a few years.

On a related note, I had a second-generation Kindle that only connected to Amazon via 3G cellular. I think 3G is no longer supported by any carrier.

I learned programming in VB6. That one has left the building in recent years, but I still do some job related programming in Arduino (C++), batch files and VBA. In the spirit of hobby self-improvement I wanted to do some programming in Commodore 64 basic though. Make some music software for its sound chip. The thing is, I sold all my C64 stuff a few years ago. Yes, just before the prices went up. And now they're overpriced and I know from my days just how unreliable those power supplies, floppy drives and also the main unit can be with the age they've got now. So no way I'm going to spend more than pocket change on one of those.

However, I happen to live in the future. A future where there's a decent emulator for everything. So I'm now running C64 basic right here on my W10 laptop, with the same interface, speed (or lack thereof), very similar sound and even fake CRT scanlines. So I can have a go at programming the dinosaur without having to own one.

And, given that we are living in the future, if I would ever like to run my code on real hardware I could still buy an old one, or an FPGA based reissue. For those not familiar: FPGA is futuristic technology that is rapidly taking over a lot of electronics. Basically, it's a chip in which you can choose the way the transistors are connected through code. That way, you can program it to be any digital chip you want on the hardware level. So you can program an FPGA to the exact digital circuit of, let's say, a Sega Megadrive game computer. It's not emulating a Megadrive, it de facto IS a Megadrive circuit and will behave EXACTLY like the real deal, including all hardware bugs and tricks. Now I can't really use that for my C64 music software, as the original C64's sound chip is largely analog and FPGA can't do that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nicolas

I learned programming in VB6. That one has left the building in recent years, but I still do some job related programming in Arduino (C++), batch files and VBA. In the spirit of hobby self-improvement I wanted to do some programming in Commodore 64 basic though. Make some music software for its sound chip. The thing is, I sold all my C64 stuff a few years ago. Yes, just before the prices went up. And now they're overpriced and I know from my days just how unreliable those power supplies, floppy drives and also the main unit can be with the age they've got now. So no way I'm going to spend more than pocket change on one of those.

However, I happen to live in the future. A future where there's a decent emulator for everything. So I'm now running C64 basic right here on my W10 laptop, with the same interface, speed (or lack thereof), very similar sound and even fake CRT scanlines. So I can have a go at programming the dinosaur without having to own one.

And, given that we are living in the future, if I would ever like to run my code on real hardware I could still buy an old one, or an FPGA based reissue. For those not familiar: FPGA is futuristic technology that is rapidly taking over a lot of electronics. Basically, it's a chip in which you can choose the way the transistors are connected through code. That way, you can program it to be any digital chip you want on the hardware level. So you can program an FPGA to the exact digital circuit of, let's say, a Sega Megadrive game computer. It's not emulating a Megadrive, it de facto IS a Megadrive circuit and will behave EXACTLY like the real deal, including all hardware bugs and tricks. Now I can't really use that for my C64 music software, as the original C64's sound chip is largely analog and FPGA can't do that.

---

Thanks for that, I found it interesting as I am currently using Arduino plus some hardware to do a project that flashes lights. I shall have to look up FPGA to understand how the chip reconfigures itself, rather than emulating. At first hearing it sounds like magic!

Basically you get an array of logical blocks which can be connected by closing switches between them. And as those switches are configurable by software, you can create any logic circuit you want with them. Well, up to a certain size.

Yes, I read the WP article and it made sense of electronic innovations that I had kept up with. There is a divide , if I may simplify, between “thinking like a transistor” and “thinking like a programmer”. My training included both but was in the past. Living in the future needs us to get past future shock, and the effects of scale as well as innovation. At a small scale, it is still amazing what a bunch of transistors can do, at less cost than the packaging they come in, but fewer people get to understand, and the scale of software in corporations and government is mind boggling. This is acute for me having worked with both types of specialists, hardware and sorftware, and seen the time go by . Oh how the time goes by, failures and bugs, and less distributed knowledge of how to intervene.

The loss of knowledge about the hardware side of things when programming is one of the reasons I'm programming in C64 basic now. The only thing closer to programming on the hardware is assembler language, which I'll happily pass on for the time being. But at least with C64 basic there are no API's or anything between you and the hardware; you can peek an poke directly into memory locations that are "right on top of" hardware functionality. Gives some insight about what's going on underneath the surface when programming in more modern environments.

I must add that programming in C64 basic is not really a fun experience for the time being, but I'm learning a lot.

I am sure that similar experiments are being made around the world but this is one that was in todays news and is claimed to be a world first. Thought control of computer actions is certainly something that makes me me think that I live in the future.


https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-10-...uters/12825048

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nicolas

The loss of knowledge about the hardware side of things when programming is one of the reasons I'm programming in C64 basic now. The only thing closer to programming on the hardware is assembler language, which I'll happily pass on for the time being. But at least with C64 basic there are no API's or anything between you and the hardware; you can peek an poke directly into memory locations that are "right on top of" hardware functionality. Gives some insight about what's going on underneath the surface when programming in more modern environments.

I must add that programming in C64 basic is not really a fun experience for the time being, but I'm learning a lot.

---

I admire your initiative! When I was working on Concorde , my friend was using assembler language to control the Rolls-Royce engines. In those days the compactness of assembler was a critical factor which has been overcome by a surfeit of memory in today’s systems ! At that time I was fascinated by the impressive analog computer, each of whose amplifiers was valve based, and several of which I tripped out making rookie mistakes. That kind of analog computer was rapidly overtaken by emulation in serial machines but I still remember the fascination of hooking two amplifiers together as integrators and watching a perfect sinewave appear on the oscilloscope.
A lot of the supersonic aerodynamics were developed using assembler and analog computing. Long before the Commodore 64 was born! When technology provides meta solutions, there is always some loss, but hopefully a net gain.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nicolas

Basically you get an array of logical blocks which can be connected by closing switches between them. And as those switches are configurable by software, you can create any logic circuit you want with them. Well, up to a certain size.

---

That’s a pretty good first approximation. They have a lot of useful applications in industry. Fast turn around design, and low unit cost relative to “application-specific integrated circuits” if your production rates are low.

I’ve been working with FPGAs since their predecessor “programmable logic devices” appeared on the scene in the late 1980s. Today’s devices range from relatively simple arrays of gates to devices with embedded processors, high-speed data links, RF circuits, etc.
There is also a pretty robust market of relatively inexpensive hobbyist boards and “evaluation cards” from the main FPGA manufacturers (Xilinx, and Intel(formerly Altera))as well as third parties.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ozduck

Thought control of computer actions is certainly something that makes me me think that I live in the future.

---

I've been seeing such reports since I was a child.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Extravoice

I don’t know how this thermostat talks to the power utility. It doesn’t rely on WiFi, so either it connects directly to the cellular system, via a dedicated radio network, or through the power line.

---

I wondered the same thing about the Snapshot Device that my insurance company had me plug into my vehicles diagnostic port. I decided it must use cellular communications, but I really don't know.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ozduck

I am sure that similar experiments are being made around the world but this is one that was in todays news and is claimed to be a world first. Thought control of computer actions is certainly something that makes me me think that I live in the future.


https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-10-...uters/12825048

---

I only need one level of -fake!- thought control, and all it would require would be some fancy software running on the webcam: a simple eye tracker that puts the focus on whichever window I stare at when I press keyboard keys so that it will perform the action in the window I think I'm working in.

Our Zoom and other online meet & greets. This year, especially the holidays, we've quickly come to rely on real-time broadband video chats to keep in contact and share time with loved ones. Easy to take for granted that we can reliably contact even the elderly quasi-technophobes in our extended family. Even a few years ago that would have been untenable.

Silicon Valley and "big tech" certainly have their flaws, but they have delivered on the promise of mass communication in this way.

The Headline says it all:
A robot dog inspected the wreckage of a Starship rocket prototype

https://www.businessinsider.com/spac...-rocket-2021-3

Ha! That’s a good one. I’m used to them now, but those headless robot dogs sit in the middle of the uncanny valley and looked very strange to me the first few times I saw videos of them. It would be interesting to see one in real life.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Van Rijn

Ha! That’s a good one. I’m used to them now, but those headless robot dogs sit in the middle of the uncanny valley and looked very strange to me the first few times I saw videos of them. It would be interesting to see one in real life.

---

To me, those robots are inescapably chained at the dead center of the Uncanny Valley. Just as actual dogs look innately appealing to humans who domesticated and bred them specifically to be so, the robots do exactly the opposite to me. They are the anti-dogs, a perversion of all that is right and good.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Noclevername

To me, those robots are inescapably chained at the dead center of the Uncanny Valley. Just as actual dogs look innately appealing to humans who domesticated and bred them specifically to be so, the robots do exactly the opposite to me. They are the anti-dogs, a perversion of all that is right and good.

---

I feel the same way about Zoom chats.

Grant Hutchison

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Noclevername

To me, those robots are inescapably chained at the dead center yof the Uncanny Valley. Just as actual dogs look innately appealing to humans who domesticated and bred them specifically to be so, the robots do exactly the opposite to me. They are the anti-dogs, a perversion of all that is right and good.

---

Eh, just add an articulated head, fur, and have it bark and say, “Hello, my name is Rags,” and nobody could tell the difference between one and other talking dogs.

I’d pay good money to see a robot cat cleaning up that mess.
(Hilarity ensues.)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grant hutchison

I feel the same way about Zoom chats.

Grant Hutchison

---

As a doctor, how about seeing patients that way? We've done that multiple times now.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Trebuchet

As a doctor, how about seeing patients that way? We've done that multiple times now.

---

Never had occasion to do that, in my Former Existence. Plenty of phone consultations, though. And lots of committee meetings using video conferencing.
For me, video calls are fine for basic maintenance contact, hopeless for anything else. The more empathy you need, the more "uncanny" it becomes. The slight delay in response, the inability to see what people are doing with their hands and feet, the difficulty in interpreting the direction of their gaze ... so much of the non-verbal communication is distorted or blocked, social contact by that medium is just excruciating for me. I suspect any sort of clinical consultation involving more than a greeting and the communication of some routine information would be the same--and that's the sort of thing that can be done just fine by email or a phone call.

So with reference to Zoom chats, I find myself echoing Isidor Rabi's comment about the muon: "Who ordered that?" They don't seem to add much to my life, and they introduce so many new complications that they're just annoying. And, honestly, my carbon footprint could do without a simmering server farm somewhere pumping out heat just so that I can have an unpleasant experience I'd rather avoid.

Grant Hutchison