<p>I have a little inside knowledge, and from what i hear the internet is on the way out. its going to be replaced with more bio-oriented applications. So if youve put all your eggs in one basket, get out now before the new wave leaves you obsolete. keep this on the down low</p>
<p>Damn! When I was just getting the hang of it.</p>
<p>So the internet is being replaced with bio-oriented applications and hence cs majors should get out of the industry?!?!!? That doesn't make any sense user. I can see if you say that computer engineering is drifting towards nano technology, but programming and computer interface are not affected by this specific trend, so the cs field will still hinge on its typical fashion.</p>
<p>If you are a troll, this is a good joke, though.</p>
<p>Lmao!!!!!...w<em>t</em>f?</p>
<p>Yes, we will replace computers with bio-engineered chimps. Man, get a life.</p>
<p>
[Quote]
keep this on the down low
[/Quote]
</p>
<p>Yeah, by posting it on an internet forum?</p>
<p>The Dallas Mavericks owner (yes, basketball) came out and said something sort of along these lines. He is also an idiot.</p>
<p>wth is this nonsense</p>
<p>I was recruiting at MIT a few years ago and this woman student walked up to me, shook my hand and told me in a totally straight face that she plans to build the first computer made from entirely living tissue! Well, as a big fan of the original Terminator movie, I cracked a joke, but she was serious and didn't get it.</p>
<p>I went to the washroom and washed my hands as soon as politely possible! LOL</p>
<p>Though the OP's post was apparently meant a little tongue-in-cheek, two trends have been converging in development really quickly at a few centers: CMU, MIT, Berkeley, CalTech, Stanford, and some other places in Japan and Switzerland: "jacking" devices into the neural networks of folks who can essentially develop the ability to control them through thought, and robotics-cum-artificial intelligence. </p>
<p>So it's not completely bio yet by any stretch, but bio-electronic/digital interfaces are being developed, and may be that much more robust when bio-based computers are developed by ClassicRockerDad's friend at MIT; the internet could then literally become part of someone's body (assuming the immune system doesn't reject it, tee hee) and computer science as we know it would become largely irrelevant or perhaps better to say greatly changed.</p>
<p>The big problem that's been run into with rough prototypes so far has been that a huge percentage of the undergrad/grad researchers that have volunteered to have computers-on-a-chip plugged right into their nervous systems have failed academically (and in one case outright died). No one's really sure exactly what they were "tapping" into on the internet, but all of these volunteers were men and they were often going blind, growing very thin, and spending a lot of time in the bathroom whence one could hear moaning.</p>
<p>If you meet one of these volunteers, best go with what CRD did after meeting the geek-girl.</p>
<p>no more internet? oh the humanity!</p>
<p>if the internet is going out, then what's web 2.0 for?</p>
<p>ah, this makes me feel better about studying biomedical engineering</p>
<p>
[quote]
I have a little inside knowledge, and from what i hear the internet is on the way out. its going to be replaced with more bio-oriented applications. So if youve put all your eggs in one basket, get out now before the new wave leaves you obsolete. keep this on the down low
[/quote]
</p>
<p>You don't have large outside idiocy but you're telling me that the bio-tech engineering is on the way in? So It's not going to be kept with less cs-oriented theorem. Because if I put none of my chicken in every basket, I need to get in later after the old wave welcome me anew. Spread this up everywhere! </p>
<p>
[quote]
Though the OP's post was apparently meant a little tongue-in-cheek, two trends have been converging in development really quickly at a few centers: CMU, MIT, Berkeley, CalTech, Stanford, and some other places in Japan and Switzerland: "jacking" devices into the neural networks of folks who can essentially develop the ability to control them through thought, and robotics-cum-artificial intelligence.</p>
<p>So it's not completely bio yet by any stretch, but bio-electronic/digital interfaces are being developed, and may be that much more robust when bio-based computers are developed by ClassicRockerDad's friend at MIT; the internet could then literally become part of someone's body (assuming the immune system doesn't reject it, tee hee) and computer science as we know it would become largely irrelevant or perhaps better to say greatly changed.</p>
<p>The big problem that's been run into with rough prototypes so far has been that a huge percentage of the undergrad/grad researchers that have volunteered to have computers-on-a-chip plugged right into their nervous systems have failed academically (and in one case outright died). No one's really sure exactly what they were "tapping" into on the internet, but all of these volunteers were men and they were often going blind, growing very thin, and spending a lot of time in the bathroom whence one could hear moaning.</p>
<p>If you meet one of these volunteers, best go with what CRD did after meeting the geek-girl.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>:) smart young man</p>
<p>I always said that the Interweb is overhyped!</p>
<p>Rest assure gentlemen, we are merely witnessing the beginning of the internet revolution.</p>
<p>The OP clearly doesn't know the definition of computer science.</p>
<p>What he's saying is that computer engineering will die out in the next few years. He may even be right. But what is currently called "computer science" would be just as necessary if every computer in the world were built out of organic components. It'd be virtually impossible to develop a fully functional computer that wouldn't be programmed in a way similar to the way existing computers are programmed (look up the Church-Turing thesis if you want more details). More importantly, any type of computing system would require experienced programmers to attack problems efficiently. In the USA Computing Olympiad, programmers have to write programs that would solve a problem millions of times faster than a brute-force approach. That takes use of techniques and approaches to problems that are extremely elegant and sophisticated, and that is the focus of much study in computer science today.</p>
<p>Mind, certain components of computers today are far faster than chemical systems could ever match. Any computer that beat out existing technology would have to use a mix of biological and electronic processors.</p>
<p>the 420 in his name explains it all...</p>
<p>Problems with this theory: </p>
<ol>
<li><p>Neurons are way, way slower than electronic circuits. Neurons are used in the natural world because they react well to noisy data and are very versatile, but for certain tasks like calculating huge sets of numbers or rendering a video game, artificial neuron networks aren't a great option. </p></li>
<li><p>Neural Networks are totally inefficient. Even to solve simple problems, ten of thousands of neurons are required, each performing a relatively complex operation. </p></li>
<li><p>Even if neural network understanding is perfected, it may very well prove more efficient to just run the network as a program on a conventional computer.</p></li>
</ol>
<p>oh man, check his other posts.</p>
<p>they are full of lulz</p>