Category Archives: Futurism

In Brief SpaceX made history by successfully relaunching and re-landing a used Falcon 9 rocket booster for the first time today. SpaceX's orbital rocket system is already the most affordable in the world, but reusability could save companies more than $18 million per launch.

SpaceX has long said it would like to make its entire Falcon 9 rocket reusable.Today, Elon Musks company madehistory by successfully relaunching and re-landing a used Falcon 9 rocket booster for the first time.The SES-10 mission marks a historic milestone on the road to full and rapid reusability as the worlds first re-flight of an orbital class rocket. Falcon 9s first stage for the SES-10 mission previously supported the successful CRS-8 mission in April 2016.

In an interview after the launch, Musk called it a huge revolution in spaceflight.

The recycled rocket carrieda satellite into orbit for SES, a Luxembourg-basedtelecommunications company, which will provide internet and television service for Central and South America.

In order for commercial space travel to be viable, companies like SpaceX have to make it more affordable. Currently, the Falcon 9 costs about$62 million. However, Gwynne Shotwell, SpaceXs COO, says reusing a rocket booster could result in a30 percent discountper launch, saving companies more than $18 million.

This is an amazing day for space as a whole, said Musk post-landing, for the space industry it means you can fly and re-fly an orbital class booster, the most expensive part of the rocket.

This is potentially revolutionary, John Logsdon, a space policy expert and historian at George Washington Universitys Space Policy Institute, told Business Insider. Reusability has been the Holy Grail in access to space for a long, long time.

See the original post:
SpaceX's Historic Launch Proves Recycled Rockets Are the Future of Space Exploration - Futurism

In BriefThe Analemma is a futuristic concept for the world's tallestskyscraper, which would hang from an orbiting asteroid, designed byClouds Architecture Office. While its design is impressive, theAnalemma may prove to be impractical, and (definitely) fatal. A Literal Skyscraper

To go where no man has gone before is a motto that resonates at the heart of manyfuturists and Trekkies (or Trekkers). The sentimentcertainly seems to be the idea behind a design for an out-of-this-world building concept that brings out the literal meaning of skyscraper.

From the minds atClouds Architecture Office, the Analemma Tower is designed to be the future of structural form. Suspended from an orbiting asteroid via super-strong cables, the Analemma rises or falls down, depending on your perspective more than 32,000 meters (104,987 feet) high.

Analemma inverts the traditional diagram of an earth-based foundation, instead depending on a space-based supporting foundation from which the tower is suspended, according to Clouds Architecture. This system, they say, is referred to as the Universal Orbital Support System (UOSS).

The building would be powered by space-based solar panels and be divided into nine sections. The top three levels, closer to its asteroid-base, are the funerary, reliquary, and worship sections. The very bottom, the part the scrapes the Earths sky, is an entertainment area where guests and residents can shop and dine. Above that is a business and commercial section, while a huge section of the tower is residential.

The Analemma would follow a geosynchronous orbit matches Earths sidereal rotation period of one day, according to Clouds Architecture. The towers position in the sky traces out a path in a figure-8 form, returning the tower to exactly the same position in the sky each day.

Theres just one problem: You would absolutely die on this skyscraper. Also, we arent good enough at physics to make this work.okay, so two problems.

An orbiting building thatpeople can parachute from seems like a good idea, and it isuntil it isnt. Not only would its absurd location demand incredibly high prices prices that are unprecedented in the history of real estate the very concept itself raises a number of concerns.

First, theres no air, so youd probably asphyxiate. Second, its not really clear how gravity would work on this. Theoretically, the asteroid would be big enough to keep you tethered to the rock (and inside the skyscraper), but given that the skyscraper is so close to Earth, its not looking good.

Never mind the absurd precisionneeded to get an asteroid to follow an artificial orbit this close to our own planet, what about making sure that the asteroid survives and doesnt hit other space objects? Space debris, anyone?

Theres just too much uncertainty (and, you know, physics) that keeps the Analemma from being a good idea for future citiesand future worlds. Fortunately! Clouds Architecture isnt the only one with ideas for whatthe cities of the future will look like. There are a number of viable options, such as cities floating on water and concepts for colonies on Mars. Then theres also plans for colonies on the Moon, including the ESAs Moon Village.As for skyscraper ideas, Dubais 3D-printed buildingsare a bitmore probable than the Analemma.

In any case, its fun to imagine how the future will look.While we may not put our money on the the Analemma Tower, it may well inspire some ideas that are worth investing in.

Read the original post:
Here's How Long You'd Survive on a Skyscraper That Hangs Off an Asteroid - Futurism

In Brief A top U.S. official believes we must prepare to fight space battles now that technology has allowed humanity to explore the far reaches of space. Deflector Shields Up

Whenever you hear about space battles, your mind might go straight toStar Wars, Star Trek, orBattlestar Galactica,where such intergalactic battlesare merely works of science fiction.Butaccording to a top-ranking U.S. military officer, it may behoove the United States to ready itself forout-of-this-world warfare.

Speaking at a conference by the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) in Washington, D.C., Navy Vice Adm. Charles A. Richard argued for the necessity of a preparation without provocation strategy that the U.S. must adopt to keep space a safe place, and to protect American assetsthat have taken up residence there. His full talk can be viewed here.

Just as nuclear assets deter aggression by convincing potential adversaries theres just no benefit to the attack, we have to maintain a space posture that communicates the same strategic message,said Vice Adm. Richard, who happens to be the deputy commander of the U.S. Strategic Command (USSTRATCOM).

Vice Adm. Richard isnt being facetious; on the contrary, hes serious about ensuring the U.S. is able to fight space battles as ameasure for keeping peace beyond our planet. I submit [that] the best way to prevent war is to be prepared for war, and were going to make sure that everyone knows were going to be prepared to fight and win wars in all domains, to include space, he said.

Vice Adm. Richard went on to suggest that space is no longer the benign environment it once was.

As todays technological advances make us capable of extending our reach into worlds beyond ours, defense against what we may find there becomes even more necessary. Our goal ultimately is to promote secure access to space so it can be explored for generations to come, Richardexplained. And with great technology comes an even greater responsibility as we know from all those superhero movies.

See more here:
Top U.S. Military Official Says We Need to Prepare for Space Battles - Futurism

Chlorpyrifos

On Wednesday, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) doubled-back on its course to ban achemical used in pesticides called chlorpyrifos. The moveto reverse its earlierdecisionwhich was made during the Obama administration is a sign of changein the agencys approach to toxic chemicals under the newEPA head, Scott Pruitt.

Chlorpyrifos, previously found in bug spray,is known to attack the nervous system of not just insects, but humans too causing an array of symptoms like dizziness, vomiting, and diarrhea. Its been banned from household use for more than a decade, but its still used by farmers on citrus trees, strawberries, broccoli, and cauliflower. The residue may be found on produce in supermarkets.

Based on the harm that this pesticide causes, the EPA cannot, consistent with the law, allow it in our food, said Patti Goldman, a lawyer with the environmental advocacy group Earthjustice, citing a number of studies that have demonstrated theharmful effects ofthe pesticide in humans.

Wednesdays decision was the EPAs response to a federal judges order for a final decision on the matter. That order had been prompted by petitions from environmental groups, including Earthjustice, to ban chlorpyrifos. The EPA previously proposed a ban on chlorpyrifos back in 2015.

The law against pesticides doesnt mince words: it strictly prohibits chemicals that cannot demonstrate a reasonable certainty that no harm will result to consumersor anyone else exposed to these pesticides. Still, as far the fate of chlorpyrifos is still subject to debate despite evidence pointing to its health dangers.

Some of that evidenceagainst chlorpyrifos came from a study by researchers atColumbia Universitywho measured the levels of this chemical present in theumbilical cords of newborn babies. The study was part of a series done on mothers and their babies who were exposed to several chemicals and showed that chlorpyrifos was more dangerous than previously thought.

Jim Jones, a former assistant administrator of the EPA whowas in-charge of pesticide regulation, admitted that the EPA struggled with translating these findings into a prediction of risks for chlorpyrifos residues on food. But once we cracked that nut, and you had the risk evaluated and in front of you, it became, in my view, a very straightforward decision, with not a lot of ambiguity in terms of what you would do, he told NPR. I just dont know what basis they would have to deny the petition [to ban chlorpyrifos], given the vast scientific record that the EPAs got right now.

One thing is clear: issues like this prove that politics and science are becoming more and more intertwined. It seems that would be the natural progression of things,as there are a number of issues vaccines, stem cells, artificial intelligence (AI) development, climate change, and even nuclear weapons to name a few that require policies backed by sound and solid, evidence-based science.

Read this article:
The EPA Approves the Continued Use of a Harmful Chemical in Pesticides - Futurism

Jamiroquais eighth album straddles two traditional scenarios: a dystopian, digital future and booze-soaked sunny days spent spying on sophisticated ladies. Set to the sounds of French touch, disco funk, Tron movie scores and Bond-style strings, there are agitated prophecies such as on synth onslaught Automaton and libidinous love songs: he worships at the feet of a cosmopolitan female on Summer Girl, while Hot Property is about a woman whose mind is so sharp that she just killed a man.

While his energies might have waned (his voice on the chemically addled Dr Buzz is particularly fried), the spooky groove of We Can Do It and the chintzy jazz-lite of Vitamin revive the classic traits of his early career. Despite some naff phrases, dodgy song titles and a lot of robotic trickery, during times of grim austerity, the return of Jay Kays elite, escapist lifestyle full of fast cars, fast girls and big bulldozing basslines offers a flash of ostentatious fun.

Read more:
Jamiroquai: Automaton review escapist futurism and libidinous ... - The Guardian

In Brief A new algorithm has shown in simulations that traffic jams can be considerably reduced even if just 10 percent of cars on the road follow its guidelines. Traffic Troubles

Despite differences in individual politicsand any number of other preferences, onething many people agree on is how much they loathe getting stuck in traffic. Those that do share the sentiment withElon Musk, whose desire to find a better mode of public transportlead to the birth of Hyperloop. Although, another solution may just be to wait thirty years for autonomous vehiclesto take the main stage.

Estimates sayAmericans spent a collective 6.9 billion hours stuck in traffic in 2014. Which rounds to 42 hours per average citizen,per year, spent in traffic thats almost two days of sitting in your vehicle. Moreover, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) reports that there were over 6 million traffic accidents in 2015. To make matters worse, the number of accidents per year has only been going up, with a 5% increase since 2006. The cost for traffic-related incidents runs up to $2200 billion per year in developed countries worldwide. Although there is promise in new AI research that might just make traffic problems a thing of the past.

Computer scientists at Nanyang Technological University in Singapore are working on an algorithm that can reduce traffic jams through intelligent routing. The program runs with the breakdown assumption, which is idea that at some point within a large traffic density, something (such as an accident)willprobably happen. The programs task is to minimize the probability of such a traffic breakdown.

After working their algorithm in simulations, and further analysis with BMW, the team is confident that their algorithm can positively improve traffic even if just 10percent of the cars in a network are driving according to their optimizations.

With similar algorithms improving in the years to come, we may live to see a day whentraffic accidents are a thing of the past. Our predecessors may one day look at how we drive, and at car safety, the way we gawk in horror at how things were almost a century ago.

Visit link:
A New Intelligent Routing Algorithm for Cars Could Dramatically Improve Traffic Flow - Futurism

Today, delegates from most of the United Nations member states are gathering in New York to negotiate a nuclear weapons ban.More than 2,500 scientists from 70 countries have signed an open letter in support of the nuclear disarmament negotiations. If successful, their words could urge the UN to stigmatize nuclear weapons like biological and chemical weapons, with the ultimate goal being to create a world free of these weapons of mass destruction.

Neuroscience professor and Nobel Laureate, Edvard Moser, believes nuclear weapons represent one of the biggest threats to our civilization:

Other notable scientists in support of the ban are not lacking. The list includes 28 Nobel Laureatessuch as Peter Ware Higgsand Leon N. Cooper;former U.S. Secretary of Defense, William J. Perry; and CERN physicists, such as Jack Steinberger. The letter will be deliveredin the UN General Assembly Hall to Her Excellency Ms. Elayne Whyte Gmez from Costa Rica, who will preside over the negotiations.

The letter, presented by the Future of Life Institute, acknowledges that scientists may have beenthe ones who invented nuclear weapons, but that it is up to the people living today to dictate how this technology should be usedor rather, should never be used. For example, nuclear-induced winter could trigger a global mini ice age, which could lead toa complete collapse of the global food system and kill most of the people on Earth.

And thats just one potential outcome.

Ultimately, such a resultwould occur even if the nuclear war involved only a small fraction of the roughly 14,000 nuclear weapons that todays nuclear powers control.

In total, nine countries (that we know of) possess nuclear weapons: The U.S., Russia, the U.K., France, China, Israel, India, North Korea, and Pakistan. The first five are the only countries allowed to have these weapons, according to the 1970 Non-Proliferation Treaty, an agreement that nations signed saying they would not release nuclear weapons, or in any way help othersacquire or build them. Furthermore, thecountries promised, to move toward a gradual reduction of their arsenals of nuclear weapons with the ultimate goal of complete nuclear disarmament.

The latter four nations (Israel, India, North Korea, and Pakistan) havent yet signed the treaty.

Unfortunately, the United States and a number of other nations that actually have nuclear weapons boycotted the talks, saying that the time was not right and that a ban would be ineffective.Ambassador Nikki R. Haley, from the United States, told reporters outside the General Assembly that the ideals are currently just a utopian dream: There is nothing I want more for my family than a world with no nuclear weapons, but we have to be realistic. Is there anyone who thinks that North Korea would ban nuclear weapons?

Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said that the state supported nuclear talks, in general, We are ready to discuss the possible further gradual reduction of nuclear capabilities. However, he said that Russia was not in support of talks of this severity or gravity. We are ready to discuss this issue proceeding from the growing urgency of making this process multilateral, he noted, adding the criticism that the discussion was too far-reaching: Efforts to coerce nuclear powers to abandon nuclear weapons have intensified significantly recently. It is absolutely clear that the time has not yet come for that,

That said, the talksare supported by 120 nations.

In 1939,just after World War II broke out, physicist Albert Einstein and his colleague Leo Szilard described a bomb of unprecedented power that could be made using nuclear fission. The two men urged the U.S. government to race to build this so-called atomic bomb before Germany could.

Six years later, President Harry S. Truman would order atomic bombs to be dropped on the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Just five years after that, 54 percent of the original population had died from the two explosions. Those who survived had to deal with mental and physical trauma including burns, disfiguration, severe scar formations, blood abnormalities, sterility, leukemia, birth defects in children, cataracts, and cancer.

Einstein would later regret his involvementin the creation of the bomb, saying: had I known that the Germans would not succeed in producing an atomic bomb, I would have never lifted a finger.

But it was too late for Einstein. And our nuclear history didnt end with him. Today, as political tensions rise, the scientists who have signed in support of the ban believe a nuclear war is more likely than one may expect:

There is a steady stream of accidents and false alarms that could trigger all-out war, and relying on never-ending luck is not a sustainable strategy. Many nuclear powers have larger nuclear arsenals than needed for deterrence, yet prioritize making them more lethal over reducing them and the risk that they get used.

Former U.S. Secretary of Defense William J. Perry even noted, the probability of a nuclear calamity is higher today, I believe, that it was during the cold war.

It is evident that the scientific community, as a whole, feels strongly about the issue at hand, and believes the issue deserves a certain level of urgency. Negotiations are sure to be heated, but, as Norwegian neuroscience professor May-Britt Moser, a 2014 Nobel Laureate in Physiology/Medicine, says,In a world with increased aggression and decreasing diplomacy the availability nuclear weapons is more dangerous than ever. Politicians are urged to ban nuclear weapons. The world today and future generations depend on that decision.

See the rest here:
The UN Is Currently Meeting To Negotiate A Complete, Global Ban on Nuclear Weapons - Futurism

In BriefIn a recent interview, an analyst at Morgan Stanley discussedthe future impact of Tesla's Autopilot system on the auto industry.He predicts the company will affect everything from the technologyand economics of vehicles to the safety of driving in general. The Road to aDriverless Future

A car that could drive itself used to be solely the stuff of science fiction. Now, its become a reality thanks to companies like Tesla.

Elon Musks companyis continuously improvingits autonomous driving system,Autopilot, which it describes as an increasingly capable suite of safety and convenience features that make personal transportation safer and more enjoyable.

Since September 2014, when it was first added to every Tesla vehicle, Autopilots hardware and software have been inching closer and closer to Level 5 autonomy,a level that requires zero interaction from a human driver. The systems features, whichnow include Autosteer, Traffic-Aware Cruise Control, Auto Lane Change, Autopark, and Summon (that one lets you call your Tesla car via a mobile app), are products of Teslas Autopilot software learning from the behavior of human drivers.

The company rolled out enhanced Autopilot features earlier this year, and thehighly anticipated 8.1 software update for its hardware 2 platform is expected to arrived this week. Clearly, Teslas Autopilot is increasingly becoming a more advanced, more capable, and safer alternative to human drivers. So what does that mean for the rest of the auto industry?

In a recent interview onCNBCs Power Lunch,Adam Jonas, the resident Tesla analyst from Morgan Stanley, explained just how much of an impact the autonomous cars of Tesla will have in the near future. One point he made was thatTeslas autonomous cars will lead to a faster rate of technological obsolescence for the other vehicles available today.

Our work on used car value is focused on the technological obsolescence of the 250 million cars on US roads today $2 trillion worth of cars. Teslas cars can get better because they can learn, Jonas said. They put in that equipment so that the vehicle five years from now is much more superhuman and much better than the one that is just learning and watching right now. Our used car thesis is that in a five-year period, we are running scenarios of used car value being off by as much as 50 percent.

Tesla is also changing the economics of electric cars, or, as Jonas put it, the economics of electrification. He explained that, while the electric car market in the United States still has plenty of room for expansion, ridesharing will be a game changer for the tech.

We think the electric cars for private use really are for human driving pleasure for wealthier individuals. Thats why its so important that in the shared model where youre not driving 10,000 miles a year, but 50,000 or 100,000 miles in a fleet operation, then the economics of electrification you can get that payback period under three years, Jonas said. Thats the game changer shared.

Vehicle safety is also a factor, as car accidents in the U.S. surged to 40,000 in 2016. It seems like the only thing progressing faster than the pace of machine learning is the pace human unlearning, Jonas said. Were getting dumber faster than the cars are getting smarter. Teslas quickly advancing self-driving car tech could be the perfect way to stop that trend from leading toany more deaths on the road.

Read more here:
Expert Says Tesla Will Make All Other Cars Obsolete - Futurism

In case you missed it, Elon Musk is rather concerned about the fate of humanity, given the extreme advancements being made in artificial intelligence (AI). Ultimately, he fears that ourAI will, one day, overtake us. When this happens, he claims that humans will likely become second class citizens (or slaves, or something even worse).

Now, reports have surfaced which assert that he is backing a brain-computer interface venture that was founded to allow humans to keep up with the advancements made in machines. The interface is intended to work by augmenting that which makes us human: our brains.

The find comes fromThe Wall Street Journal.According to them, the company which is called Neuralink is still in the earliest stages of development. To that end, it has no public presence at all.

What we do know is that its ultimate goal is to create a device (or possibly a series of devices) that can be implanted in the human brain. These will serve a multitude of purposes the final end being to help humans merge with our software and keep pace with artificial intelligences so we dont get left in the dust.

Initially, these enhancements will likely assist in smaller ways, such as helping us improve our memories by creating additional, removable storage components.

Notably, this is not the first that we have heard of Musk working on such a device. Previously, he mentioned a device called the neural lace. He explained how he imagined it would work at the 2016 Code Conference, which you can see below:

Unsurprisingly, Musk isnt the only one worried about AI. In a video posted byBig Think, Michael Vassar, thechief science officer of MetaMed Research,stated that AI will likely kill us all (literally): If greater-than-human artificial general intelligence is invented without due caution, it is all but certain that the human species will be extinct in very short order. Essentially, he is warning that an unchecked AI could eradicate humanity in the future.

Similarly, Stephen Hawking famously stated that AI is one of the biggest threats to humanity: The development of artificial intelligence could spell the end of the human race. It would take off on its own and redesign itself at an ever-increasing rate. Humans, who are limited by slow biological evolution, couldnt compete, and would be superseded.

To that end, Musk isnt the only person working to ensure that humanity can keep up with AI.Braintree founder Bryan Johnson is investing $100 millionto make a neuroprosthesis to unlock the power of the human brain and, ultimately, make our neural code programmable.

Johnson outlinesthe purpose of his work, stating that its all about co-evolution:

Our connection with our new creations of intelligence is limited by screens, keyboards, gestural interfaces, and voice commands constrained input/output modalities. We have very little access to our own brains, limiting our ability to co-evolve with silicon-based machines in powerful ways.

He is working to change this and ensure that we have a seamless interface with our technologies (and our AI).

Johnson is clear that his company, Kernel, will begin by researching the brain and figuring out exactlyhow it works. This research, Johnson states, is the first step in helping humans achieve permanent equality with machines.

Of course, such technologies will do a lot more than justallow humans to interface with machines. Neuroprostheses could alsorepairour cognitive abilities which will allow us to combat neurological diseases such as Alzheimers, ALS, Parkinsons, and other conditions that destroy our brainsand our lives.

This is just the beginning.

Such advancements could allow us to merge with machines, yes, but they can also allow us to literally program our neural code, which would allow us to transform ourselves in ways that we cant even imagine. In short, we couldprogram ourselves into the people that we want to be. As Johnson states, Our biology and genetics have become increasingly programmable; our neural code is next in line.

It sounds like something out of science fiction, but it is based on remarkable scientific work.

In short, the devices under development work by replicating the way that our brain cells communicate with one another.The tech envisioned is based on 15 years of academic research that was funded by the NIH and DARPA. So get ready. Human superintelligence is only a matter of time.

Disclosure: Bryan Johnson is an investor in Futurism; he does not hold a seat on our editorial board or have any editorial review privileges.

View original post here:
Elon Musk Just Launched A Company To Merge Your Brain With A Computer - Futurism

During his campaign, now-President Donald Trump promised voters he would bring American jobs back from overseas. Now that he is in office, hisadministration has made job creation a central focus of its efforts.

But what if those jobs overseas cant come back to the United States because companies no longer need to hire humans to complete the tasks? How is the Trump administration gearing up to tackle the rise of automation?

Based on recent statements by Trumps TreasurySecretary, Steven Mnuchin, they arent planning to address it all. In a conversation with Axios co-founder Mike Allen, Mnuchin said that increased automation is not even on our radar screen as the problem is 50 to 100 more years away. He continued, saying, Im not worried at all. In fact, Im optimistic.

The administrations claims run counter to the mounting evidence that artificial intelligence (AI) and automation are a much more imminent threat to American workers.

Some reports predict that todays technology could automate 51 percent of economic activity. Such a shift has the potential to causeunprecedented levels of unemployment, puttingmillions of people out of work. Its not just blue-collar jobsthat are at risk, either. Another report expects that850,000 public sector jobs could be taken over by automation in the United Kingdom by 2030, a trend likely to carry over into the U.S.

According to Mark Muro of the MIT Technology Review,jobs that went overseas arent going to be coming back to the U.S. Trump can propose policies to make it more beneficial for companies to bring their operations back to the country, but theres nothing to stop them from replacing American workers with machines should the financial implications of doing so continue to become more attractive.

As Muro said, No one should be under the illusion that millions of manufacturing jobs are coming back to America.

See the rest here:
Trump's Treasury Secretary Says Increased Automation Is "Not Even ... - Futurism