“My car gets 40 rods to the hog’s head and that’s the way I likes it!”

The program director on CFRB 1010 took to the air to answer phoned in complaints and questions from the listeners on Wednesday, January 31st. That was cool. I love it when people put themselves in the frontlines knowing full well they’re going to get shot at. Some of the comments were nice, some weren’t, really, what do I care, right? One caller asked why the station doesn’t report the temperature in Fahrenheit anymore.

Ladies and gentlemen, welcome to the Metric System!

If you’re reading this and you live in one of the few places in the world that don’t use the Metric System, don’t take offense, I’m not attacking you. I’m attacking those people who live in places like Canada, places that have converted. There are people today, in Canada, who have still yet to grasp the concept of the Metric System. Hello, people! Conversion began in 1970.

The company where I am employed uses measurements all day long. We use the Metric System. Our handwritten layouts are in centimetres, but are software is limited to millimetres. On dear, what are we to do? Hmmm… Cut the last digit off the millimetre measurement and voila, centimetres. Easy, isn’t it.

In regards to the Fahrenheit Celsius debate in Canada, give up the Fahrenheit. Celsius is easier to work with in regards to why we as Canadians need the temperature. In Canada, the first thing we need to know is whether or not water will freeze. Celsius is designed for just such a need. Water freezes at 0 degrees. Below 0 degrees means cold, above 0 degrees means warm. It doesn’t get easier than that.

For crying out loud people, convert!

…

Could someone explain to me why cars have that feature to tell you “ICE POSSIBLE.” It is always obvious to me whether or not ice is possible on the roads. If there’s ice beside the road, there could be ice on the road. If the temperature is below freezing, there could be ice on the road. If there’s a car flipped upside down in the ditch 50 metres in front of you, there could be ice on the road. If you had an icicle sword fight while waiting for the car to warm up, there could be ice on the road.

Recommended Listening: Too Cold in the Winter by Cry of Love

Colonization of Outer Space

Recently, Stephen Hawking was in Hong Kong speaking about mankind’s need to populate astral bodies other than the Earth. His claim that we need this is to have a backup in case of a global disaster. I am certainly in favour of mankind expanding it’s habitation into space. Here is my guide to colonize other planets.

Step I: Finding a Suitable Location

The closest place to the Earth that resembles the Earth in physical characteristics is Mars, the fourth planet from the Sun. It is much farther from the Earth than the Moon but has a greater gravitational pull and a more accommodating atmosphere. Mars is a more suitable long term solution to moving from the Earth.

Step II: Getting There

Currently travel to Mars from the Earth is about six months. This does differ depending on the two planet’s relative locations. The Earth and Mars orbit the Sun at different speeds and their orbital paths are different distances. Much of the transportational work would have to be done all at once.

Step III: Making It Habitable

Much of Mars’ atmosphere is carbon dioxide. There is very little oxygen in the air. To counter that imbalance, Mars must first be populated with some sort of device that can perform the needed chemical exchange. The Earth’s natural plantlife has the ability to convert carbon dioxide to oxygen. The first step in terraforming Mars would be to populate the planet with plants. Launch thousands of plants and trees and such onto the surface of Mars would be a must. Each plant or group of plants would have to be potted into some sort of device which could provide the plant with water until the atmosphere is capable of creating sufficient rain to feed the plants. Sending a lot of nutrient rich top soil would also be needed and would have to land adjacent to the planter devices. This way the plants could drop seeds that would eventually grow out of the top soil. Thus enabling the plants not just to grow, but breed as well. As the plant population grows, the rate of chemical change in the air would increase. Along with the plants, microorganisms would have to live on the plants and in the top soil in order to breakdown dying plant particles.

Step IV: The First Wave

Once the planet has the ability to foster life as we know it, the planet would need animals larger than just the microorganisms. Ideally, the first animals sent should be animals that are rather self-sufficient and could be able to live off the specific plants that we already sent. Also these animals would have to be edible by humans. We are not to just send them there to live in a pollution-free environment. We have to eat them.

Step V: The Bubble Dome

A bubble dome would be the next thing sent to Mars. The bubble dome would need to be well stocked with all that humans need to live as well as tools needed to create more bubble domes. Bubble domes provide lots of work and living space for people as well as create that futuristic feel that we would all expect from a colony on Mars. The first humans on Mars would live in the bubble dome while they build other structures on Mars. These people would also have to begin mining Mars for it’s natural resources in order to create other bubble domes.

Step VI: Dealing with the Locals

Should us humans have to deal with the locals on Mars, we could learn from our own mistakes on Earth when colonizing such places as the Americas but chances are, after the terraforming of Mars, I doubt the locals could survive such a drastic change in the planets atmosphere. If any remain, we may have to “off” them. I understand that is genocide but if we have to live on Mars, its because we cannot live on Earth anymore. Or maybe a trade could be performed. Give the martians Earth and we take Mars. Think about that for a second, we’ve really messed up Earth. But they don’t have to know that.

A.I.

Some quick points on my views on AI. First, I think it IS possible; and second, I think it is NOT a good idea.

AI will eventually be developed. It won’t be any time in the near future, but it will happen. At first, some scientists and mathematicians will develop a virtually infinite database of situations with some sort of logical algorithm to choose what the computer is to do next. This is not artificial intelligence as it is based on the logical algorithm and the database of situations. The people who created the algorithm will have indirectly chosen every possible response thus giving the computer the inability to chose on its own. This is basically what computer games use to determine the actions of computer-characters or bots. So I guess the next step would be, remove the database of situations and allow the computer to start fresh and just absorb it’s surroundings. Learn by osmosis.

The learn-by-osmosis technique is still flawed by the logical algorithm. I guess the way to overcome this is to allow a computer to create its own logical algorithm based on, well, it would probably be based on a human-developed algorithm at some point. I see no way of separating human interaction in the logic. But there was a time when humans did not know the world was round. I am of the mind that at some point, somebody will create a computer with actual artificial intelligence; just not any time soon.

Now, do we as a society and as a race of beings, need AI. No we don’t. We need the level of AI we have now. The database of situations with a logical algorithm is great for gaming and training situations. Would this computer “care” about self-preservation? If so, would it try to interfere with living beings in an attempt to maintain its own preservation or would it not care about itself and simply shut itself off. If that is the case and it shuts itself off, why? What would it know that we don’t? What would it have learned about itself and about us that would make it, for lack of a better word, suicidal? Would it help us (all humanity or a certain group of people) live better lives by our standards or by the standards of the computer itself? If it could exist as a completely unselfish being, what would be its reason for existance?

There is too much uncertainity. There is not enough reason for us to develop such a device. As I said before, we don’t need it. And, what have we to gain from AI? Just another computer taking a job away from a human being.