Re: starship-design: Computing Power

[KellySt@aol.com]

In a message dated Mon, 28 Jan 2002  3:26:41 AM Eastern Standard Time, "jakesmiley" <jakesmiley@netzero.net> writes:

> Hello...
> 
>     Since we have 2000 people with their own computers, why not 
> use a distributed computing model?  Most computers tend to spend
> a lot of time unused.  I'm sure any non-essential systems could find 
> _something_ to do with the unused fraction of the combined power
> of 2000 PCs (or Macs, whatever your preference).  I wouldn't
> recommend trying to run navigational or life-support programs that 
> way, but most tasks could be run with a fair degree of safety.

Problem is its more trouble then its worth, and slow.  Fast processing needs extreamly short distences.  Distributing slows it all down.

Besides computer power is cheap.  You'ld spend more on the screen and cables.

;)



>     I agree with Kelly, microbes that we have never made the
> acquaintance of are probably the most dangerous.  On Terra we
> have all of 20 (?) different amino acids comprising all of life on the
> planet.  Who knows what the varying effects of different gravity and
> radiation have had on the development of basic life?  Regardless of
> how exotic they are, they would still pose a danger.  And probably
> more so for being quite so exotic.

Yeah, viruses would be stuck with compatrible DNA, but microbes, funguses, etc can get pretty flexible.



>     Back to the computers...  Are we worried at all about the effects
> of space sickness?  It's all well and good to protect computers from
> the environment, but I also like the idea of extra, extra rugged
> computer cases.  Just in case anyone goes "space happy" for a bit.

And what tosses it across the room?  Bring spares, sooner or later theirs a spilled coffee or user with attitude, with some CPU's name on it.

;)


> 
>     I dunno...  I agree that, historically, governments and companies
> have pretty much the same track record when it comes to
> colonization.  And, I understand that governments are full of faceless
> bureaucrats sent to punish you for any sins, real or imagined.  
> However, I just can't seem to divest myself of the idea that
> corporations are full of soulless demons from Hell.  Maybe it's just
> me...  

Its you.  Companies are as good or bad to you as they need to be.  If you can make them money, and they need you, your their best friend.  If you're just one more replacable drunge -- they have no idea who you are.

Historically they have done far more for people then govs.  At best govs are referees, at worst they want to be masters.



==
>     From a less dramatic point of view, I suppose a corporation
> would be a better backer than a government.  It seems that
> corporations tend to be more willing to go out on a limb when there
> is a glimmer of profit.  And, while corporations live in fear of being
> seen as guilty of some heinous crime, governments are traditionally
> considered the final arbiter when making a life and death decision.  I
> think a corporation would probably have a harder time of writing off
> a colony than a government would...

A gov has no real reason to support a colony, nor incentive to not close it.  Its all just a polling whim.


>     I love this group!  There are so many interesting things to learn!

;)

> 
> -JS