#computer theory

i realized that the more i looked into it the more unexpected proof there is for computer theory, or a variation of it, being true. like for instance the community post phaleur's clone made during season 1:

obviously the background wouldn't have been changed to this if phaleur wasn't in the computer. and this image also bounces around the screen in "a new era of CONTENT".

the variation im adding to this theory is that a lot of videos about this simply say phaleur's inside a computer, but i want to add that i think the time dilation room itself is a program on a computer or something like that.

the room stopped working after the clonevpn servers took the hit from the USB drive being plugged in by jonny, and if the servers are linked to the room, wouldn't it make sense for the room to be on those servers? and phaleur claims he can use the computer that's already in the room to escape it, and it would make perfect sense to have to use a computer to escape a computer (see Endgame, cdot messes around with some files on the facility computer in order to release pear and melon from it).

also i think it's important to mention the hidden phrases on phaleur's channel leading up to the legend. one of them is "AM I ON YOUR TV, OR IN YOUR COMPUTER?" he could have just said "on your computer" like he did for "on your tv" but he specifically said IN. i think this is a hint towards this theory being true.

A brand-new theoretical design including squeezing light to simply the right total up to properly transfer details utilizing subatomic particles is bringing us closer to a brand-new age of computing.

Scientists at Hokkaido University and Kyoto University have actually established a theoretical method to quantum computing that is 10 billion times more tolerant to mistakes than existing theoretical designs. Their approach brings us closer to establishing quantum computer systems that utilize the varied homes of subatomic particles to transfer, procedure and shop exceptionally big quantities of intricate details.

Quantumcomputing has the prospective to fix issues including large quantities of details, such as modelling complex chemical procedures, far much better and faster than contemporary computer systems.

Computers presently save information by coding it into “bits.” A bit can exist in one of 2 states: 0 and 1. Scientists have actually been examining methods to utilize subatomic particles, called “quantum bits,” which can exist in more than simply 2 different states, for the storage and processing of much vaster quantities of details. Quantum bits are the foundation of quantum computer systems.

One such method includes utilizing the fundamental homes in photons of light, such as encoding details as quantum bits into a beam by digitizing patterns of the electro-magnetic field. But the encoded details can be lost from light waves throughout quantum calculation, causing a build-up of mistakes. To minimize details loss, researchers have actually been explore “squeezing” light. Squeezing is a procedure that eliminates small quantum- level variations, described as sound, from an electro-magnetic field. Noise presents a particular level of unpredictability into the amplitude and stage of the electro-magnetic field. Squeezing is therefore an effective tool for the optical execution of quantum computer systems, however the existing use is insufficient.

In a paper released in the journal PhysicalReview X, Akihisa Tomita, an applied physicist at Hokkaido University, and his coworkers recommended an unique method to considerably minimize mistakes when utilizing this method. They established a theoretical design that utilizes both the homes of quantum bits and the modes of the electro-magnetic field where they exist. The method includes squeezing light by getting rid of error-prone quantum bits, when quantum bits cluster together.

This design is 10 billion times more tolerant to mistakes than existing speculative approaches, implying that it endures approximately one mistake every 10,000 estimations.

“The approach is achievable using currently available technologies, and could further advance developments in quantum computing research,” states Akihisa Tomita of HokkaidoUniversity .

###

Disclaimer: We can make errors too. Have a good day.

Embodied Interaction and Participation

What is embodied Interaction？ What is Participation？

Embodiment is not just about the body, it’s about participatory status.

Interactive art, interactive performance experience may be is the ultimate goal of my study of this major. Atau Tanaka introduced his artwork in this lecture. 

With the development of science and technology. In his artworks, we can also see a lot of more advanced sensors about machine learning. As well as hybridity physical computing and virtual elements, combine sensors and actuators, and create a relationship between performance and installation.

At the same time, I highly recommend this Journal The Computational Imagination: Notes on the Exhibition Designing the Computational Image, Imagining Computational Design 

https://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1162/leon_a_01655 

In my mind the early development of computer-aided as an aesthetic movement. Computational arts combine new visual culture and new practices and new concepts. They are particularly tricky questions to ask of early computational images because such images come from an era when people were eager to frame their work as scientific research, and aesthetics was often ruled out of bounds.

Furthermore, more people who use the computer to create images are now paying more and more attention to their aesthetic meaning, rather than creating for creation. And with the development of computational arts has largely solved a series of inefficiencies related to traditional design. 

This is a new era, everything is innovating, art and science are not independent, they support each other, so more new media art is produced in this era, and performance is not just a traditional way, with Embodied Interaction performance, and the future is full of expectations

Article website: http://www.constantvzw.org/verlag/spip.php?page=article&id_article=72&mot_filtre=9&id_lang=0

When I finished reading this article, I had a huge confused about the relationship between technology software and human being. 

Especially, this article tells us “ But do we use software to think?” So people still think software or machines are tools, human use tools to negotiate the space around their bodies.  As this article says: the relationship between technology software and human being seems like the relationship between the user and tools, many times we do not need to care about the feelings of many tools. We use tools as much as possible to create many benefits. And the machine can’t judge the people.

So can we think ourselves outside it?

"someone can know how to type but not know how to read the words produced (...) just as someone can be able to read a typescript without knowing how to type" (Katherine Hayles - How We Became Posthuman)

Thus，people are always in a dominant position in society. After all, people give machines an opportunity to think, so they are surrounded by these theological products around us, and with the development of technology, this technology software will be smarter and more intelligent. 

This week the guys invited their friend Erin Orstrom to join them in a round table discussion on their different experiences in learning to code and the concepts of computer science. Will has a degree in Computer Information Systems whereas Erin and BJ have degrees in other fields but ultimately came to programming as a career.

Will came to programming through wanting to combine biology and…