Scientific American

472,658 followers -

Scientific American is the authoritative source for the science discoveries and technology innovations that matter.

472,658 followers

About

Scientific American's posts

Post has attachment

Scientific American

Public

Carbon-absorbing batteries, antibiotics from scratch, quantum satellites, ingestible robots, poverty-predicting software, cool clothes, the ultimate virus-fighting drug, software that reads, inexpensive paper tests, materials from superatoms. Read about them all in the December 2016 issue, now available for preview and purchase: http://bit.ly/2fVwifq

Hazzard Ruiz: Easy way to join the illuminati brotherhood in the world.

Kindly contact Mr Hazzard Wallace the illuminati online registrations officer in USA through their email now: hazzardwallace@hotmail.com and you shall be given an ideal chance to visit the satan and his representative after registrations is completed by you, no sacrifice or human life needed, illuminati brotherhood brings along wealth and famous in life, you have a full access to eridicate poverty away from your life now. So contact Mr Hazzard Wallace the online registrar at: hazzardwallace@hotmail.com or Via moblie +17402028608 or +17128239585 and +14432034680

Post has attachment

Scientific American

Public

While science played only a bit part in this year’s dramatic, hard-fought campaign, many researchers expressed fear and disbelief as Trump defeated former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

Donald Trump's Presidential Election Win Stuns Scientists

+Scientific American

John Marc Thibault: Instead of CNN, start with the evidence - what Trump has actually said and done -- the future is brighter than you think. Consider funding being diverted from climate politics to legitimate research and development.

Karl Emmanuel Sanchez Laursen: +Paul Lamoureux sadly it is politicians and nowdays reality show stars that can pull the plug on science funding, or are you willing/able to pay the electricity for the LHC hundred per cent out of your pocket?

Karl Emmanuel Sanchez Laursen: +John Marc Thibault bright as fallout green and cherenkov blue?

Post has attachment

Scientific American

Public

For this puzzle with over 43 quintillion permutations, author Ian Scheffler explains how players have found the most efficient route to resolving a Rubik’s cube.

Post has attachment

Scientific American

Public

Major websites including Amazon.com, Twitter and Netflix experienced outages on Friday in what appears to be a massive cyber attack. This article from 2014 explains what DDOS attacks are and how they wreak havoc on the Web.

How Hackers Take Down Web Sites [Video]

blogs.scientificamerican.com

reach cathey: Last nite I got hacked/& they tried to mischaracterize me as an EVIL person.I'm different, not EVIL.

carey g. butler: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-3859500/Widespread-internet-havoc-major-attack-takes-websites-offline-Spotify-Twitter-sites-suffer-outages.html

Dag-Erling Smørgrav: That's not how yesterday's attack happened, though. There was no reflection or amplification involved. The attackers used the Mirai botnet to take down a major DNS provider. Most of the affected sites were never directly under attack, they were just unreachable because their DNS names couldn't be resolved into IP addresses. It's like setting fire to phonebooks in a pre-Internet world: the phone network is fine, but you can't call anyone unless you already have their number written down or memorized.

Post has attachment

Scientific American

Public

The results of a new study have brought neuroprosthetic limbs one step closer to reality.

Brain Stimulation Allows Paralyzed Man to Feel His Hand Again

+Scientific American

Post has attachment

Scientific American

Public

Donald Trump’s astonishing victory demonstrated that the polls cannot always be trusted.

Explaining Donald Trump's Shock Election Win

+Scientific American

Mallikarjuna Kaveti: How long do we take to decide on a house or a car? how much time do we spend on researching before buying a car? How many of us actually consulted media to tell us which car is the best? If we make a mistake buying a car we always have options to correct and cut losses. In spite of having a safe net we still spend time researching which one to buy.
Have we spent time researching about these two candidates? I am not a US citizen but a US President election affects the whole world. Why would we listen to polls and media to decide on a candidate? at the age of data science and machine learning how can we have any trust on numbers? each one of us have the responsibility to do our research and make up our own damn mind. How many replies to this post are actually from real people? what if I told you there are mechanical turks based in a third world country responding to posts like this? (i dont know if it exists, but inclining towards a probability)... I will keep working hard at my job like most of us do. My prayers for those who are disheartened. Good Day!

Tam McDonnagh: +Cruzana deAtlantean Hurrah for your county.

Apparently, when pollsters heard "undecided" or "third choice", they assigned those voters equally to Trump and Hillary. In retrospect, that was a huge mistake because many Repugnicans ultimately held their noses and voted against swiftboated Hillary and those irrelevant emails.

Repugnicans are not the brightest bulbs in the chandelier..

Tam McDonnagh: +Mallikarjuna Kaveti "mechanical turks based in a third world country"

You're right. Trump and Putin used paid shills and bots.

Yes, voters should check. However, the bottom end of the intellectual scale voted for Trump. Emoters are mot the types to check facts and think for themselves.

Post has attachment

Scientific American

Public

Albert Einstein now has his own set of emoji.

Say It With Einstein

blogs.scientificamerican.com

Post has attachment

Scientific American

Public

Author and “Speedcuber” Ian Scheffler reveals some of the math behind how you could solve the Rubik’s cube puzzle.

Solving the Rubik's Equation

scientificamerican.com

Post has attachment

Scientific American

Public

Online attacks are unpredictable and hard to control, leading to worries that White House cyber rattling could quickly escalate.

Could Obama's Threat of Retaliation against Russia Lead to Cyber War?

+Scientific American

Robert Miller: +Robert Walden there are a lot of organizations out there that run websites they can help you protect your identity in a lot of ways especially your identification that is in your IP address they will give you a consumer warnings and alerts of All Sorts of scams and ways that hackers get into your information. Some are free some of you have to pay for the ones you have to pay for usually come with a guarantee. And of all things even if you're not 50 or older you can get a lot of good information about these scams from AARP

Robert Walden: +Robert Miller Thanks for the information. Have a Great Day

Bruce Cox: Based on what I heard from head of security at the Federal agency I spent 25 years with, the cyber war is already on.

They gave us specially tricked out BlackBerrys to travel with. BB's were notorious targets for eavesdropping and even the camera could be used with the phone powered down.

Post has attachment

Scientific American

Public

Artificial intelligence is everywhere. But before scientists trust it, they first need to understand how machines learn.

Can We Open the Black Box of AI?

+Scientific American

carey g. butler: +Karl Emmanuel Sanchez Laursen Thanks for being more civil this time around. Are you also interested in what I have to say about your last comment?

SharingFOCUS: +carey g. butler
I know about all your arguments, and I'm just way past all that. I don't think you're off your rocker, you're just stuck somewhere.

carey g. butler: +Karl Emmanuel Sanchez Laursen
Thank you for explaining the article. Your good intentions are well taken.

I could have taken it apart piece-by-piece. I've done this many times with others like it. So often now, that I've even found a way to bring the worst of it down. I (and others) will do this by proving how wrong the paradigm really is. That remaining which is of value, will stand on its own merit.

1) A neuron, no matter how 'complex' (complexity is another fraud), is not a complete expression of anything. It can only form part of that expression, just as the brain provides on a larger scale.

2) Intelligence is just one expression of the more encompassing concept of mind and each 'intelligence' is only one voice in a fugue of intelligences that may be found there. The brain participates in mind, but mind is much more than the brain.

3) That robot will never be telling me anything; rather, the drone pilot in the control room somewhere 'driving' the thing. I realise you don't believe me, but the whole idea is completely wrong! Even the test for 'intelligence is a fraud (Turing Test). This is widely known among professionals in this business. They are playing us, because of OUR (as a whole) ignorance on the matter.

The people who want us to believe in this bunk DO NOT understand 'intelligence' (which they also cannot not define precisely); they also do NOT understand what mind is.

Wait while more posts are being loaded

Press question mark to see available shortcut keys