netjeff.com

http://www.ex.ac.uk/~RDavies/arian/emoneyfaq.html#double

A nice summary of the issues with digital cash that arise because bits are so easy to copy (unlike physical currency). Covers topics like online vs offline systems, and identified vs anonymous systems. The latter comparison is the more interesting, because with fully

identified currency, the life of a "bill" is perfectly tracked. As the author points out:

"By the way, did you declare that $20 bill your Grandmother gave you for your birthday? You didn't? Well, you won't have to worry about forgetting those sorts of things when everybody is using fully identified e-money. As a matter of fact, you won't even have to worry about filing a tax return. The IRS will just send you a bill."

EFF has several articles on digital cash. I reccommend the double_spending.articles because it's a nice mix of overiew plus some details and some math so that it doesn't seem like a bunch of hand-waving.

Some people argue that we are very complex "machines". From this starting point, you could argue that someday we will be able to invent "machines" that are intelligent and conscious (eg. AI) just like we are. This makes many people uncomfortable, and those people claim that you could never make such a "machine". In those cases, an interesting question to ask is, "How do you know that you are not a machine?". The following is written by Marvin Minsky, in an afterword to Vernor Vinge's novella "True Names":

"Ridiculous," most people say, at first: "I certainly don't feel like a machine!".

But what makes us so sure of that? How could one claim to know how something feels, until one has experienced it? Consider that either you are a machine or you're not. Then, if, as you say, you aren't a machine, you are scarcely in any position of authority to say how it feels to be a machine.

Auction "sniping" is the practice of waiting until the very last second in an online auction before placing the winning bid. By waiting until the last possible second, nobody else can get in and increase your bid.

Here's an interesting solution to the "problem", sent in by a reader of David Coursey's anchordesk column.

For every minute you maintain the high bid, you get a point. The bidder with the most points at the end of the auction is the "Auction Leader," and has the right to match the "winning bid" after the close of auction and to purchase the item.

The auction item would reach its final sale price earlier in the auction process, giving each bidder a better understanding of how other bidders value the object. This should on average increase the sale price of the item. Additionally, the seller would know how well his auction is doing before it ends. A bidder would know early on in the auction what his odds of winning are."

http://www.michaelgreer.com/screw_up.htm

http://www.eff.org/IP/DMCA/20020503_dmca_consequences.pdf

An excellent paper on the chilling effects of the 1999 Digital Millennium Copyright Act. I've excerpted the executive summary below:

Since they were enacted in 1998, the "anti-circumvention" provisions of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act ("DMCA"), codified in section 1201 of the Copyright Act, have not been used as Congress envisioned. Congress meant to stop copyright pirates from defeating anti-piracy protections added to copyrighted works, and to ban "black box" devices intended for that purpose.

In practice, the anti-circumvention provisions have been used to stifle a wide array of legitimate activities, rather than to stop copyright piracy. As a result, the DMCA has developed into a serious threat to three important public policy priorities:

Section 1201 Chills Free Expression and Scientific Research.

Experience with section 1201 demonstrates that it is being used to stifle free speech and scientific research. The lawsuit against 2600 magazine, threats against Princeton Professor Edward Felten’s team of researchers, and prosecution of Russian programmer Dmitry Sklyarov have chilled the legitimate activities of journalists, publishers, scientists, students, programmers, and members of the public.

Section 1201 Jeopardizes Fair Use.

By banning all acts of circumvention, and all technologies and tools that can be used for circumvention, section 1201 grants to copyright owners the power to unilaterally eliminate the public’s fair use rights. Already, the music industry has begun deploying "copy-protected CDs" that promise to curtail consumers’ ability to make legitimate, personal copies of music they have purchased.

Section 1201 Impedes Competition and Innovation.

Rather than focusing on pirates, many copyright owners have chosen to use the DMCA to hinder their legitimate competitors. For example, Sony has invoked section 1201 to protect their monopoly on Playstation country from playing games legitimately purchased in another.

This document collects a number of reported cases where the anti-circumvention provisions of the DMCA have been invoked not against pirates, but against consumers, scientists, and legitimate competitors. It will be updated from time to time as additional cases come to light. The latest version can always be obtained at www.eff.org.

I've been wondering when augmented reality technology would start showing up as more than a curiosity.

To date most articles about these kinds of interactive real-time heads-up display systems have been of the "gee-whiz" variety. This article discusses the likely impacts when it does become available.

My only quibble is the 10-year timeline. I think that some of the ideas in the article are a bit more than 10 years away. Certainly the computers we will be able to wear will be small enough, but issues of power supply, display technology, and general integration do not follow the 18-month Moore's law