Google Kills Hyper-Threading On Chrome OS In Wake Of Critical Intel Flaw

May 15, 2019

https://chromeunboxed.com/google-kills-hyper-threading-on-chrome-os-in-wake-of-critical-intel-flaw/

Android Authority: 8 years on from the first Chromebooks: Google was right about them

May 11, 2019

Android Authority: 8 years on from the first Chromebooks: Google was right about them.
https://www.androidauthority.com/google-chromebook-launch-984205/

New Feature Coming For Chromebook Extended Displays

April 13, 2019

New Feature Coming For Chromebook Extended Displays

It looks like Display Port and USB-C are required for daisy chaining monitors with Chromebooks.

The Verge: Microsoft’s Chromium Edge browser is now officially available to test

April 8, 2019

The Verge: Microsoft’s Chromium Edge browser is now officially available to test.
https://www.theverge.com/2019/4/8/18300077/microsoft-edge-chromium-canary-development-release-download

SlashGear: Chrome OS is a productivity utopia but it needs one more thing

March 5, 2019

Will ChromeOS replace the Windows, Linux and/or Mac OS platforms for some types of software development?  The author, though awkwardly stating it, seems to thing so.

SlashGear: Chrome OS is a productivity utopia but it needs one more thing.
https://www.slashgear.com/chrome-os-is-a-productivity-utopia-but-it-needs-one-more-thing-05568471/

howtogeek.com: What To Do When Your Chromebook Reaches the End of Its Life

February 16, 2019

howtogeek.com: What To Do When Your Chromebook Reaches the End of Its Life.
https://www.howtogeek.com/403164/what-to-do-when-your-chromebook-reaches-the-end-of-its-life/

Information Entropy

February 9, 2019

Is there a maximum amount of data about any given subject above which the incremental value of any additional data begins to approach zero? Even more starkly is there a point where more data about a given subject may actually begin to have a negative effect, in that it actually decreases the amount of information about the subject?

I don’t mean that newer data may prove that old data about the subject is no longer accurate and therefore render the old data out of date. In which case the old data would still exist but no longer be relevant. I’m talking about a situation where the informational content, i.e. the payload of the data, will actually decrease. This would be a situation when we know less about a subject at some point in the future than we knew in the past, based on all the data there is on the subject. I think it would have to have something to do with context, with the passage of time, and the associations between units of data about the subject and data about other subjects. The more connections, the more information a body of data has.

This is a tricky speculation. I mean, is it possible to actually know less at some point than was previously known? Not for just a single person, as sometimes happens as we age and simply forget the information we previously could recall about a subject. I am talking about the accumulated knowledge about a subject. It is kind of like a subject becoming simpler over time rather than more complex. Which is pretty much the opposite of observed reality.

In fact, this just may be what happens as we approach absolute and universal entropy. I am not a physicist but why would this not be the case? There would be two aspects to this, not only would universal entropy eliminate any differences between things, but the differences between parties, places and time would cease to exist as well. Not only would there be less information on all subjects, but there would be less and less subjects to have information about. Nor would there be anyone to have and be responsible for information, even if it did still exit.

Automation and the End of Human Wealth

January 15, 2019

Time is money. Well not really, but they do equate very nicely. A person’s wealth can be measured not only by how much money he or she controls, but by how much of their time can be used for activities not necessary just for survival. This time, freed up from mere survival activities, has always been used to create increasing wealth for humans. The increase in wealth creation accrues to both producers and consumers. Producers get wealthier by getting more money, and consumers get wealthier by getting more time.

Previously the march toward automation has created ever increasing wealth because some party has invented the latest automation, sold it to others, and another party has bought the automation and used in to free up more of their time. In the 6BI sense, “money” and “time” are the product and payment exchanged at armslength in the transaction.

The question we should ask now is, will we ever reach the point when there are simply no new wealth creating activities that humans can invent? A time when every activity that could have created new wealth for humans will already be performed by some form of automation. Could it be possible that at some point in time any invention, instead of being valuable to some human, will have no value and thus not be able to be exchanged for money?

If we ever do reach the point where additional automation can no longer drive the creation of wealth for humans because everything that humans could do for themselves will have already been automated, then there will be no advantage, or value, to the next invention. It simply will not be an innovation.

At that point in time, I believe the earth’s human population will crash or go into a period of slow negative growth. There will be no motivation to either invent or procreate. Human population will decrease as a product of reduced opportunities and consequently the influence of humans on the planet will decrease.

On the other hand, the robots and artificial intelligence that provide automation to humans, since they do not need to either invent nor procreate, will increase in number and influence. In number because they will wear out more slowly than flesh and blood humans and in influence because they will no longer be dependent on humans to improve their programming.

Because of the decrease in number of unmet human needs fewer software developers will be needed, for example. This decrease in unmet needs, doesn’t necessarily mean humans will be more satisfied, just that there will be fewer and fewer value and wealth creating activities that they can perform for themselves.

If this happens, and there are substantially less humans, will there really be a lesser need for automation? What will happen when there is no longer any new human need or activity to be automated? Will robots and artificial intelligence continue to operate with humans eventually becoming less and less relevant to them? Will humans become even less aware of the means of automation? Are humans ultimately essential for the operation of automation and thus as human numbers drop, computing entities, the means of automation, will drop as well? Will automation itself be automated and operate without human intervention at all because any knowledge of how it works will eventually be lost to humans?

Will there be an ever increasing demand for resources such as electricity to keep a kind of “closed loop” automation going and going even though it has reached the point where automation’s added value to humans is at, or near zero? Even more interesting, from a human perspective, what will happen when new wealth can no longer be created?

AMD gets serious about Chromebooks at CES 2019 – CNET

January 9, 2019

https://www.cnet.com/news/amd-gets-serious-about-chromebooks-at-ces-2019/

Google Chrome wants to stop back-button hijacking – Ars Technica

December 19, 2018

Well IMHO, its about time some browser team did something about this.  So, the nefarious website renders the back button useless by inserting its own URL at the top of the history list as its first action, so that before the user even decides what to do with the page, it is already entered as the “previous” page.  Hit the back-button and you are right where you were!

Another ingenious, though evil, data-driven solution.  More than ever, one person’s solution is another person’s problem!!

https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2018/12/google-chrome-wants-to-stop-back-button-hijacking/