A FEW years ago, some friends entrusted Feedback with a pool of money to bet on a horse in the Grand National. We accidentally backed the wrong horse, but luckily it came first, instead of the one our friends had chosen.
That narrow shave made us suspicious of gambling. After all, in the long run what does it matter which horse wins this or that race? But now it turns out that “in the long run” is the key to a new and, to Feedback’s way of thinking, much superior kind of betting—the long bet.
May’s issue of Wired magazine shows how people can put their money where their intelligence lies. Kevin Kelly and Stewart Brand have set up the Long Bets Foundation, a way of focusing technological and scientific thinking about the future. To place a bet, you have to propose that something “societally or scientifically” important will or will not happen, back it up with a good argument and place your bet. Someone who disagrees can then bet against you. The winnings go to a charity of your choice.
Advertisement
Here are some examples: Will a computer pass the Turing test by 2029? Yes, says Ray Kurzweil, inventor and technology entrepreneur. Not so, says Mitchell Kapor of Lotus. Will 50 per cent of all books be e-books in eight years’ time? Yes, says author and publisher Jason Epstein. No, says Vint Cerf of WorldCom.
Mind you, some gamblers may have to wait a while to know if they’ve won. Danny Hillis reckons the Universe will stop expanding eventually, while Nathan Myhrvold says it won’t. Seeing the result of that bet would rely on longevity of a high order (there’s a bet on that too) or a lot of confidence that the uncertainties of physics will be wrestled into a straight answer.
The long bet is in a noble tradition: Johannes Kepler, Richard Feynman and many others have bet on future science. Go to if you feel like a flutter.
THE WEEK’S bunk about a product comes from Kabbalah spring water, which among many other qualities apparently “absorbs and neutralises damaging radiation within the environment” and has a “profound positive effect on the immune system”.
How can water have such effects? Why, because “Kabbalah spring water is made from pure spring water and an exclusive Kabbalistic process, ‘Quantum-Resonance Technology’. This process restructures the intermolecular binding of the spring water…” etc etc etc.
How do they get away with this stuff?
READER Dave Brennan was having some problems with his Memorex CD-RW drive, so he decided to look up the troubleshooting section in the manual. Under “Other problems” he found: “If your drive appears to have problems accessing a CD after a lengthy period of time, please use a lens cleaning set which you can purchase at your local computer retailer.”
Just below this was a highlighted warning; “Note: Please note that CD-RW drives must never be cleaned with a lens cleaning set.”
Isn’t that helpful?
A COLLEAGUE received an email the other day with this disclaimer at the bottom: “This message and any attachment hereto is intended solely for the use of the designated recipient(s) and their appointed delegates and may contain confidential information. Any unauthorized use, disclosure, copying, or distribution of its contents is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please destroy it and advise the sender immediately by phone, email, or fax. Thank you for your cooperation.”
The email was a press release headed “For immediate release”.
HERE IS a firm that is apparently happily bypassing the laws of physics. According to The New Zealand Herald website: “Today Buckley Systems in Mount Wellington is the only large-scale manufacturer of ion implanters—machines which purify beams of ions by sending them at up to twice the speed of light through a narrow slit which sieves out all atoms of the wrong atomic weight.”
ANOTHER redundant box to tick. A recent edition of Cycling Weekly offered the chance to win a fancy pair of cycling shoes. At the bottom of the competition details was a box with the usual small print advising you to tick it if you didn’t want to receive additional mailings or details of other products or services—in other words, junk mail.
The competition, however, was a phone-in. So what would be the point of ticking the box?
HYDREX surgical scrub instructs those who use it in laboratories to “avoid contact with eyes, ears, brain and meninges [membranes surrounding the brain and spinal cord]”.
So what do you use if you want to give your brain a wash?
FROM THE department of superfluous precision: the jar of Vegemite spread bought by reader Max Gibson was labelled: “Best before 01 Jan 03 16:49.” The bottle of Summit spring water offered to Alf Cousins with his meal on a Qantas flight said: “Best before 08:42 20/07/02.” The tub of Supercook bicarbonate of soda bought by David Sindall stated: “Best before end Sep 03 2060, 15:31”. The packet of Weetabix bought by Brian King told him: “Use by Mar 03 2072 [sic] 04:36.” And the pack of low-fat spread bought from Safeway by Susan Frank advised: “Best before 02 June, Time 23.44.”
What is the reason for this absurdity?
FINALLY, from the “91ɫƬ, Safety, Environment, Security” leaflet given to visitors to the National Physical Laboratory in south-west London: “Within the new laboratory building smoking is not permitted anywhere except outside.”
