Personal Computers in Traveller

[Somebody]

gone

 

[AlphaWhelp]

I imagine computers that are little more than a foldable keyboard, that would, well, unfold, and the power button is directly on the keyboard, and the display is actually a holographic projector.

It's possible that the keyboard itself is entirely, with the entire computer being a 3 cm cubed cube that fits in your pocket that is a holographic projector, that projects a keyboard in addition to the display, and you control by tapping on light sources, or maybe the keyboard itself is done away with and you simply point and click in a three dimensional holographic space.

I imagine the folding keyboard model is still in minor amounts of circulation for the blind using computers who, for whatever reason, can't afford eye replacement cybernetics.

remember voice commands is software and there needs to be a way to control your computer without it.

I found a reference somewhere in one of the traveller books that suggests data media is stored on something called "Data Diamonds" but I can't find this reference again, if anyone knows where it is, a book and page number would make me squirm.

 

[hdan]

I picture increasingly smart devices being used, with the concept of a "personal computer" becoming less relevant. IMTU all computers are capable of speaking a sort of "Lingua Franca" for both data and graphics (imagine HTML and OpenGL/X-Window as early prototypes). When a character gets a "computer" during mustering out, I allow them to customize a standard computer up to the TL of the world they are from, adding software that matches their job. For example, a field researcher who mustered out with a computer would have all the relevant software they used in their job as well as the physical device(s) that make up their field computer network.

A few examples:
The "display" of a desktop computer is roughly the equivalent of a touchscreen netbook in today's parlance. It can easily slave to any external CPU and input devices by way of either an encrypted wireless protocol or hard wires. (Usually a serial connection to keep things simple.)

Various "tool kits" interface directly and easily with computer systems, and most ships support both passenger and crew networks (but with many layers of security on the ship's systems!)

Higher tech components are smaller, lighter and more powerful, but still speak the same protocols (Bocci?).

For a more "crunchy" campaign, I would definitely have various political groups defining their own protocols, and in many cases (Vargr come to mind) you probably have to match manufacturers, though "knock off" hardware would emulate the more popular protocols. ("Ling Standard Protocol? Sure, this baby can speak LSP and NaasirkaML! And it'll only cost you....")

 

[DFW]

Comments?

2000 years from now it will be unimaginably capable, ubiquitous & cheap.

 

[AndrewW]

Communication will also depend on "what is there". If you are in a TL4 backwater you link to your long range comm and then the ship. If you have cell phone you use that

Comments?

A TL4 world isn't going to have the infrastructure (cell towers), so make that more of a satellite (or would that be ship?) phone that communicates with a ship in orbit.

 

[AndrewW]

I found a reference somewhere in one of the traveller books that suggests data media is stored on something called "Data Diamonds" but I can't find this reference again, if anyone knows where it is, a book and page number would make me squirm.

Central Supply Catalogue page: 177 has a Data Wafer:

...TL 14 wafers are memory diamond..."

 

[Garuda]

Well if the far future looks anything like Blake's 7 - a portable compact computer will look like an enourmous milk crate with lots of wires and flashing lights.

 

[DFW]

Assuming Moores law holds up

Even without it.

But what will it look like? I.e the "mobile" part of a modern smartphone can fit on little more than a finger nail. But there are requirements such as "useable by humans" that force bigger sizes

You will order exactly what you want. There will programs to design your own interface options. Fabrication on demand. Aka: F.O.D.

 

[PhilHibbs]

Moore's Law is not the only thing to take into consideration. Ten years ago, I could type an email without having to wait for the computer. Now, I can't do that because the computer I'm using can't keep up with the requirements of Outlook 2007.

 

[IanBruntlett]

What will they look like? Will they still run Windows? If yes, will their be a new version for each emperor (Windows, Strephons edition)

Well, with political bodies lasting for 1000 years or more, I'd envisage most computing standard(s) to have been hammered out. Leading to:-

1. Wide-spread inter-communicating systems. E.g a 3rd Imperium navigation computer interacting with a Zhodani star base's docking computers.

2. Costs being low. Processors and memory being built into many systems - as is pervasive on Earth *right now* but even more so. Don't fret the details, just concentrate on the (intelligent) abilities.

3. Materials science improvements will lead to all sorts of improvements. The web sites http://www.theregister.co.uk/ and http://slashdot.org/ may provide some inspiration.

Taking a different tack, the military tends to continually improve their kit so some computing systems may still be improving - even after 1,000 years of use.

As for the software they'll be running, *make it up*. Call the operating system(s) and application(s) something suitably groovy and concentrate on their capabilities without worrying too much about the implementation.

Here are some ideas from computing:-
* Silicon chips are baked onto flat wafers - i.e. they are 2D. Manufacturers are looking at producing 3D chips which, in theory, individual cores/processors on the 3D chips will communicate more effectively
* The source code / software blue prints in some political bodies are available for inspection and end-user improvement
* Hard disks are being replaced by SSDs - Solid State Drives.

And, for the right TL, consider Iain M. Banks Neural lace - in-brain computing and gland control - found in his Culture novels.

Also, if you are interested in guessing the future there is a 148 page article by Kurzweil at this address:-
http://singularityhub.com/2011/01/04/kurzweil-defends-his-predictions-again-was-he-86-correct/

 

[Vile]

Well if the far future looks anything like Blake's 7 - a portable compact computer will look like an enourmous milk crate with lots of wires and flashing lights.

Yes, that is exactly what they will look like. And they will be very annoying.

Who cares what the computers look in that future. The question is: Will the females look like Blake's 7s Soolin

No, some will look like Wilma Deering.

Personal computers seem to be getting bigger all the time. First they were basically a keyboard which you plugged into a TV, then they became these flat desktop or all-in-one monitor.keyboard combinations. Now they're these huge flashing boxes with another twenty flashing boxes of various shapes and sizes plugged into it, with at least two widescreen monitors if you know what's good for you.

I hope Future*World computers look a bit like a scroll which goes rigid when you roll it out. When you're done you zip it back up and slip it in your truncheon pocket.

In the future, everyone has truncheon pockets in their lycra bodystockings.

 

[CosmicGamer]

Others will use arm-mounted keyboards or classic keyboards. Comments?

You already mentioned voice interactive systems and below discusses another option.

or maybe the keyboard itself is done away with and you simply point and click in a three dimensional holographic space.

I think the concept of keboards would be archaic. Voice recognition is here already. Motion sensing with a little more sensitivity could let one motion be an entire word instead of one key press; utilizing sign language as an input.

I guess some form of input is still needed when you are in public and don't want people seeing what you are doing. The research is still not there yet today for dictating an "email" by thought but a sensor reading your brain as an input might be possible in the future. See http://www.nytimes.com/2006/07/13/science/13brain.html

if for some reason the link is not allowed, do a search on the three words: "paralyzed" "thoughts" "move"

 

[PhilHibbs]

The future is an undiscovered country, and all kinds of wonders and monsters can inhabit it. I guess the kind of grief that I wrote about are because computing is still in its infancy, it hasn't matured yet. Computers are a "singularity" technology. Before they are invented, nobody can possibly even dream what the world will be like afterwards. And we haven't finished inventing them yet. So, whoever is writing the setting has to make a call as to how they want the result to look, and go with that. Saying "but that's not how it's going to be" is rather pointless, just like saying "Jump drive is not how FTL is going to work", as no-one can possibly know that. You make a call and go with it, any GM that wants a different call has to make sure that their changed interpretation doesn't have any disastrous knock-on effects on game balance.

Does the official Traveller universe still have computers measured in tons?

 

[BP]

Just some things to ponder...

I've used commercially available speech 'recognition' systems some twenty years ago (and they had been out for quite some time before then). Within the past 10 years it has not been uncommon for cell phones to provide speech controlled calling options (very poorly implemented, but the tech works very good).

Recent times have been great for many alternate control tech moving into the mainstream - multi-touch (am writing full business apps on iPad at the moment), face recognition (standard option on some Windows Laptops), 3D motion sensing (Kinect - which support body, face and voice sensing). Oh, and one can buy a laser projection keyboard today for any PC/Mac (less than $100 IIRC).

E-Ink and flexible display systems have been available for quite some time (~30 years), and some are making inroads in consumer sector.

Holographic storage and retrieval systems have actually been available (commercially) since the early seventies (and before for government) - though not mainstream in any way. Holographic displays have existed in research labs and specialized markets for 40 plus years.

Several large companies (Sony and Panasonic IIRC) have demonstrated full color hidef 3D projection systems in the past.

As to 'brain' controlled - I've actually played with an 'alpha-wave' controlled mouse several years back that was designed for handicap accessibility and I believe is still on the market. Don't forget retinal controlled systems - such as used in the fire-control systems on some fighter craft (helicopters first IIRC) and other military platforms for many decades and is also used for handicap accessibility.

All of these have pros and cons like any tech - and their effectiveness doesn't really have a direct market relationship (tech vs value is more about financing, politics and perceived ROI than reality). A great many financially successful technologies that have been around for many decades are only now hitting the market place - mostly due to huge revenue streams of entertainment markets, rather than any real tech hurtles that had needed to be overcome.

 

[IanBruntlett]

Personal computers seem to be getting bigger all the time. First they were basically a keyboard which you plugged into a TV, then they became these flat desktop or all-in-one monitor.keyboard combinations. Now they're these huge flashing boxes with another twenty flashing boxes of various shapes and sizes plugged into it, with at least two widescreen monitors if you know what's good for you.

Desktop/Tower PCs are losing ground in terms of sales to the portable computer market.

Eventually most consumer used computers may be some kind of portable computer. It could be an expensive, high performance laptop (e.g. Alienware). Or an average laptop - enough for most people. Or a budget laptop (typically using an Intel Core i3 processor). A lot of "wearable" computers aren't typically counted as computers - e.g digital watch, smartphone, MP3 player, Nintendo DS etc. And others (e.g. Amazon Kindle, Apple Ipad, generic slate computers) are viewed more as accessories.

For years Intel and IBM had the PC business market sewn up (later on, Microsoft came in). They did so on the back of "binary compatibility" where, say a 486 could run software written for an 8086. Then on came along the Free Software Foundation http://www.fsf.org/ and the Open Source movement http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_source. Then, all of a sudden, binary compatibility was less of a prerequisite. People would take software written in, say, C or C++ and compile it for newer computer architectures.

 

[BP]

Not to put to fine a point on it - but that's mixing apples and oranges and grapes.

The binary compatibility between a '486' and 8086 is a hardware and microcode technology - and all Intel. (IBM defined the BIOS and hardware interface standards which still impact us today - usually adversely.)

'Free Software' and Open source is about operating system platform compatibility. (And most of this is done commercially - very tiny percentage of users actually re-compile programs for their OS - though I love open source myself.)

C and C++ were designed (many decades before) specifically to be independent of hardware platform - hence C was and still is the primary programming language used for OS development. A great deal of Open source is not C/C++ based (and much still is - as C/C++ is a very prevalent language).

 

[AndrewW]

Also given the nature of space I have always seen the "ship computer" as a classic "three and voting" setup like the one used i.e in nuclear plants. A "backup computer" than is a second system with the same setup (Again not uncommon in nuke plants). The "three and voting" setup actually is the standards for starships in TNE

Then there's NASA's space shuttle which uses 4 + 1 backup. In one case the backup computer was shutting down the others, they couldn't find anything wrong with the ones that where being shutdown and eventually found out it was a problem with the backup computer.

 

[AndrewW]

Desktop/Tower PCs are losing ground in terms of sales to the portable computer market.

Hey, don't forget rackmount.

 

[AlphaWhelp]

I think the concept of keboards would be archaic. Voice recognition is here already. Motion sensing with a little more sensitivity could let one motion be an entire word instead of one key press; utilizing sign language as an input.

I don't feel that keyboards will ever be done away with entirely. Even if Voice recognition is hundreds of times more advanced then than it is now, it won't and can't be perfect.

If for example, I'm trying to write a book, and one of the words I want to use is "Vargr" today's VRS would probably interpret that as barge. Even highly advanced VRS won't know that I meant to input Vargr and not Varger or Varg'r or some other strange way to spell Vargr.

Keyboards will probably still be accessible, if not as hardware, than through the same methods one might access a command prompt or shell today.

Now the idea of a computer that is controlled entirely through encephalon waves would be interesting, but Traveller is advanced enough to have brain implants that allow for computers controlled directly through impulse stimulation. So another possibility is that computers might be controlled through a neuro-jack type interface, but I can't really see everyone in the galaxy having hardware wired into their brain.

Ultimately, I think the keyboard is a pretty staple piece of technology, and will be as hard to permanently replace and made obsolete as something like a knife.

 

[AndrewW]

The binary compatibility between a '486' and 8086 is a hardware and microcode technology - and all Intel. (IBM defined the BIOS and hardware interface standards which still impact us today - usually adversely.)

Nobody will ever need more then 640k.

'Free Software' and Open source is about operating system platform compatibility. (And most of this is done commercially - very tiny percentage of users actually re-compile programs for their OS - though I love open source myself.)

Though does offer some hardware independence as well.