Slashdot Mirror

I actually lost the original article I was going to post, but found a completely different AI for lie detection. Both were from 2018.

https://futurism.com/new-ai-detects-deception-bring-end-lying-know-it/
This was developed for determining if someone is lying in a court.

https://www.fastcompany.com/40575672/goodbye-polygraphs-new-tech-uses-ai-to-tell-if-youre-lying/

This one seems to be being developed for homeland security.

(plus, if we don't do whatever the fuck he says, he might just install a Microsoft Windows powered Nuclear Power Plant in our backyard, jab us with Agenda 21 vaccines, and then force upon us free, live chickens to butcher and eat because obviously, we're savage heathens that have no appreciation for his technological superiority)

I remember seeing an article last year about Solar paint. Meaning, you paint the building with this specific paint and it can be used generate clean energy. This was developed in the UK, which is not where I would expect to spend my days sunning on the beach.
A team of researchers from the Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology (RMIT) has developed a paint that can be used to generate clean energy. The paint combines the titanium oxide already used in many wall paints with a new compound: synthetic molybdenum-sulphide. The latter acts a lot like the silica gel packaged with many consumer products to keep them free from damage by absorbing moisture. According to a report on RMITâ(TM)s website, the material absorbs solar energy as well as moisture from the surrounding air. It can then split the water into hydrogen and oxygen, collecting the hydrogen for use in fuel cells or to power a vehicle. âoe[T]he simple addition of the new material can convert a brick wall into energy harvesting and fuel production real estate,â explained lead researcher Dr. Torben Daeneke.

https://futurism.com/a-new-sol...

This article is from 2017 so I wonder where this type of solution has progressed to. It could resolve the issue of your anal neighbors bitching and moaning that your solar panels are blinding them or blocking their view.

You may be right, but not by as much as you think, because I said a small ship (meaning manned spacecraft), not just an empty ultra-efficient hypothetical rocket. Here's a more relevant ideal scenario estimate at $300m to send a potentially manned ship on an unmanned test landing mission:

https://futurism.com/nasa-esti...

With more traditional options, the price could reach into the 11-digits for a one-way trip:

https://www.fool.com/investing...

China is the world leader in renewable energy: https://futurism.com/china-new...
33% of India's current energy production is renewable or Hydro: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

While its true that both country's are building coal plants, they are building even more renewable capacity and backpedaling on further reliance on fossil fuels.

>It doesn't matter what the USA does, mathematically insignificant to global carbon load.
Unfortunately, the US contribution to global carbon load is not insignificant: http://www.globalcarbonatlas.o...

Look, I know we've built our societies on CO2 belching cars and CO2 diarrhetic energy production but it's a real problem that we need to fix. We have the technology to build carbon capture systems remove CO2 from the air with 1000x the efficacy of trees (per square meter) but it needs to be built and maintained. Therefore it seems only logical that there be a tax on all the things that produce CO2 so that money can be used to capture it. Obviously, this will make lower and non-polluting products far more attractive as they will be cheaper.

The solution is known and it's extremely frustrating that there is a total lack of will to implement it.

https://futurism.com/measureme....

Now, it appears I was mistaken, they are somewhere between a 2.5 and 4 sigma, but, it is still under study. Interesting? Someone qualified care to comment?

Oh, thanks. Found some other picture, the receiver is very visible in TFA, it's just lowered down

> Do you realize that the driving force of UBI in today's environment is to actually allow people to survive without working?

You realize there's no reason to assert that? There's nothing published or publicly said, by the organizations running these experiments, to that effect.

You do realize there's more context behind UBI than just Y Combinator's press release? Do press releases really need to repeat everything just for you?

thats why China is the world leader in renewables.... https://futurism.com/china-new... [futurism.com] - it'll just take a longer time due the size of China.

Yes, "longer time" to get to carbon neutrality means "more than 10-20 years". Ditto for India. Those countries could switch completely to renewables for energy generation and they still would be far from carbon neutral.

"there is no conceivable political or economic way that China, India, or African nations would agree to eliminating greenhouse gas emissions" thats why China is the world leader in renewables.... https://futurism.com/china-new... - it'll just take a longer time due the size of China.
and India is chasing to be second in the table https://economictimes.indiatim...

The D in DARPA stands for Defense, so your flying cars will have to wait. And DARPA doesn't get the money from all those other projects you mentioned. If I'm reading you correctly, you're arguing that we didn't need those weapons mentioned above. I'll disagree with you, while agreeing that we paid much more than necessary...FWIW, I've been in the defense contracting business for more than 35 yrs. DoD in general needs to have the way in which it procures weapons completely revamped. DARPA has had plenty of success stories (below are just a few), so I have no issue with them spending money this way.

https://futurism.com/nine-most...

If you want to see the real ramification of it all, if you want to see the actual effect, it got to be introduced as a WHOLE for everyone.

You are bold! I assume you're volunteering to fund this, right? Or are you suggesting that the Canadian government should make a $50 billion gamble on this?

Make no mistake, I'm in support of UBI. But politically, I doubt most countries in the world could take that gamble. You're talking about a very significant percentage of all expenditures by a country being required to fund UBI. Here's one analysis:

But how would we pay for this? $1,000 a month for everyone would cost approximately $2.7 trillion annually, which represents around four to five times the size of the defense budget and 15 percent of the GDP.

I get that UBI doesn't work if it's not universal. But before you're going to convince anyone to take this dive, it's going to have proven at least minimally effective in trials.

They said CR was wrong but now apparently they say CR was right...

Tesla's big battery in Australia will pay for itself in less than a year by outcompeting fossil fuel power plants to provide grid power (from wind).
https://www.theguardian.com/te...
https://futurism.com/teslas-au...

The real reason the summit is being "cancelled": https://futurism.com/sonic-att...

Wouldn't this be a reason TO have the summit? North Korea is a buffer and a football. If South Korea and the US become friendly to North Korea, China's influence is weakened.

The real reason the summit is being "cancelled": https://futurism.com/sonic-att...

I guess there are different types of anti GMO people :D
I'm only against GMO'ed food.

For what purpose? Because honestly, there is no rational reason to be opposed to it. Here's what GMO food can (and already does in many cases) do for us:

- Reduced need for landmass for farming. Increased need for agricultural landmass is the #1 reason this planet is losing forest areas.
- Reduced agricultural waste.
- Reduced need for insecticides.
- Reduced need for resources for farming, especially water.
- Increased nutritional value of food while reducing the toxicity. And yes, there is plenty of that in food already.
- Increased flavor of food without needing to add more of what you can do without (i.e. simple sugars.) Possibly reducing it even.

Apparently, Greenpeace doesn't like these things. They don't like saving lives either:

https://geneticliteracyproject...

So what's your beef with all of the above? Keep in mind, nearly all of the negatives you've heard are either outright lies or scientific fraud. There is zero evidence that GMO causes cancer, or any other negative health effect. All of the claims that GMO will "contaminate" wildlife have already been addressed. The claim that "GMO is dangerous because we don't know what it does, therefore it's probably dangerous and should be avoided" is so stupid it's laughable: With GMO, we know exactly what we're getting, whereas with natural breeding, there are millions of unknowns.

http://www.vocativ.com/272885/...
https://futurism.com/two-decad...

Honestly, there is no reason to be against it. You're basically the same as an anti-vaxxer, only you're targeting something else. Possibly you think natural is better, only it is a fact that natural is NOT better, and you rarely eat anything natural. For example, apples don't grow massively oversized and with much higher amounts of sugar than is needed in order for their seeds to consume and survive. It simply goes against the plant's survival, namely because producing all of that extra sugar consumes energy that wild plants are usually in short supply of. Human intervention is required for them to thrive in all but the most perfect growing conditions (which are rare to find.) The fact is, most plants you eat have been bred to be calorie dense enough for us to thrive on. In fact, they are themselves genetically modified, only the means is different.

Pro tip: Your body can't actually digest most natural plant matter, which means most wild plants are inedible for you. Disagree? Then here's a challenge: Go to your nearest wooded area and survive on only plant matter for a month. By the way: All of these little vegetarians and vegans who claim that humans evolved as herbivores are demonstrably false. In fact, there is no one place in the world that vegans can obtain all of the nourishment the human body needs; they can only live on their diet because of the technology available.

And: we want it labeled.

And this is the most ASSHOLE position to have, because it only serves one purpose: To stigmatize the product so that it can't sell. There really is no rational reason to demand to know if it's genetically modified even though this fact is immaterial to the food, while at the same time you don't seem interested in its heavy metal content, which IS a material fact. You're just an asshole for doing your best to make GMO produce unmarketable. Asshole.

Hence we have laws according to it in Europe ...

That's because Europe is stupid. Really, it is. Just as California is stupid for labeling cofee as carcinogenic (It has a ring of truth to it, but this is all relative. Practically everything you eat contains carcinogens, the question is just how much. And by the way, GMO can reduce said content.)

But the greatest of them is the ability to reproduce

There are AIs which write AIs ... is this reproduction? That's a very abstract question.

So, if you have an AI which can produce other AIs, and which is self aware (which even in animals we have some basic tests to evaluate that) ... at what point do we draw the line for saying "well, it's aware, and can reproduce, is it alive?"

I'm not sure we would know how to identify if it was self-aware, especially if it had the capacity to keep that information to itself, and I'm not sure we'd really know what happened. We quite possibly could have something which was a fairly random event that we can't reproduce and nobody will ever know the mechanics of it.

And, if the people who built the AI which built other AIs have no idea how the 'child' AI works, what we have is a machine created AI which we know very little about its inner workings, if it's batshit crazy, or if it has decided getting rid of us is the best plan of action.

What happens if you try to turn such a thing off? Does it just passively accept that, or does it react? The latter sounds like something out of a movie, but then again, so does an AI which builds other AIs.

The only thing we can say as, as far as we know it hasn't happened yet, but otherwise the rest of it is entirely a theoretical discussion -- but ideally one you think about before you're confronted with something you don't know how to control.

You could look at Australia which has wind, solar and a big battery stabilizing the grid and supplying backup power for South Australia. So far, the battery has surpassed expectations by preventing power outages and is even proving to be a money maker.
https://futurism.com/teslas-au...
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-...
Renewables plus battery storage are more reliable and less expensive than fossil fuels.

So it's OK if stars have their rotation axii aligned together:

http://www.cea.fr/english/Page...

Then galaxies seemed to be aligned with their rotation axii as well:

https://arxiv.org/abs/1308.281...

Same with quasars billions of light-years apart:

https://futurism.com/rotationa...

Gravity can pull objects together, but it takes electromagnetism to get them to align together.
That would suggest electric fields and currents.

I'm not going to say that is impossible for AI to do what I do, but AI is itself another layer of technology, subject to both failures in the underlying layers and failures in its own implementation. AI might be better at sorting-out some of its own problems, but there comes a point when the platform upon which its implemented is broken enough that it requires someone external to fix it.

Of course AI will for a long time at least take people to maintain it. However, this is a sort of red herring in this argument, because the question is not 'does AI produce new jobs' but 'Does AI produce more jobs than it removes', and the answer to that is no. As in, you take a factory that employs say 300 people and you increase the automation, chances are you'll remove something like 50 jobs and create 5.10 new ones. Even i you pay those new guys 3-4 times as much as you used to pay the guys doing manual labor that the system made obsolete, you're still saving money. Here's an actual example from China from last year

The factory recently replaced 90 percent of its human workforce with machines, and it led to a staggering 250 percent increase in productivity and a significant 80 percent drop in defects.

Changying Precision Technology Company’s factory used to need 650 human workers to produce mobile phones. Now, the factory is run by 60 robot arms that work around the clock across 10 production lines. Only 60 people are still employed by the company — three are assigned to check and monitor the production line, and the others are tasked with monitoring computer control systems. Any remaining work not handled by humans is left in the capable hands of machines.

According to Luo Weiqiang, general manager of the factory, the number of people employed could drop to just 20, and given the level of efficiency achieved by automation, it won’t be long before other factories follow in their footsteps.

Same thing on the office side: large amounts of data entry jobs are fast becoming automated. So you may have something like 30 people doing nothing but paying/sending invoices. Move to an fully electronic system, and you're left with maybe 5 people who oversee that everything goes alright and handle the cases wherein the system fails.

Cost of a PV system was in the "balance of system" since 2012.
And the price of a PV system will continue to drop at almost the same level as the tariff - 4.4% per year.
So the tariff will be meaningless in half the time.

Also... It's pretty much obvious from the graph on the link above that even with that 30% hike on Chinese solar panels - they will still be cheaper than the ones Made in USA.
Aaaand... that India is making China look like USA with their prices - 65 cents per watt.

On top of all that... If anything, this will push China to cut costs further and to export more to non-US customers.
Or, to simply have the government of China "eat the difference" for a while. It's not like they can't do subsidies too.

But hey... China doesn't have the benefit of being run by a "stable genius".

So to have significant effect, such a system would need to be installed on many flat-topped buildings in urban areas, or open ground. If you're going to do that, why not install solar power generators in the same places, which reduce need for dirty power generation? The system is de facto using clean power generation potential for air filtering, albeit in efficient manner (due to direct utilization of solar thermal energy), but I question it's total utility value. China is already pushing electric cars etc heavily so that source is not a long term problem.

I would supposition that plant based air cleaning systems, whethe normal plants like http://mashable.com/2017/02/09... or moss like https://futurism.com/4-citytre... can be installed even more places, even filling vertical walls, effect not dependent on large single areas to support 'chimney' etc, and actively clean the air in even more ways, as well as adding oxygen.

Although on the other hand, the chimney filter system can very well be applied where heat chimneys already inherently serve climate control cooling function for buildings, and designing buildings with this approach in mind reduces need for air conditioning etc thus reducing electric consumption.

Links, there were supposed to be links and urls and stuff. https://futurism.com/experts-a... I predict that Slashdot post will be replaced by AI yesterday.

More and more the theory that intelligent civilizations always destroy themselves when the become advanced makes sense to me. https://futurism.com/we-wont-b... I think a large percentage of us agree that we are watching a slow motion train wreck. Whether the train actually crashes in the end or not, it is going to get a lot more scarier. There is nothing we can do but hope for the best and prepare for the worst. Think about not having children. Do whatever sets your soul on fire. Live your best life.

But someone sure went to a lot of effort to post over a million anti-Net Neutrality comments to the FCC using stolen identities a bot network.

And there were at least 7.5 million auto-generated pro-NN comments as well. Both sides were replete with folks with far more tech savvy than common sense who thought that the comment mechanism was a ballot box, which, ironically enough, made it significantly harder for the FCC to sort though the mess to find any comments actually providing meaningful information.

End of the Automotive era. Longtime GM executive thinks the car industry as we know it is pretty much doomed.

This could be be pessimistic. Or optimistic. Depends on how you feel about driving. I used to like it. But with all the distracted drivers and vile traffic in my area I am ready to kiss it goodbye. Forty thousand dead on US roads. Robots couldn't do worse. Heck. Trained bears couldn't do worse.

How about this !

https://futurism.com/a-tiny-fi...

It seems to me that poor communication discourages people from being interested in Physics. "The Universe should not exist" is clickbait dishonesty by the media.

Read the scientific article, A parts-per-billion measurement of the antiproton magnetic moment. There is nothing dishonest.

It would have been far better to explain the conflict being observed and acknowledge that not much is known in that area of interest. It is FAR too early to draw conclusions.

What the CERN scientists may have discovered is that the "basic assumptions of the standard model of particle physics" are incorrect.

More clickbait dishonesty:

CERN Antimatter Experiment Suggest the Universe Shouldn't Exist

CERN Research Finds "The Universe Should Not Actually Exist"

The Universe Should Not Actually Exist, CERN Scientists Discover

CERN Scientists Find Further Evidence That the Universe 'Should Not Exist'

The universe shouldn't exist, scientists say after finding bizarre behaviour of anti-matter. Quote: "We don't know why the universe isn't destroying itself." That is at least in the direction of being honest; we don't know why.

I'm guessing that media writers didn't want to try to understand the actual issues, so they all adopted one writer's wild exaggeration.

I see NO evidence that anyone at CERN is dishonest. The dishonesty seems to be only in media reports.

We don't have to worry because the Singularity will happen by 2045.

https://futurism.com/kurzweil-claims-that-the-singularity-will-happen-by-2045/

Tesla's gigafactory is not going to be able to produce enough batteries for grid level storage.

A single factory is not intended to. But Tesla projects that 100 gigafactories would meet demand for 100% world-wide renewable energy.

Is it expensive? Yes. But so is the current power industry. If cheaper options exist for sustainable energy storage (as you suggest) then they will eventually prevail against current options. But pumped hydro is mostly played out (and hydro usually causes massive habitat destruction) and other energy storage options tend to have drawbacks. Maybe another battery chemistry like sodium air will win.

OK:

AI Lawyer "Ross" has been hired by its first official law firm.

AI cancer diagnosis tool

Using AI to Predict Malicious Infrastructure Activity

It's not legal either place for very good reasons because it isn't safe and cannot be made safe.

Then how do you rationalize why it is even legal to purchase such hardware? There are undoubtedly more firearms than 500+hp cars in America. Firearms are regulated extensively regulated for public safety. High-powered street cars are not. If they are such a public safety risk as you assert, why is this the case?

Spend 20 seconds on google if you need actual examples.

I already supplied multi-year traffic accident data for Japan and the US. That's a far larger data set than looking at individual examples on Google.

Considering that automation/robots/AI are making human labor obsolete...

Umm, what kind of bullshit are you talking about now? This has nothing to do with the topic at hand nor is it actually true.

I'm not sure if you are trolling or just plain ignorant, but I'm feeling generous enough to contribute to your enlightenment.
Japanese insurance firm replaces 34 staff with AI: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-...
IBM's Watson edits an entire magazine on its own: https://futurism.com/will-ibms...
Automation arrives at restaurants: http://www.computerworld.com/a...
"The result of their agitation will be more jobs for machines and fewer for the least skilled workers," it wrote.
Foxconn replaces 60,000 factory workers with robots: http://www.bbc.com/news/techno...
Chinese factory replaces 90% of humans with robots, production soars: http://www.techrepublic.com/ar...

Now, here's why all of that is relevant. What are we supposed to do with potentially billions of low-skill or even medium-skill human beings whose labor is no longer a cost-effective means of production? They will still consume resources and produce pollution, just by existing. Your posts indicate that protecting the environment is a priority for you, yet you have a myopic focus on high-powered passenger vehicles while ignoring the elephant in the room of unchecked global population growth. Hence why I countered that cutting the population in half would leave us still able to sustain (if not improve) our First-World living standards across the board, AND do the environment a big favor. We can have 800HP cars and pristine national parks if we just had 4 billion fewer people, who we won't need to manufacture said 800HP cars in the near-future anyway, so no loss there......Are you finally picking up what I'm putting down now?

Holy off topic batman. I think we are done here.

Well, I've laid out my thoughts in a clear manner with numerous references, and you've only contributed vapid one-liners, so I have no qualms about accepting your concession in this debate.

Nope. The roof is warrently forever. The solar is not.

Okay, done. Next?
(what this has to do with is unclear, but there is plenty of research on that score as well)

Los Angeles has the very same issues?

Yeah, they're breathing Chinese smog too... And some of the bad weather can also be attributed more to the smog than to climate change.. Chinese smog is a global issue, quite a mess...