I think a facebook twitter combo would be a pretty good solution. On a given newsfeed you should be able to see the comments of those who you are following. You would obtain those friends through a one sided relationship like twitter (i.e. they don't need to grant you permission) and you could also see the posts of those who belong to specific groups (i.e. I hate Republicans or I hate Democrats) -> that way, you could find more individuals to friend. You could perhaps also have an option to see posts from random individuals who have a high degree of popularity (i.e. many followers) so as to spice things up a bit. The ignore feature would be just as important, you could eliminate certain folks from your newsfeed or certain groups. The ignore would override any setting for group following.
It's pretty common sense and allows people to see what they want and from whom they want so I'm not sure why this has not been done. It's computationally and architecturally a bit demanding, but not much more so than facebook itself.
The downside is that you'll enable people to wall themselves off from the viewpoints of others, so there will be a lot of in-group discussions without outsiders telling them they are wrong. But this is human nature, already happens for the most part and really isn't of concern to a site that just wants to generate traffic.
Can anyone poke holes in my idea? If so, I'd actually like to hear it. I've wanted to see this type of thing for a while.
Ah - I will say that if budget is an issue some of the other options like vbscript will work, but they're more labor intensive. Do yourself a favor and push for QTP.
I'll second this. QTP is *the* standard for automated testing. There are others, but QTP is the best. If you want more info check out this forum.
sqaforums.com - look up Quick Test Pro and get to work. Everyone talking unix is talking nonsense. If you're in a Windows environment, you work with that. You go in talking unix stuff and you're likely to get fired.
I agree with AC. I love science and I'd love to see more science projects but to enforce at least halfway reasonable government spending, there must be consequences for overspending. They couldn't get their costs under control and showed no sign of getting better. Write them off and move on.
Yeah, it's not the most interesting story, but I do find it vaguely interesting that anonymous (i.e. a random group of dudes not getting laid) would do this. Was this just a prank or perhaps trying to prove some kind of point. I think this would actually be a pretty interesting study of how the event would propagate to so many people.
At what point did this party reach the threshold between "why would I want to RSVP to this stupid thing" to "haha - it'll be funny if I say I'm going".
I would imagine the first five to ten thousand would be difficult. Even stupid groups like "I think this pickle is better than Nickleback" group had some unifying message/intention. I think pulling this off was something a bit different.
U.S. Pacific Command made the request to free up the bandwidth. The sites, 13 in all, are blocked across the Department of Defense's.mil computer system.
I actually found Tron to be pretty awesome in its computer references and commands. I was pleasantly surprised. And a backdoor login is not only plausible but a real security concern.
You are picking one of the very few answers Watson got wrong and you're saying he didn't "understand" because the answer doesn't obviously fit in the type of mistake we humans would make. However, it was a mistake. Perhaps an AI would counter (when they are invented) that you don't truly "understand" language.
Can you statistically relate the way in which all your phrases above interact? Probably not. What is your "understanding" based on.. some ethereal knowledge? I would think that in quantitative terms we are the ones that don't understand language.
Eh, I'm a shallow bastard I guess. I can't stand a chick with no brains, but I don't like fat chicks or ugly chicks either. Luckily, I'm born with decent genetics by luck of the draw so I can afford to be a little picky. Also, generally speaking, I think most guys would do exactly the same thing (and definitely most women), they may just be more indirect in how they classify their actions. But this is the Internets so crass comments are the norm.
Lol - I actually wrote this post in hurry, because I'm working (compile time, ya know;-)
Point taken, but if lusting after boobs makes me a deadbeat, then I know I'm not alone! As one of the replies said, deadbeats are the guys that don't shower, work, or have manners.
Agreed. I've used it. And honestly I think online dating is the most efficient way to find someone you're compatible with. You have a list of people answering questions you wouldn't dare to ask them before you see them naked a few times (e.g. what religion are you, do you want to get married and/or just have fun) and you've got a whole list of them. Select your criteria, weed out the fatties and the uglies and email the rest. A couple of them respond, talk to them go on dates with a few and 'viola' - instant girlfriend and/or friend with benefits. It's beautiful. And like you said, most of the competition is just deadbeat dudes. Pretty easy to beat.
But as you also said, it's one dude's project and the interface... well, it kind of shows it. I'm not surprised they're hacked. But honestly, these dating services are generally public anyway, so if these sites are not hacked, they're definitely farmed. The way I look at it... fuck it. I'm looking for titties!
There are an excellent series of essays which I found through/.. They were written by Brad Templeton (EFF chairman). In the essays he outlines a lot of the objections to "robocars" (as he terms it) and many of the possible solutions. Centralized management of data need not be in place for such a system to work. His "school of fish" idea I found pretty interesting...
Good God, +1 for a rational, measured response from someone who knows what the fuck they're talking about.
I swear, I read some of the most illuminating, brilliant comments on/. on topics on which I have little knowledge but after the dude above says "nothing beats actual local accounts" I wonder if they brilliant comments I read are just utter bullshit.
Someone would create a system of local accounts for tens of thousands of desktops and expect to have a manageable LAN? Yeeeeeeah...
True. I actually do not disagree with you there, necessarily. It could go either way. But I would think it's more probable that a machine will obtain some level of autonomous "thought" and "understanding" before we can adequately meld humans with them. I would be surprised if the progress of neural/machine interfaces was as rapid as the AGI algorithms which are currently being researched, especially when the raw horsepower of processing capability is being doubled roughly every 18 months. But... it certainly is possible a human will find a way to augment their brain before a true AGI is created.
Of course, you hit the nail on the head in that I do have a certain blind faith in Moore's law continuing. Generally I believe this will happen because it does seem to be the way processing change occurs, as Kurzweil famously says "back to the 1890 census" and probably before.
Artificial General Intelligence. AI is generally referred to as the specific expert systems and AGI is something more "humanlike" in that it can attack general problems without specific domain knowledge.
Yeah, I do believe humans will be disadvantaged in terms of computing power relative to machines in a few decades. That will very likely lead to "the singularity" in my estimation. Any time I tell non-tech folks about this, they think I'm nuts. And most tech folks think the idea is similarly nuts. Oh well, luckily for me, I'm not proselytising and don't need to be. It'll either happen or it won't!
Yeah, I love Linux and so do most people here. But how the hell is Russia going to manage that LAN (assuming it's anything resembling a large enterprise of 10k+ machines)?
Really... there is nothing, I repeat NOTHING which is as robust or catered to large enterprise user/LAN management than Active Directory. This is one of the major reasons why large enterprises have not left Microsoft.
It's my impression that the Linux community just doesn't "get it". Am I wrong, or perhaps they're not even targeting business customers? Linux devs focus on creating a good desktop, but there's really so much more than that to consider.
Oooh, I don't know if our leaders deserve quite that much vitriol. At least our current ones. Putting partisan politics aside as much as possible, I think it's fair to say that Obama's cozy relationship with Erik Schmidt of Google almost guarantees he has heard about the possible implications of a scalable AGI. And I think Obama is with it (I'm speaking of technology) enough to understand and not immediately dismiss the implications of this. Why do you think the dept of energy constantly funds these supercomputers and supercomputer research? I have hope that we're not quite as obtuse as many would believe. Similar lawyers and financiers had the foresight to finance a very expensive project to split the atom about 60 years ago.
Agreed. I very much doubt we are modeling weather patterns or nuclear explosions anymore. People know an AGI will be created at some point in the future. Some people (including myself) believe that it is highly probable the AGI will be created in the next few decades. Given the huge advantage an AI could create, how could a superpower (or an aspiring superpower) NOT act to create one? Even if the odds are.01% an AGI will be created, a loss in this area means a loss in any conflict. Therefore a power MUST try to create one.
Incidentally, people have thought about this kind of stuff. Factions competing for creation of an AI will very likely lead to a "hard takeoff". This is thought to be the worst of all ways to create an AI because the power and "mentality" of such a thing cannot be well controlled. Much better to collaboratively work together as a species to create a benign and useful partner - but why the hell would we go and do something sensible like that? Instead we'll get what we deserve.. whatever that may be. Fuck
Hahahahahaha - LOL - yeah... but really, c'mon now. Seriously, what ever gave you the idea that the market was a place for equals. It never has been and never will be
Slashdot Mirror
I think a facebook twitter combo would be a pretty good solution. On a given newsfeed you should be able to see the comments of those who you are following. You would obtain those friends through a one sided relationship like twitter (i.e. they don't need to grant you permission) and you could also see the posts of those who belong to specific groups (i.e. I hate Republicans or I hate Democrats) -> that way, you could find more individuals to friend. You could perhaps also have an option to see posts from random individuals who have a high degree of popularity (i.e. many followers) so as to spice things up a bit. The ignore feature would be just as important, you could eliminate certain folks from your newsfeed or certain groups. The ignore would override any setting for group following.
It's pretty common sense and allows people to see what they want and from whom they want so I'm not sure why this has not been done. It's computationally and architecturally a bit demanding, but not much more so than facebook itself.
The downside is that you'll enable people to wall themselves off from the viewpoints of others, so there will be a lot of in-group discussions without outsiders telling them they are wrong. But this is human nature, already happens for the most part and really isn't of concern to a site that just wants to generate traffic.
Can anyone poke holes in my idea? If so, I'd actually like to hear it. I've wanted to see this type of thing for a while.
Ah - I will say that if budget is an issue some of the other options like vbscript will work, but they're more labor intensive. Do yourself a favor and push for QTP.
I'll second this. QTP is *the* standard for automated testing. There are others, but QTP is the best. If you want more info check out this forum.
sqaforums.com - look up Quick Test Pro and get to work. Everyone talking unix is talking nonsense. If you're in a Windows environment, you work with that. You go in talking unix stuff and you're likely to get fired.
I agree with AC. I love science and I'd love to see more science projects but to enforce at least halfway reasonable government spending, there must be consequences for overspending. They couldn't get their costs under control and showed no sign of getting better. Write them off and move on.
Yeah, it's not the most interesting story, but I do find it vaguely interesting that anonymous (i.e. a random group of dudes not getting laid) would do this. Was this just a prank or perhaps trying to prove some kind of point. I think this would actually be a pretty interesting study of how the event would propagate to so many people.
At what point did this party reach the threshold between "why would I want to RSVP to this stupid thing" to "haha - it'll be funny if I say I'm going".
I would imagine the first five to ten thousand would be difficult. Even stupid groups like "I think this pickle is better than Nickleback" group had some unifying message/intention. I think pulling this off was something a bit different.
U.S. Pacific Command made the request to free up the bandwidth. The sites, 13 in all, are blocked across the Department of Defense's .mil computer system.
This is unclear (I even read TFA). Who exactly is being blocked? The Japanese? The US Military? Everyone?
I actually found Tron to be pretty awesome in its computer references and commands. I was pleasantly surprised. And a backdoor login is not only plausible but a real security concern.
Yep - that's the way I interpreted that scene too.
You are picking one of the very few answers Watson got wrong and you're saying he didn't "understand" because the answer doesn't obviously fit in the type of mistake we humans would make. However, it was a mistake. Perhaps an AI would counter (when they are invented) that you don't truly "understand" language.
Can you statistically relate the way in which all your phrases above interact? Probably not. What is your "understanding" based on.. some ethereal knowledge? I would think that in quantitative terms we are the ones that don't understand language.
Eh, I'm a shallow bastard I guess. I can't stand a chick with no brains, but I don't like fat chicks or ugly chicks either. Luckily, I'm born with decent genetics by luck of the draw so I can afford to be a little picky. Also, generally speaking, I think most guys would do exactly the same thing (and definitely most women), they may just be more indirect in how they classify their actions. But this is the Internets so crass comments are the norm.
Plus I'm an incurable smartass.
Lol - I actually wrote this post in hurry, because I'm working (compile time, ya know ;-)
Point taken, but if lusting after boobs makes me a deadbeat, then I know I'm not alone! As one of the replies said, deadbeats are the guys that don't shower, work, or have manners.
Agreed. I've used it. And honestly I think online dating is the most efficient way to find someone you're compatible with. You have a list of people answering questions you wouldn't dare to ask them before you see them naked a few times (e.g. what religion are you, do you want to get married and/or just have fun) and you've got a whole list of them. Select your criteria, weed out the fatties and the uglies and email the rest. A couple of them respond, talk to them go on dates with a few and 'viola' - instant girlfriend and/or friend with benefits. It's beautiful. And like you said, most of the competition is just deadbeat dudes. Pretty easy to beat.
But as you also said, it's one dude's project and the interface... well, it kind of shows it. I'm not surprised they're hacked. But honestly, these dating services are generally public anyway, so if these sites are not hacked, they're definitely farmed. The way I look at it... fuck it. I'm looking for titties!
There are an excellent series of essays which I found through /.. They were written by Brad Templeton (EFF chairman). In the essays he outlines a lot of the objections to "robocars" (as he terms it) and many of the possible solutions. Centralized management of data need not be in place for such a system to work. His "school of fish" idea I found pretty interesting...
Aha - beat me to it. This vid is cute as shit and pretty interesting - further supporting the theory in OP
Agreed. Lesson the white space please. We're geeks, we prefer information density
Yes. Loved it. My first experience with trying to manipulate code (after nibbles, of course). Good times.
Good God, +1 for a rational, measured response from someone who knows what the fuck they're talking about.
/. on topics on which I have little knowledge but after the dude above says "nothing beats actual local accounts" I wonder if they brilliant comments I read are just utter bullshit.
I swear, I read some of the most illuminating, brilliant comments on
Someone would create a system of local accounts for tens of thousands of desktops and expect to have a manageable LAN? Yeeeeeeah...
I don't disagree with anything you said.
True. I actually do not disagree with you there, necessarily. It could go either way. But I would think it's more probable that a machine will obtain some level of autonomous "thought" and "understanding" before we can adequately meld humans with them. I would be surprised if the progress of neural/machine interfaces was as rapid as the AGI algorithms which are currently being researched, especially when the raw horsepower of processing capability is being doubled roughly every 18 months. But... it certainly is possible a human will find a way to augment their brain before a true AGI is created.
Of course, you hit the nail on the head in that I do have a certain blind faith in Moore's law continuing. Generally I believe this will happen because it does seem to be the way processing change occurs, as Kurzweil famously says "back to the 1890 census" and probably before.
Artificial General Intelligence. AI is generally referred to as the specific expert systems and AGI is something more "humanlike" in that it can attack general problems without specific domain knowledge.
Yeah, I do believe humans will be disadvantaged in terms of computing power relative to machines in a few decades. That will very likely lead to "the singularity" in my estimation. Any time I tell non-tech folks about this, they think I'm nuts. And most tech folks think the idea is similarly nuts. Oh well, luckily for me, I'm not proselytising and don't need to be. It'll either happen or it won't!
Yeah, I love Linux and so do most people here. But how the hell is Russia going to manage that LAN (assuming it's anything resembling a large enterprise of 10k+ machines)?
Really... there is nothing, I repeat NOTHING which is as robust or catered to large enterprise user/LAN management than Active Directory. This is one of the major reasons why large enterprises have not left Microsoft.
It's my impression that the Linux community just doesn't "get it". Am I wrong, or perhaps they're not even targeting business customers? Linux devs focus on creating a good desktop, but there's really so much more than that to consider.
Oooh, I don't know if our leaders deserve quite that much vitriol. At least our current ones. Putting partisan politics aside as much as possible, I think it's fair to say that Obama's cozy relationship with Erik Schmidt of Google almost guarantees he has heard about the possible implications of a scalable AGI. And I think Obama is with it (I'm speaking of technology) enough to understand and not immediately dismiss the implications of this. Why do you think the dept of energy constantly funds these supercomputers and supercomputer research? I have hope that we're not quite as obtuse as many would believe. Similar lawyers and financiers had the foresight to finance a very expensive project to split the atom about 60 years ago.
Agreed. I very much doubt we are modeling weather patterns or nuclear explosions anymore. People know an AGI will be created at some point in the future. Some people (including myself) believe that it is highly probable the AGI will be created in the next few decades. Given the huge advantage an AI could create, how could a superpower (or an aspiring superpower) NOT act to create one? Even if the odds are .01% an AGI will be created, a loss in this area means a loss in any conflict. Therefore a power MUST try to create one.
Incidentally, people have thought about this kind of stuff. Factions competing for creation of an AI will very likely lead to a "hard takeoff". This is thought to be the worst of all ways to create an AI because the power and "mentality" of such a thing cannot be well controlled. Much better to collaboratively work together as a species to create a benign and useful partner - but why the hell would we go and do something sensible like that? Instead we'll get what we deserve.. whatever that may be. Fuck
egalitarian marketplace of equals
Hahahahahaha - LOL - yeah... but really, c'mon now. Seriously, what ever gave you the idea that the market was a place for equals. It never has been and never will be
phew - good. God forbid the phrase "yeah, he was good, but not broken condom good" is being whispered behind my back