Computer programmers have to reinvent to keep the lawyers away. They can't just take someone's patented and copyrighted square wheel and make an octagon out of it, they must start from scratch.
Again, no. Small children naturally wake by the crack of dawn and are ready to go soon after. Teens naturally wake later. They can force themselves up earlier given sufficient motivation, but they will not be ready to learn at that time.
A search warrant is quite different from an order to produce something, and those must be legally separate. Otherwise, they could just order you to produce something that doesn't exist and then jail you forever for contempt when you fail to produce it.
Or, present it that the test mode will trigger a map that disregards normal pollution standards so peak performance can be studied and normal mode will use the compliant maps. Then switch the maps.
Actually, it is not. In practice, there is an unofficial policy of looking the other way. That tells you something when a law is so unconscionable that even a government bureaucracy doesn't have the stomach to enforce it.
No. Insurance doesn't help this particular problem at the social level, it just changes things from us paying 4 times more than we should for medical bills to 4 times more than we should for insurance premiums.
It does bring up a good point though. There is a lot of space between the A bomb proof data center with the geographically diverse duplicate data center with hot cutover and DR, what's that?
As you point out, data backup is essential, but that doesn't imply a full duplicate data center. It may be that a very minimal setup is enough to limp along for a few weeks while things get back to normal. Limping doesn't necessarily mean no revenue.
It's also useful to note that downtime due to storms and such doesn't necessarily mean lost equipment.
Alas, you seem willing to redefine terms into meaninglessness so you can claim a disconnected neural net has that mysterious thing. We'll call it quigby. It affects nothing and changes nothing and it can't be detected. Yes, I'll agree that neural nets may have quigby.
However, if sentience, consciousness, and intelligence have any sort of meaning that at all coincides with commonly accepted definitions, please do explain scientifically how a neural net might have those traits if it has never had connections to the outside world and doesn't even show signs of oscillation.
Otherwise, I declare that rocks are intelligent, sentient, and conscious and you just lack the imagination to see it. We must therefor cease all quarrying immediately.
If you don't orient the can reasonably properly, it gets left there. You will have to store it till the next pickup. Eventually, the smelly garbage encourages you to try orienting the can properly.
Though our county service still uses the 2 men on the back of the truck method, it is now providing a standard trash can. If a marker were placed on the can next to the handle in the back, it shouldn't be TOO hard to get a grappler to find it's way to the handle (much like the automated charger we saw on/. a month or two ago finds the charge port). That would at least simplify the problem to be a matter of making sure the handle faces the street.
And as soon as one neuron fires, it is no longer in the same state.
No. If the net has learned nothing, it's behavior will remain indistinguishable from the default state. Random static electricity can cause a neon tube to fire as well, but that doesn't mean it's conscious, even if another tube fires due to the stimulus.
Certainly, no matter how many neurons randomly fire, it is not going to learn self vs. not-self. The concept won't be there because without external stimulus there is no information about not-self. No self, no sentience. Sentience is generally believed to be required for suffering to exist. Where there is no possibility of suffering, there is no ethical or moral duty to not cause that suffering.
If you prefer to argue for consciousness, please see this. I see no definition there that can be satisfied without at least a history of external stimulus of some sort.
Intelligence is a slippery term to be sure. However, I would say that certainly sentience does not imply intelligence. Depending on your favorite definition, intelligence doesn't require sentience. For example, artificial image classification nets don't likely have any sense of self or subjective experience. Nor do expert systems.
The default state of a neural net is untrained, without memories. Fresh from the vat in the case of an organic one.
None of your confusion between the computer analogy you introduced and organic neural nets alters the fact that the fetal neural net does not oscillate before week 25. It shows only random spikes that damp to nothing in short order.
I am presuming that a neural net with no activity isn't doing anything. That's not a terribly radical idea.
I am well aware of the history of computing and the halting problem, but I'm not sure how the halting problem or batch vs interactive computing has any bearing on the question at hand. Regardless of the philosophy, the techniques provide experience that may have bearing on the question at hand.
I invoke Buddhist thought primarily because meditation is the only way we are likely to experience a self-less state without very dangerous physical experimentation on the brain.
It feels a bit as if we are talking at cross purposes. I am here hoping to spur new ideas on the subject in myself and perhaps you. I may be miss-perceiving, but you seem to be here expecting to win an argument?
The problem with the insurance scam is that it does very little to contain out of control medical costs. In fact, it makes it worse since opting out entirely and self-treating becomes impossible, even for conditions that used to be treated at home as a matter of course.
Really I think at this point, a European style system is our best bet. The entire industry is so thoroughly addicted to unnecessary tests and outrageous margins that it will take legal price controls or a unified negotiator to get it under control. That will, in turn, drive internalization of the health care externalities of pollution.
This would certainly be useful in a consciousness learning about it's external environment, but I don't think comprehension of one's external environment is necessary for sentience.
Please read what I wrote carefully. I said:
I suspect coordinated and consistent input would be required to get from sentience to intelligence.
In other words, development of sentience doesn't necessarily require coordinated input but intelligence does.
Also, note that I said DEFAULT state, not INITIAL state.
As to the computer analogy, pull the boot rom and turn it on, the clock ticks, but nothing useful happens. Power on an untrained artificial neural net, at most you get a meaningless oscillation (but if there is no form of output, you won't see it).
Consider, how can there be self if there isn't not-self? While Buddhism suggests there is a self-less state of being, it also indicates that there is no suffering in that state.
A little googling shows that in fact, before week 25, the fetal neural net does not oscillate. Going back to the computer analogy, imagine an old mini where the power is on but the CPU clock hasn't been started. The potential is there but it isn't actualized. Of course, a neural net is asynchronous (or at least can be), but some stimulus is still needed to get it going. Note too that the normal fetal brain is not completely sensory deprived once the peripheral nervous system begins to develop.
Oh, you can bleed the account dry, no problem. What I mean is that they DO have a mechanism to keep you from overdrawing it, but they only use it when there is nobody they can put the bite on to cover the debt.
I will agree that the bar is fairly high. It would just about take a smoking gun email that discusses how best to fudge the data so it's not too obvious.
That's an entirely different matter. You apparently are not trying to deny climate change, only questioning the political mechanism behind remediation. Further, you're not cranking out fraudulent reports to do so.
I'm a bit skeptical of buying and selling pollution indulgences as a solution as well.
Slashdot Mirror
It was the same when I went to school. It really didn't make much sense.
Computer programmers have to reinvent to keep the lawyers away. They can't just take someone's patented and copyrighted square wheel and make an octagon out of it, they must start from scratch.
Again, no. Small children naturally wake by the crack of dawn and are ready to go soon after. Teens naturally wake later. They can force themselves up earlier given sufficient motivation, but they will not be ready to learn at that time.
A search warrant is quite different from an order to produce something, and those must be legally separate. Otherwise, they could just order you to produce something that doesn't exist and then jail you forever for contempt when you fail to produce it.
Or, present it that the test mode will trigger a map that disregards normal pollution standards so peak performance can be studied and normal mode will use the compliant maps. Then switch the maps.
If we as a society really want to see more software ethics, we will create a proper professional society and require a sign-off much like a PE.
Without that shift in the balance of power, unethical management will always be able to get bad things done.
It probably only connected two of the pairs. Gig E needs 4.
The markups they're charging are enough to cover 80% of their patients being indigent.
I do agree that the unfunded mandate is problematic but it doesn't really explain the outrageous costs.
Sadly, at hospitals, they charge individuals a lot more than they charge insurance companies.
Actually, it is not. In practice, there is an unofficial policy of looking the other way. That tells you something when a law is so unconscionable that even a government bureaucracy doesn't have the stomach to enforce it.
No. Insurance doesn't help this particular problem at the social level, it just changes things from us paying 4 times more than we should for medical bills to 4 times more than we should for insurance premiums.
It does bring up a good point though. There is a lot of space between the A bomb proof data center with the geographically diverse duplicate data center with hot cutover and DR, what's that?
As you point out, data backup is essential, but that doesn't imply a full duplicate data center. It may be that a very minimal setup is enough to limp along for a few weeks while things get back to normal. Limping doesn't necessarily mean no revenue.
It's also useful to note that downtime due to storms and such doesn't necessarily mean lost equipment.
Alas, you seem willing to redefine terms into meaninglessness so you can claim a disconnected neural net has that mysterious thing. We'll call it quigby. It affects nothing and changes nothing and it can't be detected. Yes, I'll agree that neural nets may have quigby.
However, if sentience, consciousness, and intelligence have any sort of meaning that at all coincides with commonly accepted definitions, please do explain scientifically how a neural net might have those traits if it has never had connections to the outside world and doesn't even show signs of oscillation.
Otherwise, I declare that rocks are intelligent, sentient, and conscious and you just lack the imagination to see it. We must therefor cease all quarrying immediately.
If you don't orient the can reasonably properly, it gets left there. You will have to store it till the next pickup. Eventually, the smelly garbage encourages you to try orienting the can properly.
Though our county service still uses the 2 men on the back of the truck method, it is now providing a standard trash can. If a marker were placed on the can next to the handle in the back, it shouldn't be TOO hard to get a grappler to find it's way to the handle (much like the automated charger we saw on /. a month or two ago finds the charge port). That would at least simplify the problem to be a matter of making sure the handle faces the street.
And as soon as one neuron fires, it is no longer in the same state.
No. If the net has learned nothing, it's behavior will remain indistinguishable from the default state. Random static electricity can cause a neon tube to fire as well, but that doesn't mean it's conscious, even if another tube fires due to the stimulus.
Certainly, no matter how many neurons randomly fire, it is not going to learn self vs. not-self. The concept won't be there because without external stimulus there is no information about not-self. No self, no sentience. Sentience is generally believed to be required for suffering to exist. Where there is no possibility of suffering, there is no ethical or moral duty to not cause that suffering.
If you prefer to argue for consciousness, please see this. I see no definition there that can be satisfied without at least a history of external stimulus of some sort.
Intelligence is a slippery term to be sure. However, I would say that certainly sentience does not imply intelligence. Depending on your favorite definition, intelligence doesn't require sentience. For example, artificial image classification nets don't likely have any sense of self or subjective experience. Nor do expert systems.
The default state of a neural net is untrained, without memories. Fresh from the vat in the case of an organic one.
None of your confusion between the computer analogy you introduced and organic neural nets alters the fact that the fetal neural net does not oscillate before week 25. It shows only random spikes that damp to nothing in short order.
I am presuming that a neural net with no activity isn't doing anything. That's not a terribly radical idea.
I am well aware of the history of computing and the halting problem, but I'm not sure how the halting problem or batch vs interactive computing has any bearing on the question at hand. Regardless of the philosophy, the techniques provide experience that may have bearing on the question at hand.
I invoke Buddhist thought primarily because meditation is the only way we are likely to experience a self-less state without very dangerous physical experimentation on the brain.
It feels a bit as if we are talking at cross purposes. I am here hoping to spur new ideas on the subject in myself and perhaps you. I may be miss-perceiving, but you seem to be here expecting to win an argument?
Hear Hear!
The problem with the insurance scam is that it does very little to contain out of control medical costs. In fact, it makes it worse since opting out entirely and self-treating becomes impossible, even for conditions that used to be treated at home as a matter of course.
Really I think at this point, a European style system is our best bet. The entire industry is so thoroughly addicted to unnecessary tests and outrageous margins that it will take legal price controls or a unified negotiator to get it under control. That will, in turn, drive internalization of the health care externalities of pollution.
This would certainly be useful in a consciousness learning about it's external environment, but I don't think comprehension of one's external environment is necessary for sentience.
Please read what I wrote carefully. I said:
I suspect coordinated and consistent input would be required to get from sentience to intelligence.
In other words, development of sentience doesn't necessarily require coordinated input but intelligence does.
Also, note that I said DEFAULT state, not INITIAL state.
As to the computer analogy, pull the boot rom and turn it on, the clock ticks, but nothing useful happens. Power on an untrained artificial neural net, at most you get a meaningless oscillation (but if there is no form of output, you won't see it).
Consider, how can there be self if there isn't not-self? While Buddhism suggests there is a self-less state of being, it also indicates that there is no suffering in that state.
A little googling shows that in fact, before week 25, the fetal neural net does not oscillate. Going back to the computer analogy, imagine an old mini where the power is on but the CPU clock hasn't been started. The potential is there but it isn't actualized. Of course, a neural net is asynchronous (or at least can be), but some stimulus is still needed to get it going. Note too that the normal fetal brain is not completely sensory deprived once the peripheral nervous system begins to develop.
Oh, you can bleed the account dry, no problem. What I mean is that they DO have a mechanism to keep you from overdrawing it, but they only use it when there is nobody they can put the bite on to cover the debt.
I will agree that the bar is fairly high. It would just about take a smoking gun email that discusses how best to fudge the data so it's not too obvious.
A good case could be made for fraud if it can be shown that data or analysis has been deliberately contorted to achieve a "conclusion".
Certainly the deniers were all for that when they thought they could convince enough people that there had been fraud on the AGW side.
Agreed. A simple carbon tax (internalizing the externality) would be a much more appropriate solution.
That's an entirely different matter. You apparently are not trying to deny climate change, only questioning the political mechanism behind remediation. Further, you're not cranking out fraudulent reports to do so.
I'm a bit skeptical of buying and selling pollution indulgences as a solution as well.
So, in fact, if I exercise my free speech in your bank to get them to give me all your money by telling them I'm you, you're cool with that?