The dark matter filiments are observable by the lensing effect of the gravity they exhibit. So it's not conjecture is an observable and repeatable fact that there is something equivelant to mass there.
Might it make more sense to people to think logically and procedurally, then worry about applying that to a computer?
By the time they are in school its been drilled in this is totally unnecessary for everyday life and is likely to make you unpopular. That seems to be a fairly large chunk of this issue, as well as a host of issues in later life, when large scale and coherent rational thought escapes people.
You do realize that the vast majority of the heat inside the earth is from radioactive decay and not latent heat left over from the formation of the solar system right?
Actually I was in your camp for quite awhile but I was completely wrong. Yes smashing your heels on the ground, even with space age shoes, will lead most humans to injury, even permenant injury. But running on the balls of your feet removes all of the impact stresses by increasing the distance the impact is dissapated over. You then have a far lower chance of injury and once you learn to run that way it's not horribly inefficent either. Try it yourself run barefoot on a flat hard surface like pavement or even dirt yourself then up on your toes by using the ball of your foot. It's a large difference.
I agree with you that we need to be conscious "ourselves", but the following:
"George Bush is known to have completely destroyed his mind with drink and drugs. he has an I.Q. of around 85 "
Where do you pull this crap from? I am no fan of Bush but seriously? And his father has an IQ of 185? ook...
It's widely known that bush jr had a below average intellect. He was born with it, alachol and cocaine do not change your intellect very much at all, if any. As for senior, I'm assuming it was pure hyberbole, he was not stupid like jr but was no Clinton much less a world record holder. It's been patently obvious that intellect does not correlate well with being a successful president and that should suprise no one.
Actual researchers have known for decades that strong AI was well beyond the future horizon. As in 50 years off or more barring some kind of unexpected revolution. Often, for research grant proposals, or for some quick media exposure, wild claims have been thrown about. But the vast majority have known, and continue to know this.
It boggles my mind how we cant solve simple visual captchas a 3 year old has no problems with, but supposedly self driving cars are prescient. None are able to spot the difference between a blowing cardboard box and a run away wagon of kids which require two very different driving responses. A housefly has far superior SLAM and navigation abilities over any self driving car, using far inferior sensors, and with processing that is no longer much better than state of the art.
it's been self evident for 30 years that we are lacking on the algorithm side far more than the hardware. This isn't remotely new news.
Climate change would be completely mitigated by this point if the world ran on windows 10. Obviously by some mysterious updates that would load while the unsuspecting sleep.
When looking for a needle in a haystack, you don't add more hay.
Of course not - you add more needles. Nothing makes entrapment easier and justification of the whole works. "Look we finally stopped a terrorist attack!" *holds up scrawny Muslim kid with a clock*
Those are all good points. The larger tesla battery actually costs around 30k to make. However, due to the pr, use in alternate markets afterward, and subsidies, it is sold at a ridiculous discount to the consumer of around 12k. It's an insane deal for the consumer from a price standpoint, yet still is too expensive - it's the absolute worst part of a car that is otherwise close to engineering perfection. At least in a tesla I exoect them to hold their value so a 12k replacement every 10 years isn't too bad. Now a leaf is another story as that's 6-8k on a far cheaper econobox electric.
Well that battery sediment does have merit. It basically wipes out any savings over gasoline vs electricity as you wind up paying roughly the same cost per mile, but in a massive chunk instead of distributed over every purchase. It also may have a negative enviornmental impact as when the vehicle gets 8-10 years old no one may want to buy it as the cost of replacing the battery is too close to the total cost of the vehicle. It will be interesting to see what happens to the market for used electrics in the next few years as mainstream vehicles age. that said the total maintance cost of electrics is less than gas/diesel. It's just that it probably dosent cover the added cost of the up front cost of electrics, making them more expensive for the same performance; except for maybe the tesla, it's an excellent car sold at a loss to the company - i just hope they don't lose enough money doing that to go under.
This is Slashdot. Any discussion of electric cars must include these obligatory posts -
"My daily commute is 762 miles. Therefore, electric cars are useless to anyone and everyone."
(Variation also acceptable: "Twice a year I drive 600 miles to Phoenix. Therefore, electric cars are useless to anyone and everyone.")
"My electric power comes from coal, therefore all electric cars are more polluting than my Grandpa's 1978 Oldsmobile Cutlass."
Yes it's true how the range argument isn't true for everyone, but has been a limiting factor for at least a percentage of use cases and buyers. At least now that problem is becoming less and less important every year as batteries become cheaper for a higher energy and power density. Also its true that coal powered electric cars pollute quite a bit, roughly the equivelant of 50-60mpg in many areas of the USA and in some areas like India 20-30, or china 30-40, while areas like Finland its 120+. So it is important to understand how physics and reality work if you really do want to have an enviornmental impact, in many areas you are better off buying a hybrid vehicle, efficient gas/diesel, or electric and supplementing it with a robust solar installation. Honestly i see electric cars as superior technology overall, the only real thing holding them back from being superior in every way is the battery. Once that component gets close to the energy density of gasoline at a reasonable price there wont be a need to foist these on anyone, people will want them because they are better in every category.
Prézeau’s work is particularly stinging for me, because about a decade ago, as a graduate student, I was asked by my advisor to consider this problem, which I did. But in my analysis, I only considered the effect that the passing dark matter would have on the planet’s velocity, not of the density enhancement in the planet’s wake.
Ya man i know what you mean. I almost solved a quantum formula for gravity myself as my advisor asked me to solve a similar problem. But all i did was use formulas like mg(h2-h1)=E and assumed frictionless spherical cows.
Given the average adults love for keeping up FTC amendments even more than Kardashians, even senior citizens everywhere will now know this isn't allowed! Upon hearing this amendment, millions of voices suddenly cried out in terror and suddenly fell silent. Keep it real FTC!
I am still not sure how people think computers can deal with the real world when my 3 year old can out do most any computer in solving visual word captchas. We give them lidar and sensors galore, then painstakingly and manually map out the routes to inch resolution marking every driveway, road sign and stop light. Many of these sensors won't function in bad weather like rain and snow, and what happens when real world things happen like a blowing cardboard box that lidar would pose a far bigger threat to safe AI driving than a human driver or to a vehicle. What we need isn't really more powerful hardware or even sensors - we need groundbreaking research in new algorithms and ways to optimally fuse them. I would feel far safer in a vehicle with algorithms on par with common household fly using just two crappy cameras and a 3 dollar 6-axis gyro/accelerometer.
Its a great start if auto companies take full responsibility, i just have no hope of it actually replacing human drivers on open roads anytime in the next 20 years.
It still boggles my mind how we live in the Information Age and this data was not automatically uploaded and calculated. I'm not saying it dosent require a human to sign off on, but it's mildly insane it isn't all automatically calculated and simply checked.
While there are serious technical problems with traveling to nearby star systems in only a few years of ship time allowing feasible travel, there are no such limitations for our solar system. It's not even revolutionary technology either it's simply better ion drives and habitat aboard the ship. There are plenty of reasons to explore or settle there, say the moons of Jupiter/Saturn or in the asteroid belt which are behind mars. Hell, its likely to occur in under a hundred years - nearby stars it isn't so clear.
Slashdot Mirror
The dark matter filiments are observable by the lensing effect of the gravity they exhibit. So it's not conjecture is an observable and repeatable fact that there is something equivelant to mass there.
Or, even more importantly, all those dogs that shoot humans like trigger did recently. Only by arming all dogs can we prevent these tragedies.
Might it make more sense to people to think logically and procedurally, then worry about applying that to a computer?
By the time they are in school its been drilled in this is totally unnecessary for everyday life and is likely to make you unpopular. That seems to be a fairly large chunk of this issue, as well as a host of issues in later life, when large scale and coherent rational thought escapes people.
You do realize that the vast majority of the heat inside the earth is from radioactive decay and not latent heat left over from the formation of the solar system right?
"You shall not pass!!"
Actually I was in your camp for quite awhile but I was completely wrong. Yes smashing your heels on the ground, even with space age shoes, will lead most humans to injury, even permenant injury. But running on the balls of your feet removes all of the impact stresses by increasing the distance the impact is dissapated over. You then have a far lower chance of injury and once you learn to run that way it's not horribly inefficent either. Try it yourself run barefoot on a flat hard surface like pavement or even dirt yourself then up on your toes by using the ball of your foot. It's a large difference.
I agree with you that we need to be conscious "ourselves", but the following:
"George Bush is known to have completely destroyed his mind with drink and drugs. he has an I.Q. of around 85 "
Where do you pull this crap from? I am no fan of Bush but seriously? And his father has an IQ of 185? ook...
It's widely known that bush jr had a below average intellect. He was born with it, alachol and cocaine do not change your intellect very much at all, if any. As for senior, I'm assuming it was pure hyberbole, he was not stupid like jr but was no Clinton much less a world record holder. It's been patently obvious that intellect does not correlate well with being a successful president and that should suprise no one.
Actual researchers have known for decades that strong AI was well beyond the future horizon. As in 50 years off or more barring some kind of unexpected revolution. Often, for research grant proposals, or for some quick media exposure, wild claims have been thrown about. But the vast majority have known, and continue to know this.
It boggles my mind how we cant solve simple visual captchas a 3 year old has no problems with, but supposedly self driving cars are prescient. None are able to spot the difference between a blowing cardboard box and a run away wagon of kids which require two very different driving responses. A housefly has far superior SLAM and navigation abilities over any self driving car, using far inferior sensors, and with processing that is no longer much better than state of the art.
it's been self evident for 30 years that we are lacking on the algorithm side far more than the hardware. This isn't remotely new news.
Like when he recieved his award
Climate change would be completely mitigated by this point if the world ran on windows 10. Obviously by some mysterious updates that would load while the unsuspecting sleep.
One emergency and you are addicted, once an addict you start making real changes and even consider creating more real emergencies.
People chanting outside: "We're not going to protest! We're not going to protest!"
When looking for a needle in a haystack, you don't add more hay.
Of course not - you add more needles. Nothing makes entrapment easier and justification of the whole works. "Look we finally stopped a terrorist attack!" *holds up scrawny Muslim kid with a clock*
Those are all good points. The larger tesla battery actually costs around 30k to make. However, due to the pr, use in alternate markets afterward, and subsidies, it is sold at a ridiculous discount to the consumer of around 12k. It's an insane deal for the consumer from a price standpoint, yet still is too expensive - it's the absolute worst part of a car that is otherwise close to engineering perfection. At least in a tesla I exoect them to hold their value so a 12k replacement every 10 years isn't too bad. Now a leaf is another story as that's 6-8k on a far cheaper econobox electric.
Well that battery sediment does have merit. It basically wipes out any savings over gasoline vs electricity as you wind up paying roughly the same cost per mile, but in a massive chunk instead of distributed over every purchase. It also may have a negative enviornmental impact as when the vehicle gets 8-10 years old no one may want to buy it as the cost of replacing the battery is too close to the total cost of the vehicle. It will be interesting to see what happens to the market for used electrics in the next few years as mainstream vehicles age.
that said the total maintance cost of electrics is less than gas/diesel. It's just that it probably dosent cover the added cost of the up front cost of electrics, making them more expensive for the same performance; except for maybe the tesla, it's an excellent car sold at a loss to the company - i just hope they don't lose enough money doing that to go under.
This is Slashdot. Any discussion of electric cars must include these obligatory posts - "My daily commute is 762 miles. Therefore, electric cars are useless to anyone and everyone." (Variation also acceptable: "Twice a year I drive 600 miles to Phoenix. Therefore, electric cars are useless to anyone and everyone.") "My electric power comes from coal, therefore all electric cars are more polluting than my Grandpa's 1978 Oldsmobile Cutlass."
Yes it's true how the range argument isn't true for everyone, but has been a limiting factor for at least a percentage of use cases and buyers. At least now that problem is becoming less and less important every year as batteries become cheaper for a higher energy and power density.
Also its true that coal powered electric cars pollute quite a bit, roughly the equivelant of 50-60mpg in many areas of the USA and in some areas like India 20-30, or china 30-40, while areas like Finland its 120+. So it is important to understand how physics and reality work if you really do want to have an enviornmental impact, in many areas you are better off buying a hybrid vehicle, efficient gas/diesel, or electric and supplementing it with a robust solar installation.
Honestly i see electric cars as superior technology overall, the only real thing holding them back from being superior in every way is the battery. Once that component gets close to the energy density of gasoline at a reasonable price there wont be a need to foist these on anyone, people will want them because they are better in every category.
Prézeau’s work is particularly stinging for me, because about a decade ago, as a graduate student, I was asked by my advisor to consider this problem, which I did. But in my analysis, I only considered the effect that the passing dark matter would have on the planet’s velocity, not of the density enhancement in the planet’s wake.
Ya man i know what you mean. I almost solved a quantum formula for gravity myself as my advisor asked me to solve a similar problem. But all i did was use formulas like mg(h2-h1)=E and assumed frictionless spherical cows.
Then I'd just implement the really good ones and take it in!
Star Wars the flame thrower!
We may have a re-re-release where Han shoots first? I'm not sure where they will take it but I dare them to make a character worse than jar jar.
Given the average adults love for keeping up FTC amendments even more than Kardashians, even senior citizens everywhere will now know this isn't allowed! Upon hearing this amendment, millions of voices suddenly cried out in terror and suddenly fell silent. Keep it real FTC!
No doubt, but for each wrongful death you would have to fire an awful lot of employees to cover the cost that quarter.
I am still not sure how people think computers can deal with the real world when my 3 year old can out do most any computer in solving visual word captchas. We give them lidar and sensors galore, then painstakingly and manually map out the routes to inch resolution marking every driveway, road sign and stop light. Many of these sensors won't function in bad weather like rain and snow, and what happens when real world things happen like a blowing cardboard box that lidar would pose a far bigger threat to safe AI driving than a human driver or to a vehicle. What we need isn't really more powerful hardware or even sensors - we need groundbreaking research in new algorithms and ways to optimally fuse them. I would feel far safer in a vehicle with algorithms on par with common household fly using just two crappy cameras and a 3 dollar 6-axis gyro/accelerometer.
Its a great start if auto companies take full responsibility, i just have no hope of it actually replacing human drivers on open roads anytime in the next 20 years.
It still boggles my mind how we live in the Information Age and this data was not automatically uploaded and calculated. I'm not saying it dosent require a human to sign off on, but it's mildly insane it isn't all automatically calculated and simply checked.
While there are serious technical problems with traveling to nearby star systems in only a few years of ship time allowing feasible travel, there are no such limitations for our solar system. It's not even revolutionary technology either it's simply better ion drives and habitat aboard the ship. There are plenty of reasons to explore or settle there, say the moons of Jupiter/Saturn or in the asteroid belt which are behind mars. Hell, its likely to occur in under a hundred years - nearby stars it isn't so clear.