There's quite a bit of porn on Facebook. Women encounter the brunt of it, from guys.
Some "women" (assuming not actually people, but the photos are obviously real from somewhere) use nudes to try and get "friends", I'm not sure of the nature of these but I figure it's scamming.
Some people also send friend requests of other people just to have them see something horrifying.
But that was kindof my point. All the examples you mention are either spam or harassment. It would seem like the easiest thing for facebook to do would to just block all nude photos and videos from its site. I know it already does some of this because there have already been cases of overcensorship of breastfeeding moms, etc... It would seem like the easiest thing would be to have a whitelist instead of a blacklist.
Or, just upload a bunch of pictures of your bedroom, living room, kitchen, garage, backyard, etc. - anywhere you might be photographed having sex - then Facebook will identify the background and block the photo.
I like this idea. The only problem with it is that it could be used as a DoS attack. For instance you could upload a picture with the Statue of Liberty or Niagara Falls in the background and kick off everyone's vacation photos. There might be ways to mitigate this for backgrounds but this type of DoS attack would not work at all for face shots and if it did start becoming a problem (for instance trying to block all pictures of Trump), you could require an upload of a government picture ID. Facial recognition wouldn't have to be perfect for every angle either. It would only have to get a single positive match for the entire length of the video.
First off, is there really a problem with revenge porn on facebook and if there is, it would seem that the easiest solution for facebook is to block all porn. I've never seen nudes on facebook. I always assumed that it would be against facebook policy as facebook is mostly a PG-13 kindof place.
Second, I would think that facial recognition would be the correct solution. Let someone upload a picture of their face and facebook can make sure that that particular face doesn't appear in nudes. An unidentified nude without a face even if someone says "this is so-in-so" is pretty harmless as if you can't see the face you could pretty much say it is anyone.
Lastly, google just came out with facial recognition for dogs so presumably you could also use that same technology for tattoos, or specific body parts too.
But again, I would think revenge porn would be primarily a problem on other services not facebook.
Expecting the human to take over in a panic situation IS unsafe. The human should only be taking over while parked.
I agree completely. Doing a handoff of a moving car is just asking for trouble.
Rather than letting the car drive on the straight road, and expecting the human to take over in case the car overlooks a pedestrian, we should be letting the human drive on the straight road, and let the car take over when the human overlooks a pedestrian.
There is a 3rd solution which I prefer. Let the computer drive on straight roads in good weather on limited access highways first. i.e. the boring stuff. If the weather starts to turn bad or you are approaching a city, have the computer pull over to the side of the road so that you can switch driver. This is already common practice. Growing up on vacations, my mom would help drive on the long stretches and then pull over and let my dad drive when we got to a big city or close to our destination.
School is a different matter, but school hours can change also. But then some will complain that it needs to correspond to working hours... For that, companies should allow flexible schedules.
School hours already don't align with working hours. Standard working hours are 8-5 (9 hours) where most schools run something like 730-230 or 830-330. If you get lucky or have a flexible schedule then you might be able to drop the kids off on your way to work but kids generally aren't at school for a full 8 hours much less the 9 hours of a typical work day.
their objective is to finish the feature and move onto the next issue
Your feature isn't finished until it is bug free. If devs don't get credit for completion until the QA is signed off, they will make a better effort to get it right the first time.
Which is exactly what the original post was saying too. If the developer is also the QA, he has an incentive to sign off on the QA as quickly as possible. An independent QA on the other hand is rewarded for the number of bugs they find. The developer is never going to be rewarded for finding bugs in their own code.
With everyone using digital clocks, there is really no reason that we couldn't just set 12:00 as solar noon and do micro adjustments every day to the clock. We would likely still want time zones so you could use the solar noon of the center of the timezone.
It's not a big deal, and changing your schedule by an hour, twice a year, does not cause strokes or miscarriages or anything else bad.
I've lived through a lot of DST changes and have never given it a second thought. You change your clock and go on with your life.
It might not be a big deal but people are saying it's pointless and does more harm than good. Why continue to do something year after year if there is no benefit?
People change their schedules and daily routine more than that, regardless of the existence of DST. Last week I was watching a movie and went to bed an hour later than usual. The week before that I had to get up an hour earlier than ususal to drive to a different office for a meeting. These things happen a lot more frequently than the DST change, and people are fine with them.
This is not an argument for DST. This is an argument against DST. Many businesses where I live already have "summer hours" and "winter hours". People already wake up at different times of the day depending on the time of the year. Why screw with the clock all the time? The only argument I've heard that makes a little sense is they don't want kids getting on the bus in the dark but many kids already do this with or without DST and again, it would be simple for schools to decide to shift the school schedule by an hour or more if it was a big concern. My town already has grade schools that run from 730-230 and high schools that run from 9-4 so they can double up on buses. They are more concerned with saving money on buses than they are about young kids getting on the bus in the dark or being home alone after school without their older siblings.
Over the last 40 some odd years I've programmed in dozens of languages. Some I liked, some I was ambivalent about, some I didn't like. But the only language I learned to actually hate is Javascript. Talk about a steaming pile of shit.
I don't think the language Javascript is that bad. I think the biggest problem with Javascript is the stuff that is intricately linked to it like the DOM, CSS, and browser incompatibilities. I think Javascript outside of a web environment would be fairly pleasant.
That's it? I ask $75 for the stuff I like to do. Perl would be $200/hr minimum.
I enjoy Perl. Of all the languages I've used, it's by far my favourite. It's probably one of the most powerful and concise languages out there. I also have no problem reading it. Even the notoriously hard to read regular expressions are easier to read than the many lines of code it would take to replace many of them. I would much rather read/write perl code than PHP or Java but probably my least favorite is writing for the web. CSS drives me batty and although Javascript is a decent language, the DOM and different browser incompatibilities is a nightmare. The solutions that people have come up with although ingenious hacks are even more insane. Things like select2 replace the standard select widget with a dizzying array of divs instead. Jquery almost completely redefines the language. Give me any language on a single platform with a single widget set and I would prefer that over the hodgepodge nightmare that is web development.
Anyone who thinks SS won't be there in 13 years, is betting that the US government will default on their debts.
Social Security might be around for a while yet but I will be very surprised if it doesn't eventually become need based where if you have assets or retirement savings you have to use that first before qualifying for social security.
No, you, as the "responsible" adult, are liable for what your kids do online, whether that be watching pirated content or porn. "Well look your honor, I just gave my kids the gun and showed them how to shoot people, I can't be expected to take responsibility for the murders they've committed!"
Yes, I'm responsible for what my kids do as in if my kids shoplift, I'm liable but the companies providing the service have a responsibility too. Apple was successfully sued for making in-app purchases too easy for kids. Businesses do unethical stuff to catch kids all the time whether it is putting a $5 bottle of water in a motel room or a pay to play tablet in a restaurant and many times the parents get stuck with the bill but that doesn't mean that we shouldn't keep demanding that businesses take responsibility. In google's case, google/youtube is the one actually hosting, copying, distributing, and selling (via ads) the infringing material. Going after the consumer is stupid. This would be like CNN broadcasting some copyrighted footage and the owner of the copyright deciding to sue everyone who happened to be watching CNN that night instead of suing CNN. If google allows its email to be used for spam there are consequences. There should also be consequences when google allows its services to be used for mass copyright infringement.
Agreed. Most people I know think as long as it's stream, it's perfectly legitimate.
As it should be. My kids (under 10) watch infringing stuff on youtube all the time. Should my kids be liable for stuff that a multi billion dollar company gives out for free? Why is google/youtube not held responsible? Google/youtube isn't even really trying. They play ads and rake in millions of dollars from infringing content. Youtube/Google is likely making more money from pirated content than all the other pirate sites combined. My kids stumble upon it accidentally by typing stuff like "spongebob" and "simpsons" but by using a little more intelligence you can type things like "the matrix full movie" and still find whatever you want on youtube. If you want to stop piracy, you need to stop going after the small infringers. You need to do two things. Step one is make everything available at a reasonable price. Something like 50cents/hour for anything more than 5 years old would be a good starting point. Step two is go after the distributors and search engines like youtube/google and the individual channels on kodi. Yes, it's whack-a-mole but whack-a-mole can actually be highly effective. If, as a kodi user, every time you sit down to watch a movie, your favorite illegal channel is gone and you have to spend 30 minutes searching for a new channel then after a while you're going to get sick of it and decide that it's easier to just pay $8/month. This is even more true if the search engines are doing their job and making it hard to find the new channels and the legitimate channels are doing their job of making all the content available at a reasonable price.
On the other hand, users, aka customers, consider CAPTCHA broken if a human cannot pass it at least 99 percent of the time.
87 percent? That's 23 percent potential customers lost. That's higher than the real world numbers for piracy[1]
[1] Ok, bad example, as piracy has been shown to increase sales in many cases due to increased exposure.
My experience with captchas is that most of the time it takes me 2-3 attempts to get it correct and/or 2-3 reloads to find one that is actually solvable. I can rarely solve the first captcha presented on the first try. I would guess that my accuracy is right at 50%. i.e. for any given captcha it's basically a coin toss whether it will let me thru or give me another one to solve.
The problem is that significant percentage of the population is stupider than a ML algorithm, so anything that tests cognitive skills and reasoning is compromised.
Google has solved this partially by pitting you against other humans. When they give you two captchas, only one of the two is a test and they already know how other humans have answered it in the past. The other captcha (not necessarily 2nd) is just there to continue their training and create new captchas. If a captcha has a low solve rate then they can never promote it to test side.
I love the "Squares with cars" ones, because they inevitably end up with squares that contain motor vehicles that aren't cars, and from experience, Google's AI treats those as cars too.
You aren't competing against Google's AI. You are competing against all the people who have taken the test before you. Just like I learned in school, you don't necessarily answer with the correct answer but rather what is the expected answer. In this case, it is what did the average human click on before you?
That's why Google is constantly working and changing their reCaptcah implementation.
Google is constantly working and changing their recaptcha because they invented a way to get people to help them improve their image recognition for free. Sometimes they just have you click a box to prove you're human. I always assume this is because their "google turk queue" ran out of stuff it needed testers for at that exact moment.
There are a number of parameters missing here, like how fast. If a bot can solve a CAPTCHA %1 as fast as a human being, the utility of the CAPTCHA goes way down and the details of all this is lacking.
Speed shouldn't really be a factor. A computer could possibly be thousands of times faster than a human but at 1% accuracy, it would on average need to solve 50 captchas to get one right and any proper system should detect and block you before allowing you that many attempts.
Not even 40 and you think you're old? Listen kid, wait till you're in your sixties.
He didn't say he was old. He said it was common for him to be the oldest in the room which means that there is 20+ years of working professionals that "vanished" and he wants to know where all the 40-60 year olds are hiding.
Yes, it was manufactured by RSA. That's not really the point. The point is that it has existed for a decade, it doesn't require an internet connection, and they are cheap to produce. There are even free versions today that use an app on your phone. Noone wants to use them. Most people would prefer to either use the same password everywhere or to have all their passwords memorized so if someone steals your phone they automatically have all your passwords too. People don't care about security until after something bad happens.
We still use passwords because theyâ(TM)re still the most secure way of authenticating your identity when combined with a second factor.
About a decade ago, Etrade sent me a small free keychain about the size of a stick of gum (1cm x 4cm x 1/2cm). It had a small digital display that had a password that changed every 60 seconds and was somehow synced with etrade's webserver. Even without a secondary password, this is a very secure system. It's not connected to the internet and you would likely know immediately if it was stolen. It ran on a single watch battery for over a year. It likely only cost a couple dollars to produce. The technology exists and has existed for a long time. The problem is that for whatever reason, people would rather use the same password for 20 websites than to have to look at their keychain and type in a 6 digit number every time they want to log in.
So, how do you decide what is a "closed" problem and what is an open problem? More to the point, I suspect that for whatever definition you are using of "open ended" by the time an AI can beat humans at a bunch of them, it may be too late.
Not only is Go a closed problem, it is a well defined problem with a well defined solution and well defined scoring. Even something like starcraft has well defined incremental scoring and a well defined goal at the end. The biggest limitation to AI right now is open ended problems. Even if solving Go is very complex, Go is a very simple game where the board can easily be represented by a tiny two dimensional array. How do you make a digital representation of an unfolded pile of laundry or the stuff in a kitchen needed to bake a cake? One of the main advantages of a digital representation is that an AI can use trial/error and solve it a million times. Even if you gave a computer the dexterity needed to bake a cake and came up with some form of scoring to determine if the cake was "good", a computer can't do one million trials in the real world.
"But Google seems to be thinking ways to make use of IT" "Last month, it added a new feature to its search function"
How do these statements relate to the library of books that we cannot see, that is the subject of the first part ?
If you don't understand how these are related, then you don't understand what Google Books is about. Google Books was never intended to give you a digital copy of the book. Google Books was designed to index paper books and returned those along with the search results. Google Books wasn't designed to be a digital library but rather to allow you to search the paper books at your local library as easily as the web. This new feature is exactly what Google Book's original purpose was. It's like the digital index that sometimes comes in the front cover of a paper reference book. It's designed to allow you to easily find something in the paper book.
The only place I've ever had not accept "SEE ID" was the US post office. They were very helpful though. They put a piece of clear tape on the back of the card, had me sign the clear tape and then removed the scotch tape for me. I was somewhat flabbergasted.
The problem with this method is half the web already acted like it was running a crypominer before these things even showed up.
Also, this already basically exists. Multiple times I've seen a popup saying "javascript taking too long" with an option to continue or abort. Presumably the bitcoin miners are already doing something to not trigger this condition and any condition you come up with, the bitcoin miner could be modified to stay under that threshold.
Slashdot Mirror
There's quite a bit of porn on Facebook. Women encounter the brunt of it, from guys.
Some "women" (assuming not actually people, but the photos are obviously real from somewhere) use nudes to try and get "friends", I'm not sure of the nature of these but I figure it's scamming.
Some people also send friend requests of other people just to have them see something horrifying.
But that was kindof my point. All the examples you mention are either spam or harassment. It would seem like the easiest thing for facebook to do would to just block all nude photos and videos from its site. I know it already does some of this because there have already been cases of overcensorship of breastfeeding moms, etc... It would seem like the easiest thing would be to have a whitelist instead of a blacklist.
Or, just upload a bunch of pictures of your bedroom, living room, kitchen, garage, backyard, etc. - anywhere you might be photographed having sex - then Facebook will identify the background and block the photo.
I like this idea. The only problem with it is that it could be used as a DoS attack. For instance you could upload a picture with the Statue of Liberty or Niagara Falls in the background and kick off everyone's vacation photos. There might be ways to mitigate this for backgrounds but this type of DoS attack would not work at all for face shots and if it did start becoming a problem (for instance trying to block all pictures of Trump), you could require an upload of a government picture ID. Facial recognition wouldn't have to be perfect for every angle either. It would only have to get a single positive match for the entire length of the video.
First off, is there really a problem with revenge porn on facebook and if there is, it would seem that the easiest solution for
facebook is to block all porn. I've never seen nudes on facebook. I always assumed that it would be against facebook policy
as facebook is mostly a PG-13 kindof place.
Second, I would think that facial recognition would be the correct solution. Let someone upload a picture of their face and
facebook can make sure that that particular face doesn't appear in nudes. An unidentified nude without a face even if someone
says "this is so-in-so" is pretty harmless as if you can't see the face you could pretty much say it is anyone.
Lastly, google just came out with facial recognition for dogs so presumably you could also use that same technology for
tattoos, or specific body parts too.
But again, I would think revenge porn would be primarily a problem on other services not facebook.
Expecting the human to take over in a panic situation IS unsafe. The human should only be taking over while parked.
I agree completely. Doing a handoff of a moving car is just asking for trouble.
Rather than letting the car drive on the straight road, and expecting the human to take over in case the car overlooks a pedestrian, we should be letting the human drive on the straight road, and let the car take over when the human overlooks a pedestrian.
There is a 3rd solution which I prefer. Let the computer drive on straight roads in good weather on limited access highways first. i.e. the boring stuff. If the weather starts to turn bad or you are approaching a city, have the computer pull over to the side of the road so that you can switch driver. This is already common practice. Growing up on vacations, my mom would help drive on the long stretches and then pull over and let my dad drive when we got to a big city or close to our destination.
School is a different matter, but school hours can change also. But then some will complain that it needs to correspond to working hours... For that, companies should allow flexible schedules.
School hours already don't align with working hours. Standard working hours are 8-5 (9 hours) where most schools run something like 730-230 or 830-330. If you get lucky or have a flexible schedule then you might be able to drop the kids off on your way to work but kids generally aren't at school for a full 8 hours much less the 9 hours of a typical work day.
their objective is to finish the feature and move onto the next issue
Your feature isn't finished until it is bug free. If devs don't get credit for completion until the QA is signed off, they will make a better effort to get it right the first time.
Which is exactly what the original post was saying too. If the developer is also the QA, he has an incentive to sign off on the QA as quickly as possible. An independent QA on the other hand is rewarded for the number of bugs they find. The developer is never going to be rewarded for finding bugs in their own code.
With everyone using digital clocks, there is really no reason that we couldn't just set 12:00 as solar noon and do micro adjustments every day to the clock.
We would likely still want time zones so you could use the solar noon of the center of the timezone.
It's not a big deal, and changing your schedule by an hour, twice a year, does not cause strokes or miscarriages or anything else bad.
I've lived through a lot of DST changes and have never given it a second thought. You change your clock and go on with your life.
It might not be a big deal but people are saying it's pointless and does more harm than good. Why continue to do something year after year if there is no benefit?
People change their schedules and daily routine more than that, regardless of the existence of DST. Last week I was watching a movie and went to bed an hour later than usual. The week before that I had to get up an hour earlier than ususal to drive to a different office for a meeting. These things happen a lot more frequently than the DST change, and people are fine with them.
This is not an argument for DST. This is an argument against DST. Many businesses where I live already have "summer hours" and "winter hours". People already wake up at different times of the day depending on the time of the year. Why screw with the clock all the time? The only argument I've heard that makes a little sense is they don't want kids getting on the bus in the dark but many kids already do this with or without DST and again, it would be simple for schools to decide to shift the school schedule by an hour or more if it was a big concern. My town already has grade schools that run from 730-230 and high schools that run from 9-4 so they can double up on buses. They are more concerned with saving money on buses than they are about young kids getting on the bus in the dark or being home alone after school without their older siblings.
Over the last 40 some odd years I've programmed in dozens of languages. Some I liked, some I was ambivalent about, some I didn't like. But the only language I learned to actually hate is Javascript. Talk about a steaming pile of shit.
I don't think the language Javascript is that bad. I think the biggest problem with Javascript is the stuff that is intricately linked to it like the DOM, CSS, and browser incompatibilities. I think Javascript outside of a web environment would be fairly pleasant.
That's it? I ask $75 for the stuff I like to do. Perl would be $200/hr minimum.
I enjoy Perl. Of all the languages I've used, it's by far my favourite. It's probably one of the most powerful and concise languages out there. I also have no problem reading it. Even the notoriously hard to read regular expressions are easier to read than the many lines of code it would take to replace many of them. I would much rather read/write perl code than PHP or Java but probably my least favorite is writing for the web. CSS drives me batty and although Javascript is a decent language, the DOM and different browser incompatibilities is a nightmare. The solutions that people have come up with although ingenious hacks are even more insane. Things like select2 replace the standard select widget with a dizzying array of divs instead. Jquery almost completely redefines the language. Give me any language on a single platform with a single widget set and I would prefer that over the hodgepodge nightmare that is web development.
Anyone who thinks SS won't be there in 13 years, is betting that the US government will default on their debts.
Social Security might be around for a while yet but I will be very surprised if it doesn't eventually become need based where if you have assets or retirement savings you have to use that first before qualifying for social security.
No, you, as the "responsible" adult, are liable for what your kids do online, whether that be watching pirated content or porn.
"Well look your honor, I just gave my kids the gun and showed them how to shoot people, I can't be expected to take responsibility for the murders they've committed!"
Yes, I'm responsible for what my kids do as in if my kids shoplift, I'm liable but the companies providing the service have a responsibility too. Apple was successfully sued for making in-app purchases too easy for kids. Businesses do unethical stuff to catch kids all the time whether it is putting a $5 bottle of water in a motel room or a pay to play tablet in a restaurant and many times the parents get stuck with the bill but that doesn't mean that we shouldn't keep demanding that businesses take responsibility. In google's case, google/youtube is the one actually hosting, copying, distributing, and selling (via ads) the infringing material. Going after the consumer is stupid. This would be like CNN broadcasting some copyrighted footage and the owner of the copyright deciding to sue everyone who happened to be watching CNN that night instead of suing CNN. If google allows its email to be used for spam there are consequences. There should also be consequences when google allows its services to be used for mass copyright infringement.
Agreed. Most people I know think as long as it's stream, it's perfectly legitimate.
As it should be. My kids (under 10) watch infringing stuff on youtube all the time. Should my kids be liable for stuff that a multi billion dollar company gives out for free? Why is google/youtube not held responsible? Google/youtube isn't even really trying. They play ads and rake in millions of dollars from infringing content. Youtube/Google is likely making more money from pirated content than all the other pirate sites combined. My kids stumble upon it accidentally by typing stuff like "spongebob" and "simpsons" but by using a little more intelligence you can type things like "the matrix full movie" and still find whatever you want on youtube. If you want to stop piracy, you need to stop going after the small infringers. You need to do two things. Step one is make everything available at a reasonable price. Something like 50cents/hour for anything more than 5 years old would be a good starting point. Step two is go after the distributors and search engines like youtube/google and the individual channels on kodi. Yes, it's whack-a-mole but whack-a-mole can actually be highly effective. If, as a kodi user, every time you sit down to watch a movie, your favorite illegal channel is gone and you have to spend 30 minutes searching for a new channel then after a while you're going to get sick of it and decide that it's easier to just pay $8/month. This is even more true if the search engines are doing their job and making it hard to find the new channels and the legitimate channels are doing their job of making all the content available at a reasonable price.
On the other hand, users, aka customers, consider CAPTCHA broken if a human cannot pass it at least 99 percent of the time.
87 percent? That's 23 percent potential customers lost. That's higher than the real world numbers for piracy[1]
[1] Ok, bad example, as piracy has been shown to increase sales in many cases due to increased exposure.
My experience with captchas is that most of the time it takes me 2-3 attempts to get it correct and/or 2-3 reloads to find one that is actually solvable.
I can rarely solve the first captcha presented on the first try. I would guess that my accuracy is right at 50%. i.e. for any given captcha it's basically a coin toss whether it will let me thru or give me another one to solve.
The problem is that significant percentage of the population is stupider than a ML algorithm, so anything that tests cognitive skills and reasoning is compromised.
Google has solved this partially by pitting you against other humans. When they give you two captchas, only one of the two is a test and they already know how other humans have answered it in the past. The other captcha (not necessarily 2nd) is just there to continue their training and create new captchas. If a captcha has a low solve rate then they can never promote it to test side.
I love the "Squares with cars" ones, because they inevitably end up with squares that contain motor vehicles that aren't cars, and from experience, Google's AI treats those as cars too.
You aren't competing against Google's AI. You are competing against all the people who have taken the test before you. Just like I learned in school, you don't necessarily answer with the correct answer but rather what is the expected answer. In this case, it is what did the average human click on before you?
That's why Google is constantly working and changing their reCaptcah implementation.
Google is constantly working and changing their recaptcha because they invented a way to get people to help them improve their image recognition for free.
Sometimes they just have you click a box to prove you're human. I always assume this is because their "google turk queue" ran out of stuff it needed testers for at that exact moment.
There are a number of parameters missing here, like how fast. If a bot can solve a CAPTCHA %1 as fast as a human being, the utility of the CAPTCHA goes way down and the details of all this is lacking.
Speed shouldn't really be a factor. A computer could possibly be thousands of times faster than a human but at 1% accuracy, it would on average need to solve 50 captchas to get one right and any proper system should detect and block you before allowing you that many attempts.
Not even 40 and you think you're old? Listen kid, wait till you're in your sixties.
He didn't say he was old. He said it was common for him to be the oldest in the room which means that there is 20+ years
of working professionals that "vanished" and he wants to know where all the 40-60 year olds are hiding.
No one tell this guy about RSA
Yes, it was manufactured by RSA. That's not really the point. The point is that it has existed for a decade, it doesn't require an internet connection, and they are cheap to produce. There are even free versions today that use an app on your phone. Noone wants to use them. Most people would prefer to either use the same password everywhere or to have all their passwords memorized so if someone steals your phone they automatically have all your passwords too. People don't care about security until after something bad happens.
We still use passwords because theyâ(TM)re still the most secure way of authenticating your identity when combined with a second factor.
About a decade ago, Etrade sent me a small free keychain about the size of a stick of gum (1cm x 4cm x 1/2cm). It had a small digital display that had a password that changed every 60 seconds and was somehow synced with etrade's webserver. Even without a secondary password, this is a very secure system. It's not connected to the internet and you would likely know immediately if it was stolen. It ran on a single watch battery for over a year. It likely only cost a couple dollars to produce. The technology exists and has existed for a long time. The problem is that for whatever reason, people would rather use the same password for 20 websites than to have to look at their keychain and type in a 6 digit number every time they want to log in.
So, how do you decide what is a "closed" problem and what is an open problem? More to the point, I suspect that for whatever definition you are using of "open ended" by the time an AI can beat humans at a bunch of them, it may be too late.
Not only is Go a closed problem, it is a well defined problem with a well defined solution and well defined scoring. Even something like starcraft has well defined incremental scoring and a well defined goal at the end. The biggest limitation to AI right now is open ended problems. Even if solving Go is very complex, Go is a very simple game where the board can easily be represented by a tiny two dimensional array. How do you make a digital representation of an unfolded pile of laundry or the stuff in a kitchen needed to bake a cake? One of the main advantages of a digital representation is that an AI can use trial/error and solve it a million times. Even if you gave a computer the dexterity needed to bake a cake and came up with some form of scoring to determine if the cake was "good", a computer can't do one million trials in the real world.
The second part of this post states:
"But Google seems to be thinking ways to make use of IT"
"Last month, it added a new feature to its search function"
How do these statements relate to the library of books that we cannot see, that is the subject of the first part ?
If you don't understand how these are related, then you don't understand what Google Books is about. Google Books was never intended to give you a digital copy of the book. Google Books was designed to index paper books and returned those along with the search results. Google Books wasn't designed to be a digital library but rather to allow you to search the paper books at your local library as easily as the web. This new feature is exactly what Google Book's original purpose was. It's like the digital index that sometimes comes in the front cover of a paper reference book. It's designed to allow you to easily find something in the paper book.
The only place I've ever had not accept "SEE ID" was the US post office. They were very helpful though. They put a piece of clear tape on the back of the card, had me sign the clear tape and then removed the scotch tape for me. I was somewhat flabbergasted.
The problem with this method is half the web already acted like it was running a crypominer before these things even showed up.
Also, this already basically exists. Multiple times I've seen a popup saying "javascript taking too long" with an option to continue or abort.
Presumably the bitcoin miners are already doing something to not trigger this condition and any condition you come up with, the bitcoin
miner could be modified to stay under that threshold.