Obvious problem with that. Does the scanner work if you have a black eye?
Yes, as long as it's not swollen to the point it can't be pried open. Besides, there are many other places to hit someone other than the eye. And I believe it or not, most people have two eyes.
For the company that invented the Walkman, dreaming up another hit shouldn't be so hard.
What a stupid thing to say. With all of the money Apple has, and a string of products that were amazing sellers, they haven't done much exciting in recent times.
Microsoft did extremely well for itself with it desktop OS and office products. I couldn't even guess how many companies they took over or put under. But I stopped counting how many times they've failed in the mobile phone market. How's Zune selling these days?
How may patents and products did Kodak bring to market over the years? Where are they now? How about GM? They were once the largest car manufacturer in the world. They even had an electric car on the road 20 years ago.
There's an immense amount of luck involved. Just look at things like Crocs, cabbage patch kids,
Just don't go asking it foolish questions like "Is there a God?"
Considering the owners/creators of such a system can turn it off, on, copy it, edit its code and swap out its hardware. It wold be a rather interesting answer if you had a self aware AI.
I am so happy! According to Hollywood, hacking into an iris-scan protected phone means ripping out somebody's eyeball. https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
I'm glad to hear you can do it with a camera instead.
Except do you think some street thug who wants to get into you phone that badly is going to carry a camera, printer and contact lens? Realistically, they'll probably punch most people once and they'll be happy to unlock the phone to avoid being hit again. Failing that, it's probably simpler to just knock the owner out and scan their eye to unlock the phone while they're unconscious.
Right. I thought the entire point of deepblue and alphago was to demonstrate how well "purpose-built" AI could perform. And that it's possible to make similar AI for.... lawyering, medical diagnosing, civil engineering, driving a car, predicting the stock market, designing stuff for function....
You know, "single-purposes"... like people's careers.
And how often are mistakes made by humans in medicine? Not often, but it's not perfect. So if a computer can diagnose with better accuracy and/or earlier, then it's better for humans as a whole.
I'm not a big fan of the current self driving cars, but eventually they will become better than humans. At which point, how many lives can be saved by removing human error? Again, better for humanity.
Law is a tricky one. First of all, because it's mostly lawyers who write the laws, so I'm pretty sure they will be able to keep their jobs safe. But if AI can keep more innocent people out of jail and more guilty ones from going free, then I would guess it would be better.
As far as misdiagnosis, accidents, etc, I would say that AI is better for humanity as a whole. But long term, we're going to have to make some tough decisions about how we want to continue as a society. Are we going to end up in some capitalist dystopia where 1% of the population lives well and the rest of us live in the ashes of our current society? Will we live in some idealistic Star Trek utopian existence? Probably something in between. But that's not caused by the AI itself, it's a result of progress. It's happened many times in history.
Purpose built machines have been able to, or be used to out do humans for a very long time. A lever can be used to lift more weight than a person alone can. But we're not being ruled by sticks. Cranes can lift even more.
Cars are used to move people further and faster than they could on their own. Computers can do many more calculations per second. These things make life better for humanity as a whole.
Unless AlphaGo figures out a way to keep a person from unplugging it, I'm guessing that humanity will be just fine.
According to my will, my obituary will be published in Comic Sans.
I love to annoy Font Nazis, and that will be my last opportunity.
Obituaries are so ephemeral. You should see about using Comic Sans on your gravestone. If you can get one coated in alumin(i)um is should add a couple hundred extra years to it.
I would have thought the comment about the germ warfare vault next door would have been a hint. But I guess not. Did anyone check to make sure the barking snakes that guard the seed vault were OK?
That said you should keep up with patches in the first place. Windows does it for you and there's usually never a good reason to stop it.
Until recently, I'd agree. But how many people turned off updates during the "free" Windows 10 thing? That in it's self damn near felt like there was a virus on your computer. Then there's the telemetry update that got added to Windows 7. Anyone who didn't want that also had to turn off automatic download and install of updates.
Did they? I don't know the specifics of the law in regards to WiFi, but this seems(according to the first half of TFS) no different than someone turning on their laptop in the parking lot of a hotel and noticing that the hotel is one network that they could potentially log onto w/o encryption.
That being said, if that's all they did, then it also doesn't prove one way or the other how secure it is. Most resorts and such have public WiFi. Many don't require any log on at all. As long as all they can do is access the internet and no internal systems, it's working as intended. I've stayed in places that also have unsecured printers outside of the regular network for guests to use.
Our inspections found weak and open Wi-Fi networks, wireless printers without passwords, servers with outdated and vulnerable software, and unencrypted login pages to back-end databases containing sensitive information.
Open WiFi and printers are to be expected for guests to use, as long as they are on a separate network from anything that's not intended to be public. The rest of this statement contradicts the previous statement of:
We resisted the temptation.
Either they did log onto the network and were doing some snooping (in which case they may have broken the law), or they didn't and made this up.
It's actually evolution in action. All of the stupid insects in the area are being caught by these traps, thus removing their lower intelligence from the local gene pool. Over time the insects that are breeding are only having smarter offspring, so they aren't getting caught in these traps. It's the long term results of the observer effect. I heard that in the areas that have been doing this the longest, many of the traps have been vandalized by what appear to be tiny stone weapons.
Oh, the John Connor from the future is a Terminator. Well, now I don't need to spend $17 on a ticket.
It's amazing how much I can relate to your comment. There was a 10 year period where I decided that owning a television was a waste of time. Terminator 2 was released during that period, so it was a really cool surprise to discover that Arnold was the good guy while watching the movie for the first time. Granted, it was a much different time, and plot twists were not required as they are now either, especially in a action movie. So it was even more unexpected.
Come to think of it, why not simply name a movie that way? No trailer needed.
And that will put us one step closer to the movie "Ass" being made and winning 8 Oscars. Sadly, instead of 500 years, it'll probably be in less than 50 years.
They will just abscond with their ill-gotten profits and form another company beyond the reach of the long arm of the law to continue raping and pillaging phone lines.
That's why we should nuke them from orbit, it's the only way to be sure.
And now it doesn't. So it's a pretty safe bet that it won't maintain one now. Even at the wildest possibly of us being able to generate an atmosphere, we're not going to be able to do so instantaneously. So the likelihood of doing so faster than it being stripped away by solar winds is small. I'd like to see humans go there as much as anyone, but you need to be realistic too.
regular cycling cut the risk of death from any cause by 41%
I would have thought it would increase your risk of death by being hit by a car.
In all seriousness though, people are not really designed for the type of lifestyle we live today in the modern world. We weren't meant to sit all day long and stare at a monitor. It would be interesting to know what cycling to and from work does in regards to stress relief too.
So instead of crashing several times daily, it might only crash several times weekly. Not that you'd want to run it that long without restarting the app since it'll be using all of your memory by the end of the day.
Is there a different Firefox than the one I'm using? The machine I do the majority of my browsing on is a Win 7 box with 16GB of RAM. I haven't seen a crash in at least a year, probably more. I have had 15 separate windows open with 10 to 30 tabs open in each for the last 2 or 3 months. I just rebooted today for updates. I will shutdown and restore my Firefox session when the memory usage creeps up and bogs it down. But the most I've seen it get up to is a little over 8GB of RAM usage. Which is ridiculous, but not as bad as you seem to be exaggerating it to be.
My one big sticking point to switching browsers is the Tree-Style-Tabs add-on. I can't find a single other browser that does this well. Opera is the only other that comes close, but I can't stand that it has no way to hide the tabs across the top of the browser. I could live with the vertical tabs not being nested if I cold just find a way to hide the horizontal ones.
And yet the numbers are clear that Edge is superior. There's no denying that Edge drains the battery a lot less.
I can't say I've used Edge, so I really don't know. But because it uses less power does not make it a superior browser. It only makes a better at electrical consumption. While a Prius has better fuel economy than a Z06 Corvette, I wouldn't necessary call the Prius a better car. If you're commuting to work in it, sure it may be better. If your doing laps at the local track, not so much.
I not making any claims regarding what Microsoft has done, but it also wouldn't surprise me if Windows 10 finds a way to waste power when another browser is used. It's not like they haven't been caught for pulling anti competitive crap in the past. And their recent decisions with regard to Windows 10 don't inspire much confidence either.
Here's the problem, the bill was called "Broadband Accessibility Act of 2017". So that has to be better than "EPB wants to expand their service". Plus with a name like that, how could any politician not vote for it. If they did, their opponent in the next election would be holding it up as if the incumbent was against broadband accessibility. Politics at most levels has become such a twisted cesspool of lies and misdirection it's no wonder why any decent person avoids running for office.
Slashdot Mirror
Obvious problem with that. Does the scanner work if you have a black eye?
Yes, as long as it's not swollen to the point it can't be pried open. Besides, there are many other places to hit someone other than the eye. And I believe it or not, most people have two eyes.
For the company that invented the Walkman, dreaming up another hit shouldn't be so hard.
What a stupid thing to say. With all of the money Apple has, and a string of products that were amazing sellers, they haven't done much exciting in recent times.
Microsoft did extremely well for itself with it desktop OS and office products. I couldn't even guess how many companies they took over or put under. But I stopped counting how many times they've failed in the mobile phone market. How's Zune selling these days?
How may patents and products did Kodak bring to market over the years? Where are they now? How about GM? They were once the largest car manufacturer in the world. They even had an electric car on the road 20 years ago.
There's an immense amount of luck involved. Just look at things like Crocs, cabbage patch kids,
Just don't go asking it foolish questions like "Is there a God?"
Considering the owners/creators of such a system can turn it off, on, copy it, edit its code and swap out its hardware. It wold be a rather interesting answer if you had a self aware AI.
I am so happy! According to Hollywood, hacking into an iris-scan protected phone means ripping out somebody's eyeball. https://www.youtube.com/watch?... I'm glad to hear you can do it with a camera instead.
Except do you think some street thug who wants to get into you phone that badly is going to carry a camera, printer and contact lens? Realistically, they'll probably punch most people once and they'll be happy to unlock the phone to avoid being hit again. Failing that, it's probably simpler to just knock the owner out and scan their eye to unlock the phone while they're unconscious.
Right. I thought the entire point of deepblue and alphago was to demonstrate how well "purpose-built" AI could perform. And that it's possible to make similar AI for.... lawyering, medical diagnosing, civil engineering, driving a car, predicting the stock market, designing stuff for function.... You know, "single-purposes"... like people's careers.
And how often are mistakes made by humans in medicine? Not often, but it's not perfect. So if a computer can diagnose with better accuracy and/or earlier, then it's better for humans as a whole.
I'm not a big fan of the current self driving cars, but eventually they will become better than humans. At which point, how many lives can be saved by removing human error? Again, better for humanity.
Law is a tricky one. First of all, because it's mostly lawyers who write the laws, so I'm pretty sure they will be able to keep their jobs safe. But if AI can keep more innocent people out of jail and more guilty ones from going free, then I would guess it would be better.
As far as misdiagnosis, accidents, etc, I would say that AI is better for humanity as a whole. But long term, we're going to have to make some tough decisions about how we want to continue as a society. Are we going to end up in some capitalist dystopia where 1% of the population lives well and the rest of us live in the ashes of our current society? Will we live in some idealistic Star Trek utopian existence? Probably something in between. But that's not caused by the AI itself, it's a result of progress. It's happened many times in history.
It isn't looking good for humanity.
Purpose built machines have been able to, or be used to out do humans for a very long time. A lever can be used to lift more weight than a person alone can. But we're not being ruled by sticks. Cranes can lift even more.
Cars are used to move people further and faster than they could on their own. Computers can do many more calculations per second. These things make life better for humanity as a whole.
Unless AlphaGo figures out a way to keep a person from unplugging it, I'm guessing that humanity will be just fine.
Well, I hate to respond with a meme, but http://imgur.com/lLxCoWM
Oh cool, Londo Mollari is finally here. So now we can build a jump gate to go see what's actually causing it.
According to my will, my obituary will be published in Comic Sans. I love to annoy Font Nazis, and that will be my last opportunity.
Obituaries are so ephemeral. You should see about using Comic Sans on your gravestone. If you can get one coated in alumin(i)um is should add a couple hundred extra years to it.
I would have thought the comment about the germ warfare vault next door would have been a hint. But I guess not. Did anyone check to make sure the barking snakes that guard the seed vault were OK?
even in Svalbard up near the north pole.... 7 degrees celsius above normal.
Of course, heat rises after all.
More importantly, did anyone check on the germ warfare vault next door?
That said you should keep up with patches in the first place. Windows does it for you and there's usually never a good reason to stop it.
Until recently, I'd agree. But how many people turned off updates during the "free" Windows 10 thing? That in it's self damn near felt like there was a virus on your computer. Then there's the telemetry update that got added to Windows 7. Anyone who didn't want that also had to turn off automatic download and install of updates.
Team OS/2!
Dumb news organization admits it broke the law!
Did they? I don't know the specifics of the law in regards to WiFi, but this seems(according to the first half of TFS) no different than someone turning on their laptop in the parking lot of a hotel and noticing that the hotel is one network that they could potentially log onto w/o encryption.
That being said, if that's all they did, then it also doesn't prove one way or the other how secure it is. Most resorts and such have public WiFi. Many don't require any log on at all. As long as all they can do is access the internet and no internal systems, it's working as intended. I've stayed in places that also have unsecured printers outside of the regular network for guests to use.
Our inspections found weak and open Wi-Fi networks, wireless printers without passwords, servers with outdated and vulnerable software, and unencrypted login pages to back-end databases containing sensitive information.
Open WiFi and printers are to be expected for guests to use, as long as they are on a separate network from anything that's not intended to be public. The rest of this statement contradicts the previous statement of:
We resisted the temptation.
Either they did log onto the network and were doing some snooping (in which case they may have broken the law), or they didn't and made this up.
It's actually evolution in action. All of the stupid insects in the area are being caught by these traps, thus removing their lower intelligence from the local gene pool. Over time the insects that are breeding are only having smarter offspring, so they aren't getting caught in these traps. It's the long term results of the observer effect. I heard that in the areas that have been doing this the longest, many of the traps have been vandalized by what appear to be tiny stone weapons.
Oh, the John Connor from the future is a Terminator. Well, now I don't need to spend $17 on a ticket.
It's amazing how much I can relate to your comment. There was a 10 year period where I decided that owning a television was a waste of time. Terminator 2 was released during that period, so it was a really cool surprise to discover that Arnold was the good guy while watching the movie for the first time. Granted, it was a much different time, and plot twists were not required as they are now either, especially in a action movie. So it was even more unexpected.
Big explosions and tits.
Come to think of it, why not simply name a movie that way? No trailer needed.
And that will put us one step closer to the movie "Ass" being made and winning 8 Oscars. Sadly, instead of 500 years, it'll probably be in less than 50 years.
They will just abscond with their ill-gotten profits and form another company beyond the reach of the long arm of the law to continue raping and pillaging phone lines.
That's why we should nuke them from orbit, it's the only way to be sure.
And now it doesn't. So it's a pretty safe bet that it won't maintain one now. Even at the wildest possibly of us being able to generate an atmosphere, we're not going to be able to do so instantaneously. So the likelihood of doing so faster than it being stripped away by solar winds is small. I'd like to see humans go there as much as anyone, but you need to be realistic too.
-Bender
That's 2 stars higher than I'd give Comcast.
regular cycling cut the risk of death from any cause by 41%
I would have thought it would increase your risk of death by being hit by a car.
In all seriousness though, people are not really designed for the type of lifestyle we live today in the modern world. We weren't meant to sit all day long and stare at a monitor. It would be interesting to know what cycling to and from work does in regards to stress relief too.
So instead of crashing several times daily, it might only crash several times weekly. Not that you'd want to run it that long without restarting the app since it'll be using all of your memory by the end of the day.
Is there a different Firefox than the one I'm using? The machine I do the majority of my browsing on is a Win 7 box with 16GB of RAM. I haven't seen a crash in at least a year, probably more. I have had 15 separate windows open with 10 to 30 tabs open in each for the last 2 or 3 months. I just rebooted today for updates. I will shutdown and restore my Firefox session when the memory usage creeps up and bogs it down. But the most I've seen it get up to is a little over 8GB of RAM usage. Which is ridiculous, but not as bad as you seem to be exaggerating it to be.
My one big sticking point to switching browsers is the Tree-Style-Tabs add-on. I can't find a single other browser that does this well. Opera is the only other that comes close, but I can't stand that it has no way to hide the tabs across the top of the browser. I could live with the vertical tabs not being nested if I cold just find a way to hide the horizontal ones.
Who cares how fat a rebel pilot is? They ony have to sit in a chair anyway, they don't have to be athletes.
When pulling high G's, yes you really do need to be an athlete and not a blob.
And yet the numbers are clear that Edge is superior. There's no denying that Edge drains the battery a lot less.
I can't say I've used Edge, so I really don't know. But because it uses less power does not make it a superior browser. It only makes a better at electrical consumption. While a Prius has better fuel economy than a Z06 Corvette, I wouldn't necessary call the Prius a better car. If you're commuting to work in it, sure it may be better. If your doing laps at the local track, not so much.
I not making any claims regarding what Microsoft has done, but it also wouldn't surprise me if Windows 10 finds a way to waste power when another browser is used. It's not like they haven't been caught for pulling anti competitive crap in the past. And their recent decisions with regard to Windows 10 don't inspire much confidence either.
Here's the problem, the bill was called "Broadband Accessibility Act of 2017". So that has to be better than "EPB wants to expand their service". Plus with a name like that, how could any politician not vote for it. If they did, their opponent in the next election would be holding it up as if the incumbent was against broadband accessibility. Politics at most levels has become such a twisted cesspool of lies and misdirection it's no wonder why any decent person avoids running for office.