Finally we have a person who gets it. The article talks about a "limited" Turing test, which says it all. Computers can retrieve data very well, but how easy is it to program intuition? How easily can a program understand a hidden question? A rhetorical question? Turing's test will remain un-passed regardless of what these people claim to have done with their "limited" test. More research needs to be done.
Sadly, you have fallen for the propaganda. There really is no such controversy in the scientific community at large. Your assertion is not supported by any evidence that effectively counters Charles Darwin's theory of evolution. All such attempts have been fully rebutted by evolutionary biologists. Now if you could enlighten us all as to any such evidence, that would be great...
Fair enough. IMHO however, colonization as the 'goal' is without merit, at least at this stage in our journey to explore space. Robotic missions would be able to accomplish the same science at a fraction of the cost, or conversely far more science for roughly the same cost. I admit that a 'Moonbase' with an 'Earth/Moon ferry service' sounds pretty enticing, but not the best expenditure of resources for the sake of humanity. Now if you were to argue for manned space flight and/or off-Earth colonization as a means to build support and rally the masses around space exploration and (more importantly) science in general, I might be able to concede somewhat.
...I honestly do not care about scientific value at this point? I want to see a moonbase. I want proof it can be done on a small planetary scale. I want to see new settlements of humans off this planet, even if only to our nearest satellite. I want to see the whole thing shown to be do'able, not for study's sake, but because it should be being done. I want to see a practical application and a first step to living elsewhere...
Cheers,
Ian How many times did you say 'I want...' in your post? Honestly, if this doesn't sum up the American mentality, I don't know what does. Me me me me me me me me me... Try opening your mind long enough to realize that A, the world doesn't revolve around you, and B, you should leave the decisions on scientific research to scientists.
What makes you think that we need 'proof' of something that man will undoubtedly do well after you're dead? Why spend a huge amount of resources to make you happy, when all we need is scientific progress in the areas that make the most sense today. Namely, sending out robotic explorers in our place. People have to learn to accept the FACT that we will not know everything, discover everything, and conquer everything in their life times.
Slashdot Mirror
Finally we have a person who gets it. The article talks about a "limited" Turing test, which says it all. Computers can retrieve data very well, but how easy is it to program intuition? How easily can a program understand a hidden question? A rhetorical question? Turing's test will remain un-passed regardless of what these people claim to have done with their "limited" test. More research needs to be done.
Sadly, you have fallen for the propaganda. There really is no such controversy in the scientific community at large. Your assertion is not supported by any evidence that effectively counters Charles Darwin's theory of evolution. All such attempts have been fully rebutted by evolutionary biologists. Now if you could enlighten us all as to any such evidence, that would be great...
Fair enough. IMHO however, colonization as the 'goal' is without merit, at least at this stage in our journey to explore space. Robotic missions would be able to accomplish the same science at a fraction of the cost, or conversely far more science for roughly the same cost. I admit that a 'Moonbase' with an 'Earth/Moon ferry service' sounds pretty enticing, but not the best expenditure of resources for the sake of humanity. Now if you were to argue for manned space flight and/or off-Earth colonization as a means to build support and rally the masses around space exploration and (more importantly) science in general, I might be able to concede somewhat.
Cheers,
Ian Doesn't really affect my point does it?
It's always a competition with you guys...
...I honestly do not care about scientific value at this point? I want to see a moonbase. I want proof it can be done on a small planetary scale. I want to see new settlements of humans off this planet, even if only to our nearest satellite. I want to see the whole thing shown to be do'able, not for study's sake, but because it should be being done. I want to see a practical application and a first step to living elsewhere...Cheers,
Ian How many times did you say 'I want...' in your post? Honestly, if this doesn't sum up the American mentality, I don't know what does. Me me me me me me me me me... Try opening your mind long enough to realize that A, the world doesn't revolve around you, and B, you should leave the decisions on scientific research to scientists. What makes you think that we need 'proof' of something that man will undoubtedly do well after you're dead? Why spend a huge amount of resources to make you happy, when all we need is scientific progress in the areas that make the most sense today. Namely, sending out robotic explorers in our place. People have to learn to accept the FACT that we will not know everything, discover everything, and conquer everything in their life times.