The thing is, they're filling the same roles in the same ecosystems. Suppose trees were square on one island, or very sticky on another, or very short and smooth, or poisonous, or covered in ants. In these cases the lizards would have evolved very different forms.
The only relationship between consciousness and intelligence is that the latter is needed before the former can present itself. Actual artificial intelligence has been created already and is used to solve chess problems, schedule subway maintenance, and answer Jeopardy questions. If your definition of "intelligent" includes "we don't know how it works" then one day you'll wake up to find yourself unintelligent. We're answering the question of how brains work at a rapid pace.
So ignorance is not an antonym of consciousness WAAAIT A MINUTE I'm being trolled aren't I?
What real-world problems are best suited to the kind of programming used to manage the subway system? That is to say, if you had unlimited authority to build a similar system to manage other problems which problems would you approach first? Could it be used to solve food distribution in Africa? Could it manage investments?
The point is, they're not the same, shouldn't be treated the same, and lumping them together makes the data less useful. The only benefit to lumping them together is that it makes the problem look worse than it is.
Publishing less useful data for political points? Evil.
Google's anti-SEO destroyed SEO-based businesses. Businesses whose product was deception and causing suboptimal decisions. I celebrate the death of those "legitimate" businesses.
If a sufficiently large population of interested people can be induced to correct the map it shouldn't be an insurmountable problem. Wikipedia suffers and reverts many thousands of bits of misinformation daily. Not to say it's perfect but it's good enough.
"Customer's permission" is newspeak for terms of service buried two links deep and five pages of microtext from the top in a section labeled "beware of leopard"
I would never assume they won't make any breakthroughs but what you're expecting is far beyond "making breakthroughs". You seem to believe a government run research program with a relatively small budget can outperform a multibillion dollar decades old giant of innovation like Intel.
If Russia had three times Intel's budget for the next ten years they could probably catch up. Other than that it's just not happening.
The refrigerator doesn't need access to the internet
Unless I want it to look up recipes. Or be able to auto-order things I'm low on. Or text me in the store to let me know I'm low on milk. Or complain that there's a dangerous form of mold growing. Or give me food usage statistics.
there is no reason what so ever for each device to be directly connected to the internet,
I've seen this argument over and over again and it's still just as short-sighted as when it was said the first time.
There's no good reason and off the top of my head three bad reasons to restrict architecture to a single reporting system:
Standards problems. A home automation system needs to be as future proof as possible and it's all too likely that manufacturers of such systems will do everything possible to not work well together.
future needs.Where a new set of data from a self-hosting fridge is inherent to the appliance I have to rely on two different systems to support it with the architecture you propose.
virus resistance. A large and diverse ecosystem of appliances won't be nearly as vulnerable as a few standardized systems
Did anyone notice how dead-on accurate Google's automatic translation is on that site?
"D-Dalu is a completely new aircraft with a drive system based on four cyclo Giro rotors. Because of pairs of counter-rotating rotors drive the aircraft is permanently in a state of dynamic equilibrium with balanced centrifugal forces."
That's almost indistinguishable from a human translator.
Snowden did it to keep his oath and he's still getting prosecuted. Anyone doing it for money would have no leg to stand on in the view of the people who would go after them.
Corruption in the US judiciary system is a very real problem and people who expose it are heroes but this reward is the worst possible way to get people to come forward.
One would hope that following the original, successful, format will be sufficient. If they try to change it up (which seems likely) to be a web 2.0 synergistic paradigm it could be a disaster. I hope they get input from Dr. Liggett or equivalent.
Long passwords composed of random words are highly random, highly resistant to bruit forcing, and relatively easy to remember. The battle to make users remember arbitrary characters isn't just foolish, it's insecure.
But the writers of TFA are still misusing the word. All learned knowledge is memetic: It's silly to pull arbitrary words from an information stream and pretend only they are memes.
The word they should be looking for is "important" or "central". The software is pulling ideas more central to the science. That's excellent work and well worth doing... It's just not directly related to memes.
The only problem is that the market doesn't fit the billing practices. The only solution is to change billing practices to fit the market.
1. Be trustworthy. 2. Charge a fee upfront to produce content. 3. Use the collected money to produce. Publish via multicast and peer-to-peer. No DRM, no bullshit. Everyone gets to see it whether or not they paid. 4. Only produce when enough people have paid enough for the next feature.
If there aren't enough people paying in then it's not worth it to make.
The characters look great and the tactics compelling but there's one important question the preview didn't even try to address:
Is the gameplay as carefully balanced and the world at least as immersive, large, and interesting as Skyrim plus expansions? No amount of eye candy can make up for weak gameplay mechanics or a small world.
Is the dialogue matched to gameplay? Is it matched to the gamer's style? Is it close enough to bug free that immersion isn't lost? Is the mechanic for buying and selling goods balanced? Does the game support all possible playing styles without falling apart in some way? Is the AI at least decent?
is more good speech. However preposterous their ideas trying to silence any cult will just end in their views being discussed in secret and away from the bright light of open debate.
This isn't the future of tech so much as the odds of specific companies doing specific things. It may be a useful platform for hedging stock purchases but to say it's about the future of technology is silly. Look at the beginning of the era of personal computers, 1980... These bets are like saying "IBM will sell over 200,000 PC's in the year 2000". How many PC's IBM sold had a very small effect on total PC sales.
Whether or not Google has 75% global land coverage in 6 years the important question is whether any company will. Whether Amazon is delivering mongoloads of stuff by drone the question is how much stuff will be delivered by anyone. The questions posed on the linked site are trivial except to the extent you're betting on stocks.
It's true that America doesn't yet have a police state to rival the gestapo. Nevertheless there are many troubling developments that have created observable similarities. Furthermore the march of technology has allowed much less visibility of the same degree of surveillance.
The gestapo couldn't have dreamed of a quickly searchable list of every phone call in Italy, its time, related phone numbers, and numbers called by those other numbers. They couldn't have dreamed of being able to know every time a person looked at a map. Yet with modern phone networks, smart phones, connected GPS's, and the internet these things are a reality in today's America.
Not having a person physically looking on doesn't make a surveilled act more private. I would argue that the average member of the public being unaware of these things makes their acts LESS private: The American public doesn't have the luxury of realizing its being watched.
As for the presence of police technology allows much more effective police. Where the Gestapo would have needed a dozen men the FBI needs one. So where there were 12 police stations in Italy here is needed 1 to surveil to the same degree. This leads to less apparent police with the same effect.
You could argue that police don't harass every citizen every morning, that one doesn't encounter a road block every mile. But with the "papers please" automatically mechanized that's not necessary.
And in actual encounters with police a more and more prevalent attitude exists among local, state, and federal police that every citizen is an enemy. It's become very common for police to use intimidation and as much force as they can legally get away with to accomplish their aims.
The constitution is seen as an obstruction by police and citizens who exercise their rights are given the worst possible legal treatment. Furthermore it's well known that even "good" cops lie in court to cover up for bad cops. An "us against them" attitude prevails and gets worse every time an internal affairs cop covers something up to save paperwork.
And what is legal is getting more and more broadly defined as the supreme court chips away at the constitution with ruling after ruling.
Finally, don't confuse prosperity with freedom. If I get into a nice car every morning that doesn't negate the fact that three pictures of the license plate are uploaded before I arrive.
The rights we sell today will be purchased tomorrow by our children -- in blood.
Slashdot Mirror
The thing is, they're filling the same roles in the same ecosystems. Suppose trees were square on one island, or very sticky on another, or very short and smooth, or poisonous, or covered in ants. In these cases the lizards would have evolved very different forms.
If they care about their customers (HA!) they should put at least half the employees they're letting go into expanded testing and security divisions.
The only relationship between consciousness and intelligence is that the latter is needed before the former can present itself. Actual artificial intelligence has been created already and is used to solve chess problems, schedule subway maintenance, and answer Jeopardy questions. If your definition of "intelligent" includes "we don't know how it works" then one day you'll wake up to find yourself unintelligent. We're answering the question of how brains work at a rapid pace.
So ignorance is not an antonym of consciousness WAAAIT A MINUTE I'm being trolled aren't I?
What real-world problems are best suited to the kind of programming used to manage the subway system? That is to say, if you had unlimited authority to build a similar system to manage other problems which problems would you approach first? Could it be used to solve food distribution in Africa? Could it manage investments?
The point is, they're not the same, shouldn't be treated the same, and lumping them together makes the data less useful. The only benefit to lumping them together is that it makes the problem look worse than it is. Publishing less useful data for political points? Evil.
Google's anti-SEO destroyed SEO-based businesses. Businesses whose product was deception and causing suboptimal decisions. I celebrate the death of those "legitimate" businesses.
If a sufficiently large population of interested people can be induced to correct the map it shouldn't be an insurmountable problem. Wikipedia suffers and reverts many thousands of bits of misinformation daily. Not to say it's perfect but it's good enough.
Anyone who doesn't work unreasonable hours is a slacker? Fuck you.
"Customer's permission" is newspeak for terms of service buried two links deep and five pages of microtext from the top in a section labeled "beware of leopard"
I would never assume they won't make any breakthroughs but what you're expecting is far beyond "making breakthroughs". You seem to believe a government run research program with a relatively small budget can outperform a multibillion dollar decades old giant of innovation like Intel. If Russia had three times Intel's budget for the next ten years they could probably catch up. Other than that it's just not happening.
Rest in peace you inspiration of mankind.
Unless I want it to look up recipes. Or be able to auto-order things I'm low on. Or text me in the store to let me know I'm low on milk. Or complain that there's a dangerous form of mold growing. Or give me food usage statistics.
there is no reason what so ever for each device to be directly connected to the internet,
I've seen this argument over and over again and it's still just as short-sighted as when it was said the first time.
There's no good reason and off the top of my head three bad reasons to restrict architecture to a single reporting system:
Did anyone notice how dead-on accurate Google's automatic translation is on that site? "D-Dalu is a completely new aircraft with a drive system based on four cyclo Giro rotors. Because of pairs of counter-rotating rotors drive the aircraft is permanently in a state of dynamic equilibrium with balanced centrifugal forces." That's almost indistinguishable from a human translator.
Snowden did it to keep his oath and he's still getting prosecuted. Anyone doing it for money would have no leg to stand on in the view of the people who would go after them. Corruption in the US judiciary system is a very real problem and people who expose it are heroes but this reward is the worst possible way to get people to come forward.
One would hope that following the original, successful, format will be sufficient. If they try to change it up (which seems likely) to be a web 2.0 synergistic paradigm it could be a disaster. I hope they get input from Dr. Liggett or equivalent.
Even the average anesthetized American brain can see the irony in these names. Soon we shall have a ministry of love.
Long passwords composed of random words are highly random, highly resistant to bruit forcing, and relatively easy to remember. The battle to make users remember arbitrary characters isn't just foolish, it's insecure.
The question was about methane.
How can mass farming of cattle be made sustainable?
But the writers of TFA are still misusing the word. All learned knowledge is memetic: It's silly to pull arbitrary words from an information stream and pretend only they are memes. The word they should be looking for is "important" or "central". The software is pulling ideas more central to the science. That's excellent work and well worth doing... It's just not directly related to memes.
The only problem is that the market doesn't fit the billing practices. The only solution is to change billing practices to fit the market.
1. Be trustworthy.
2. Charge a fee upfront to produce content.
3. Use the collected money to produce. Publish via multicast and peer-to-peer. No DRM, no bullshit. Everyone gets to see it whether or not they paid.
4. Only produce when enough people have paid enough for the next feature.
If there aren't enough people paying in then it's not worth it to make.
The characters look great and the tactics compelling but there's one important question the preview didn't even try to address: Is the gameplay as carefully balanced and the world at least as immersive, large, and interesting as Skyrim plus expansions? No amount of eye candy can make up for weak gameplay mechanics or a small world. Is the dialogue matched to gameplay? Is it matched to the gamer's style? Is it close enough to bug free that immersion isn't lost? Is the mechanic for buying and selling goods balanced? Does the game support all possible playing styles without falling apart in some way? Is the AI at least decent?
is more good speech. However preposterous their ideas trying to silence any cult will just end in their views being discussed in secret and away from the bright light of open debate.
This isn't the future of tech so much as the odds of specific companies doing specific things. It may be a useful platform for hedging stock purchases but to say it's about the future of technology is silly. Look at the beginning of the era of personal computers, 1980... These bets are like saying "IBM will sell over 200,000 PC's in the year 2000". How many PC's IBM sold had a very small effect on total PC sales. Whether or not Google has 75% global land coverage in 6 years the important question is whether any company will. Whether Amazon is delivering mongoloads of stuff by drone the question is how much stuff will be delivered by anyone. The questions posed on the linked site are trivial except to the extent you're betting on stocks.
Your sarcasm is noted, but misplaced.
It's true that America doesn't yet have a police state to rival the gestapo. Nevertheless there are many troubling developments that have created observable similarities. Furthermore the march of technology has allowed much less visibility of the same degree of surveillance.
The gestapo couldn't have dreamed of a quickly searchable list of every phone call in Italy, its time, related phone numbers, and numbers called by those other numbers. They couldn't have dreamed of being able to know every time a person looked at a map. Yet with modern phone networks, smart phones, connected GPS's, and the internet these things are a reality in today's America.
Not having a person physically looking on doesn't make a surveilled act more private. I would argue that the average member of the public being unaware of these things makes their acts LESS private: The American public doesn't have the luxury of realizing its being watched.
As for the presence of police technology allows much more effective police. Where the Gestapo would have needed a dozen men the FBI needs one. So where there were 12 police stations in Italy here is needed 1 to surveil to the same degree. This leads to less apparent police with the same effect.
You could argue that police don't harass every citizen every morning, that one doesn't encounter a road block every mile. But with the "papers please" automatically mechanized that's not necessary.
And in actual encounters with police a more and more prevalent attitude exists among local, state, and federal police that every citizen is an enemy. It's become very common for police to use intimidation and as much force as they can legally get away with to accomplish their aims.
The constitution is seen as an obstruction by police and citizens who exercise their rights are given the worst possible legal treatment. Furthermore it's well known that even "good" cops lie in court to cover up for bad cops. An "us against them" attitude prevails and gets worse every time an internal affairs cop covers something up to save paperwork.
And what is legal is getting more and more broadly defined as the supreme court chips away at the constitution with ruling after ruling.
Finally, don't confuse prosperity with freedom. If I get into a nice car every morning that doesn't negate the fact that three pictures of the license plate are uploaded before I arrive.
The rights we sell today will be purchased tomorrow by our children -- in blood.