actually just about everyone has something illegal to hide.
paraphrasing from "Don't Talk to the Police" by Professor James Duane but
"there isn't a man woman or child on this earth who hasn't violated the united states tax code"
And pretty much everyone has probably committed enough crimes to put them away for life if they were watched closely enough or at the very least bankrupt them with fines. Ever spit on the sidewalk? always break the tax seal on your package of cigarettes properly? jaywalked? etc etc etc
I spent most of my free time for a big chunk of my childhood from about age 8 to 12 down at the local river/stream building damns and rafts with some of the neighbourhood kids about a mile from home.
when going out the door I'd call out "going out for a few hours, if not back avenge death."
In that time I never put myself in any more danger than I did climbing trees in my parents garden. Some danger but no more than the norm. My parents had a fair idea of roughly where I was and had instilled in me the basics of not killing myself.
When we got an internet connection when I was 12 or 13 they instilled the basics of "don't give out your details online, don't give out your location online" which is really really really easy to follow if you're not an unusually thick child.
being a 13 year old boy I looked at quite a lot of pornography, went on a lot of forums and a lot of chat rooms but not once did I ever get approached by any kind of child predator or anyone trying to dig my location/details out of me.
the fear of child predators online is wildly over the top. Your children are vastly more likely to run into them in real life than online and it's almost trivial to stay safe.
you know somehow I've never heard of old age pensioners who've had their licence taken because they're no longer fit to drive getting a cash payout for it.
I'd be interested in a citation if that in fact happens.
there's no shortage of heat at the equator where you'd want to build solar panels and the heat bleeds back out thanks to the old laws of thermodynamics.
There's plenty left for the rest of the biosphere. Whether the rays of light hit dead sand or dead solar panel they give exactly as much energy to the biosphere.
Solar would require a stupidly large area but nothing like half the Atlantic. The obvious choice is to stick it on top of somewhere already short on life like deserts.
In most of the ocean life is limited by the amount of iron, not the amount of light.
The Turing Test takes it's name from one of the greatest minds of the 20th century who proposed it.
Half of those weaknesses are the sort of challenges leveled by those who have utterly missed the point. the only really good criticism is this:
"Planes are tested by how well they fly, not by comparing them to birds." "Aeronautical engineering texts,do not define the goal of their field as 'making machines that fly so exactly like pigeons that they can fool other pigeons.'"
ah the Chinese room. the pinnacle of bullshit. Asking which part of the room understands chinese is like asking what grain of sand knows math in a computer made from rocks. http://xkcd.com/505/
Try the luminous room. "Consider a dark room containing a man holding a bar magnet or charged object. If the man pumps the magnet up and down, then, according to Maxwell's theory of artificial luminance (AL), it will initiate a spreading circle of electromagnetic waves and will thus be luminous. But as all of us who have toyed with magnets or charged balls well know, their forces (or any other forces for that matter), even when set in motion produce no luminance at all. It is inconceivable that you might constitute real luminance just by moving forces around!"
for real information rather than the kind of bullshit spouted in the philosophy class of arts programs around the country try reading Artificial Intelligence: A Modern Approach chapter 26.
there's actually some really remarkable things out there in medical expert systems already. they don't get much traction though as humans in the field can be somewhat hostile to the idea of a machine offering suggestions about a diagnosis.
people can't really define how they do any of that stuff themselves, they just *know* that whatever the machine is doing can't really count as real intelligence.
Autistics/savants often have problems with both those tasks yet they can still be intelligent.
I like your motor vehicle-body comparison. But to match it to what people say about AI remember to include hordes of people insisting that motor vehicles are no use because they
"can't galop like a horse" and "what would you even do with one which could travel as far or fast as a horse, surely it would just take as much hay to feed and would get angry just as much."
really all the fuss about the internal combustion engine is just a waste of time an effort.
"The human brain is extremely energy efficient, using approximately 10-16 joules per operation per second, whereas the best computers today use around 10-6 joules per operation per second."
6400000000000000000/(10^16)
640 joules per second.
1 food calorie = 4.2 kilojoules
1 Cal every 6.5625 seconds.
Seconds in a day:86400
86400/6.5625=13165 calories per day just to keep your brain running.
"We guarantee nothing, we promise nothing, we reserve the right to do anything we want or terminate this agreement at any point. You have the right to do absolutely nothing but we may decide not to punish you from doing some things if we feel like it. We also may change this agreement at any time and you shall have agreed to those changes as well automatically by agreeing to this"
it's remarkably similar to the agreement that comes with most antivirus software.
""A machine will never be able to read the written word." "A machine will never understand speech." "A machine will never be able to look at something and figure out what 3D shape it is." "A machine will never drive a car." "A machine will never play chess." "A machine will never play chess well." "A machine will never beat a chess Grandmaster." "A machine will never beat my favourite chess Grandmaster."
Go back far enough and you can find people making these same sorts of predictions about tasks that seem simple today. Arithmetic, algebra, spell-checking - all were clearly Things Only the Mind of Man (and of a Few Unusually Intelligent Women, Bless 'Em) Could Ever Do."
"But a funny thing always happens, right after a machine does whatever it is that people previously declared a machine would never do. What happens is, that particular act is demoted from the rarefied world of "artificial intelligence", to mere "automation" or "software engineering".
Apparently, you see, when they said "a machine will never be able to spot-weld a car together", they meant to say "a machine will never be aware that it's welding a car together". So all of those production-line robots aren't actually a triumph of artificial intelligence at all, any more than aircraft autopilots or optical character recognition or the square-root button on a calculator - which, after all, merely duplicated a perfectly obvious slide-rule operation - are.
But don't worry. Once someone comes up with a computer that can carry on an intelligent IM chat with you, that'll be proper AI. (And a machine will never do it, of course!)"
Now of course we can cross off "A machine will never be able to beat the champion at jeopardy" but of course that's trivial really.... and look at the mistakes it made while beating one of the best human players. obviously since it made odd mistakes it isn't really a triumph of AI.
it's espioage, sabotage or disruption of communication.
spending 500 million to defend yourself against espioage, sabotage or disruption is a very good idea. Calling it "cyberwarfare" though conjours up far too many images from bad movies.
I think you may not understand the slashdot modderation system. change your view so that you can see -1 comments and you'll realise that the person you're responding to wasn't talking about your post but rather one between yours and his.
it doesn't excuse it but it does matter when racist dickheads are trying to paint a culture or religious group as subhuman for doing what our own ancestors did only a handful of generations ago.
"In April of this year[2010], the Catholic Church modified the Code of Canon Law to remove all references to the act of formal defection, the process used by those who wish to formally renounce their membership of the Church"
And yes you have to go back further to find people actually being killed for heracy or for abandoning the catholic church. The 60's were just the easiest recent example of the church treating women in an utterly barbaric manner.
If I list any country with fairly moderate laws you'll just declare that they're not muslim enough no matter if the laws in the country are strongly shaped by the religion with a massive muslim majority in the population.
Slashdot Mirror
"but most do not have anything illegal to hide"
actually just about everyone has something illegal to hide.
paraphrasing from "Don't Talk to the Police" by Professor James Duane but
"there isn't a man woman or child on this earth who hasn't violated the united states tax code"
And pretty much everyone has probably committed enough crimes to put them away for life if they were watched closely enough or at the very least bankrupt them with fines.
Ever spit on the sidewalk? always break the tax seal on your package of cigarettes properly? jaywalked? etc etc etc
I spent most of my free time for a big chunk of my childhood from about age 8 to 12 down at the local river /stream building damns and rafts with some of the neighbourhood kids about a mile from home.
when going out the door I'd call out "going out for a few hours, if not back avenge death."
In that time I never put myself in any more danger than I did climbing trees in my parents garden. Some danger but no more than the norm.
My parents had a fair idea of roughly where I was and had instilled in me the basics of not killing myself.
When we got an internet connection when I was 12 or 13 they instilled the basics of "don't give out your details online, don't give out your location online" which is really really really easy to follow if you're not an unusually thick child.
being a 13 year old boy I looked at quite a lot of pornography, went on a lot of forums and a lot of chat rooms but not once did I ever get approached by any kind of child predator or anyone trying to dig my location/details out of me.
the fear of child predators online is wildly over the top.
Your children are vastly more likely to run into them in real life than online and it's almost trivial to stay safe.
you know somehow I've never heard of old age pensioners who've had their licence taken because they're no longer fit to drive getting a cash payout for it.
I'd be interested in a citation if that in fact happens.
WTF?
he was explaining the legal situation. not approving of it.
as you thick?
So does the government have to pay you if they decide to take your driving licence away?
as you said, it's not a contract, it's a grant.
there's no shortage of heat at the equator where you'd want to build solar panels and the heat bleeds back out thanks to the old laws of thermodynamics.
There's plenty left for the rest of the biosphere.
Whether the rays of light hit dead sand or dead solar panel they give exactly as much energy to the biosphere.
Solar would require a stupidly large area but nothing like half the Atlantic. The obvious choice is to stick it on top of somewhere already short on life like deserts.
In most of the ocean life is limited by the amount of iron, not the amount of light.
"(adding geothermal energy)"
geothermal isn't what you think it is.
The Turing Test takes it's name from one of the greatest minds of the 20th century who proposed it.
Half of those weaknesses are the sort of challenges leveled by those who have utterly missed the point.
the only really good criticism is this:
"Planes are tested by how well they fly, not by comparing them to birds."
"Aeronautical engineering texts,do not define the goal of their field as 'making machines that fly so exactly like pigeons that they can fool other pigeons.'"
ah the Chinese room. the pinnacle of bullshit.
Asking which part of the room understands chinese is like asking what grain of sand knows math in a computer made from rocks.
http://xkcd.com/505/
Try the luminous room.
"Consider a dark room containing a man holding a bar magnet or charged object. If the man pumps the magnet up and down, then, according to Maxwell's theory of artificial luminance (AL), it will initiate a spreading circle of electromagnetic waves and will thus be luminous. But as all of us who have toyed with magnets or charged balls well know, their forces (or any other forces for that matter), even when set in motion produce no luminance at all. It is inconceivable that you might constitute real luminance just by moving forces around!"
for real information rather than the kind of bullshit spouted in the philosophy class of arts programs around the country try reading Artificial Intelligence: A Modern Approach chapter 26.
there's actually some really remarkable things out there in medical expert systems already. they don't get much traction though as humans in the field can be somewhat hostile to the idea of a machine offering suggestions about a diagnosis.
No human except me has ever understood speech.
prove me wrong.
And before you prove me wrong first read about the Problem Of Other Minds.
Right.
and I suppose you know exactly what is actually happening .
people can't really define how they do any of that stuff themselves, they just *know* that whatever the machine is doing can't really count as real intelligence.
Autistics/savants often have problems with both those tasks yet they can still be intelligent.
I like your motor vehicle-body comparison.
But to match it to what people say about AI remember to include hordes of people insisting that motor vehicles are no use because they
"can't galop like a horse"
and
"what would you even do with one which could travel as far or fast as a horse, surely it would just take as much hay to feed and would get angry just as much."
really all the fuss about the internal combustion engine is just a waste of time an effort.
well it's model of the world is good enough to beat the best human player so it's at least acceptable.
so would BSD be ok then?
" THIS article from just the other day"
What the hell.
this is complete bullshit.
utter utter bullshit.
"Our total storage capacity is the same as an adult human's DNA. And there are several billion humans on the planet. "
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_genome:
3 billion DNA base pairs
even storing it in plain text without compression that's only 3 gigabytes.
my external hard drive could store that 1000 times over.
"the 6.4*10^18 instructions per second that human kind can carry out "
6.4*10^18=
6400000000000000000 instructions per second
http://www.cs.bham.ac.uk/~jxb/INC/l2.pdf
"The human brain is extremely energy efficient, using approximately 10-16 joules
per operation per second, whereas the best computers today use around 10-6 joules
per operation per second."
6400000000000000000/(10^16)
640 joules per second.
1 food calorie = 4.2 kilojoules
1 Cal every 6.5625 seconds.
Seconds in a day:86400
86400/6.5625=13165 calories per day just to keep your brain running.
actual figure:400 and 500 calories per day
The condenced version of sonys TOS/EULA:
"We guarantee nothing, we promise nothing, we reserve the right to do anything we want or terminate this agreement at any point. You have the right to do absolutely nothing but we may decide not to punish you from doing some things if we feel like it. We also may change this agreement at any time and you shall have agreed to those changes as well automatically by agreeing to this"
it's remarkably similar to the agreement that comes with most antivirus software.
Ah the forever shifting goalposts of AI.
http://www.dansdata.com/gz107.htm
""A machine will never be able to read the written word."
"A machine will never understand speech."
"A machine will never be able to look at something and figure out what 3D shape it is."
"A machine will never drive a car."
"A machine will never play chess."
"A machine will never play chess well."
"A machine will never beat a chess Grandmaster."
"A machine will never beat my favourite chess Grandmaster."
Go back far enough and you can find people making these same sorts of predictions about tasks that seem simple today. Arithmetic, algebra, spell-checking - all were clearly Things Only the Mind of Man (and of a Few Unusually Intelligent Women, Bless 'Em) Could Ever Do."
"But a funny thing always happens, right after a machine does whatever it is that people previously declared a machine would never do. What happens is, that particular act is demoted from the rarefied world of "artificial intelligence", to mere "automation" or "software engineering".
Apparently, you see, when they said "a machine will never be able to spot-weld a car together", they meant to say "a machine will never be aware that it's welding a car together". So all of those production-line robots aren't actually a triumph of artificial intelligence at all, any more than aircraft autopilots or optical character recognition or the square-root button on a calculator - which, after all, merely duplicated a perfectly obvious slide-rule operation - are.
But don't worry. Once someone comes up with a computer that can carry on an intelligent IM chat with you, that'll be proper AI. (And a machine will never do it, of course!)"
Now of course we can cross off "A machine will never be able to beat the champion at jeopardy"
but of course that's trivial really.... and look at the mistakes it made while beating one of the best human players. obviously since it made odd mistakes it isn't really a triumph of AI.
barely even that.
do something anonymously, congratualtions you are now part of "Anonymous".
there's going to be both psychos and saint doing things anonymously.
the term "cyberwarfare" is still stupid.
it's espioage, sabotage or disruption of communication.
spending 500 million to defend yourself against espioage, sabotage or disruption is a very good idea.
Calling it "cyberwarfare" though conjours up far too many images from bad movies.
I think you may not understand the slashdot modderation system.
change your view so that you can see -1 comments and you'll realise that the person you're responding to wasn't talking about your post but rather one between yours and his.
it doesn't excuse it but it does matter when racist dickheads are trying to paint a culture or religious group as subhuman for doing what our own ancestors did only a handful of generations ago.
it doesn't mean we shouldn't try to change it.
Just for reference:
http://hdr.undp.org/en/media/HDR_2010_EN_Table4_reprint.pdf
USA rank for gender inequality:35th
Tunisia :rank 56: 99.5% muslim.
Maldives:rank 59: 99% muslim.
Libya: rank 52: 96.6% muslim.
Kuwait: rank 43: 95% muslim.
but I'm guessing none of them are muslim enough for you.
actually they did remove the procedure:
"In April of this year[2010], the Catholic Church modified the Code of Canon Law to remove all references to the act of formal defection, the process used by those who wish to formally renounce their membership of the Church"
And yes you have to go back further to find people actually being killed for heracy or for abandoning the catholic church.
The 60's were just the easiest recent example of the church treating women in an utterly barbaric manner.
If I list any country with fairly moderate laws you'll just declare that they're not muslim enough no matter if the laws in the country are strongly shaped by the religion with a massive muslim majority in the population.
More detail:
http://lists.ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au/pipermail/lore/2006-August/000040.html
http://www.merit.edu/mail.archives/nanog/1997-04/msg00340.html
http://www.merit.edu/mail.archives/nanog/1997-04/msg00444.html
http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=347428&dl=ACM&coll=
http://web.archive.org/web/20070328170121/http://www.riverstonenet.com/support/bgp/design/index.htm
How is this news?
we've know for years that BGP has problems.
it's broken big section of the net before.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AS_7007_incident