Vaccines are not antibiotics. However, both vaccines and antibiotics that are used properly eradicate diseases successfully, and those that aren't used properly breed resistant strains. The Australian government has the right mindset here.
It's simple: we take every journalist who ever misunderstood quantum entanglement and assumed that it was a viable method of information-passing, and then make them interact at a subatomic level so that they adopt opposite spins (one liberal, the other conservative.) To pass information, we simply adjust the spin on one of the journalists, and due to misunderstanding quantum entanglement, his or her partner will automatically adopt the opposite spin.
Estimates for the additional programming and testing necessary to ensure similar functionality and accessibility access across the available iPhone and BlackBerry platforms are $56,000 and $40,000 respectively.
Yeah, man. Down with vampires. I'm so sick of their horrible garlic breath and bad accents. And what's with them getting all the best housing? The living deserve spooky old mansions too!
Admittedly, that one looks like it'll take a while to sort out. If you haven't done so already, I might recommend stumbling aimlessly through this sprawling beast of a Wikipedia article, which is really more of a review of the relevant literature.
The credibility of those philosophies went out the window when we clearly established that humans haven't been around since the dawn of time. Occam's razor doesn't like the idea that we evolved to hook into a magic API in the fabric of the universe that lets us think, especially when we now have all these other species (chimps, ravens, parrots, babies...) that appear to have intermediate levels of intelligence and self-awareness.
Molecular dynamics is algorithmic. The brain is implemented in molecular dynamics. Hence, a Turing machine can simulate the brain, even if only very inefficiently. The brain can only either be Turing complete or less than Turing complete. Most (if not all) of the non-Turing-compatible problems we know of are either uncomputable tautologies or rapidly approach infinite complexity.
Little-known fact: humanity achieved strong AI almost a decade ago. Unfortunately, we botched its sense of humour. All lazy trolls on the Internet are actually just one super-intelligent perl script.
Methylation is an epigenetic form of regulation. While it involves the modification of the chromosomes, calling it modification of DNA is generally considered underhanded.
Transposons are independent parasites that manipulate DNA on their own. We don't really have evidence that the cell does anything more than tolerate them.
The Nature blog article, however, is quite something, and I'll concede the point based on it.
Your point is correct in general, but you greatly over-estimate the computational power of an individual neuron. They only compute one function: sum inputs, multiply by adjustable weights, emit signal if adjustable threshold is exceeded. A neuron is more like a fuzzy and transistor than a processor. (Also, as 1s44c said, neurons are not capable of modifying their genomes.)
Turing-complete computers can perform anything. You might get further if you attack the claim that the brain is Turing-complete. Neurons can be configured into a Turing-complete arrangement (in fact it only takes a few layers of neurons to do so), but it's not necessarily as clear that we're configured that way. People just assume it is.
Slashdot Mirror
Vaccines are not antibiotics. However, both vaccines and antibiotics that are used properly eradicate diseases successfully, and those that aren't used properly breed resistant strains. The Australian government has the right mindset here.
Who said anything about oxidation? Ammonia: it's the new black. (Well, old black.)
Well! Maybe on your planet.
Why not go the whole way and encrypt the whole signal? Then you'd have to handshake with your hands every morning.
It's simple: we take every journalist who ever misunderstood quantum entanglement and assumed that it was a viable method of information-passing, and then make them interact at a subatomic level so that they adopt opposite spins (one liberal, the other conservative.) To pass information, we simply adjust the spin on one of the journalists, and due to misunderstanding quantum entanglement, his or her partner will automatically adopt the opposite spin.
Then we do this several billion times per second.
Actually, no to that last one. But the rest about redundancy is spot-on.
Fixed!
Simple:
in the original scan.
You did actually read my post, right?
Estimates for the additional programming and testing necessary to ensure similar functionality and accessibility access across the available iPhone and BlackBerry platforms are $56,000 and $40,000 respectively.
The iPhone version was $56,000. The Blackberry version was $40,000. Together, they were $96,000. It says this very clearly in the original scan.
Oh god. I didn't even cyber-notice that. What is the cyberworld cyber-coming to?
Can we send all of MRG's top brass an e-mail of this? I think it says more than any other comment on this story ever could.
- "Beastiality" is banned, but not "bestiality". Coitus with animals is acceptable as long as you can spell it properly.
- A lot of superstrings seem to be banned; I guess they expect the operators to censor the longest possible match.
- I guess no one's allowed to do research on HSV in Pakistan, since "herpes" is banned.
- How long before someone turns the blocking of "lesbian" and "gay" into a human rights issue? Especially "gay pride"?
- Some of these bans are actually dangerous to public safety: "sniper", "hostage", and "stroke" are all being banned.
you know that your product is cursed.
Unless it's a mobile phone—then it's the other way around. (Pssh, yeah, sure, Intel. You'll get a slice of that pie someday, I'm sure.)
Yeah, man. Down with vampires. I'm so sick of their horrible garlic breath and bad accents. And what's with them getting all the best housing? The living deserve spooky old mansions too!
Admittedly, that one looks like it'll take a while to sort out. If you haven't done so already, I might recommend stumbling aimlessly through this sprawling beast of a Wikipedia article, which is really more of a review of the relevant literature.
The credibility of those philosophies went out the window when we clearly established that humans haven't been around since the dawn of time. Occam's razor doesn't like the idea that we evolved to hook into a magic API in the fabric of the universe that lets us think, especially when we now have all these other species (chimps, ravens, parrots, babies...) that appear to have intermediate levels of intelligence and self-awareness.
Molecular dynamics is algorithmic. The brain is implemented in molecular dynamics. Hence, a Turing machine can simulate the brain, even if only very inefficiently. The brain can only either be Turing complete or less than Turing complete. Most (if not all) of the non-Turing-compatible problems we know of are either uncomputable tautologies or rapidly approach infinite complexity.
Little-known fact: humanity achieved strong AI almost a decade ago. Unfortunately, we botched its sense of humour. All lazy trolls on the Internet are actually just one super-intelligent perl script.
That's quite okay; I've got university access to most publications. :)
Methylation is an epigenetic form of regulation. While it involves the modification of the chromosomes, calling it modification of DNA is generally considered underhanded.
Transposons are independent parasites that manipulate DNA on their own. We don't really have evidence that the cell does anything more than tolerate them.
The Nature blog article, however, is quite something, and I'll concede the point based on it.
Your point is correct in general, but you greatly over-estimate the computational power of an individual neuron. They only compute one function: sum inputs, multiply by adjustable weights, emit signal if adjustable threshold is exceeded. A neuron is more like a fuzzy and transistor than a processor. (Also, as 1s44c said, neurons are not capable of modifying their genomes.)
Turing-complete computers can perform anything. You might get further if you attack the claim that the brain is Turing-complete. Neurons can be configured into a Turing-complete arrangement (in fact it only takes a few layers of neurons to do so), but it's not necessarily as clear that we're configured that way. People just assume it is.
Lead is a pretty lousy writing tool. Graphite is much darker and less shiny.
Unfortunately, such a direct comparison is reductionist to the point of being meaningless. You may like this related article: When will computer hardware match the human brain?
Wikipedia to the rescue! The Romans did lots of things with lead that you generally shouldn't, it seems.