You misread my statement. Difficulty is not the defining characteristic. The ability of the human brain is the defining characteristic. Being able to do things that come naturally to human brains, but not (traditionally) to software, is the textbook definition. Examples of such things include facial recognition and playing games.
This official definition is flawed, but yours is outright meaningless. Depending on how you interpret your definition, it either refers to everything under the Sun, or to a small subset of all AI problems.
Political rally? Bah. I expect them to be attached to quadrocoptors, hovering around every large city after the next terrorist attack. It will be like Half Life 2. Pick up the can.
any program that made decisions and took actions based on environmental inputs.
This describes every nontrivial piece of software. Your definition is even more meaningless. Like facial recognition, "game playing" is (was) one form of AI -- but now computers beat humans at games like chess.
You are trying to describe the "hard" AI of sci-fi, not the actual AI studied by researchers and engineers today. And even so, nothing infinite is required. The human mind is not infinite; AI certainly need not be, either.
Your definition is close, but for something to be AI it has to be doable on a bio brain. Those problems which computers don't do well yet, but brains don't do either, are not considered AI.
My AI prof said that the term "AI" refers to software systems which address the class of problems which are easy for biological brains but difficult for computers. For example: summing a thousand numbers is superior intelligence, but it isn't AI. Recognizing a face, on the other hand, is AI.
But every AI problem which is solved shrinks the definition of AI. Now that facial recognition software works, it isn't AI anymore. Because the definition itself changes, the term itself seems somewhat meaningless. Yesterday's AI is today's mundane consumer electronics feature. For this reason, the use of the word AI makes me feel the same way as the word "nano." It isn't really very meaningful.
Modern security relies on the wise supposition that there are and will always be flaws, therefore multiple layers of protection are employed to minimize the possibility of those flaws affecting you. This is called "defense in depth."
Wire up some inputs and outputs, and let the kids program (with adult help) an arduino robot. Think "so what should it do when it sees motion? Sound an alrm? Blink a light?"
At some point, the soldiers selected targets and fired on them. No matter what the "tension" or "provocation," those men placed their cross-hairs on people who were obviously not a threat and executed them.
I would love to hear, in the soldiers' own words, how they picked their targets.
I have a degree in engineering. I design and analyze complex interconnected systems. What I do is magic to 99% of the population. It's engineering.
Now, there are IT engineers and there are IT technicians. Don't call yourself an engineer if your job is to answer the phone and advise people to reboot their laptops. But if you design software or make complex systems work together optimally, you're doing engineering.
That's just marketing blather. Akami is one of those services that would be called "cloud hosting" if it had been invented more recently. It's just a big web hosting operation what has lots of geographically-dispersed, load-balanced server farms. If you have a heavy-traffic site and you want to make sure it feels fast to your customers, you host it on Akami.
On our network, a large portion of our traffic goes to Akami IP space just from user browsing.
The second page of the article states that the device shown costs $80, the wireless version is $130, and there are less-configurable models at lower price-points.
If you spend a lot of time using your mouse (gamers and geeks), it makes sense to spend more money for getting the best-possible comfort and a higher degree of accuracy. Obviously it won't be "worth" $80 to casual computer users or dedicated command-liners, but those aren't the target market.
Slashdot Mirror
I hope they have an infinite budget, too. But they don't, so it's good that they're using technology to make the most of what they have.
I don't think "we" means what you think it means.
Wrong. We can sit and wait all day, but some portion of the human population will still do it, because some portion isn't content to sit and wait.
You misread my statement. Difficulty is not the defining characteristic. The ability of the human brain is the defining characteristic. Being able to do things that come naturally to human brains, but not (traditionally) to software, is the textbook definition. Examples of such things include facial recognition and playing games.
This official definition is flawed, but yours is outright meaningless. Depending on how you interpret your definition, it either refers to everything under the Sun, or to a small subset of all AI problems.
Political rally? Bah. I expect them to be attached to quadrocoptors, hovering around every large city after the next terrorist attack. It will be like Half Life 2. Pick up the can.
This describes every nontrivial piece of software. Your definition is even more meaningless. Like facial recognition, "game playing" is (was) one form of AI -- but now computers beat humans at games like chess.
You are trying to describe the "hard" AI of sci-fi, not the actual AI studied by researchers and engineers today. And even so, nothing infinite is required. The human mind is not infinite; AI certainly need not be, either.
Your definition is close, but for something to be AI it has to be doable on a bio brain. Those problems which computers don't do well yet, but brains don't do either, are not considered AI.
Spies beware: the facilities which house the inflatable weapons will be guarded around-the-clock by vicious balloon dogs.
Our intelligence shows that it is actually yellow cake which is delicious.
My AI prof said that the term "AI" refers to software systems which address the class of problems which are easy for biological brains but difficult for computers. For example: summing a thousand numbers is superior intelligence, but it isn't AI. Recognizing a face, on the other hand, is AI.
But every AI problem which is solved shrinks the definition of AI. Now that facial recognition software works, it isn't AI anymore. Because the definition itself changes, the term itself seems somewhat meaningless. Yesterday's AI is today's mundane consumer electronics feature. For this reason, the use of the word AI makes me feel the same way as the word "nano." It isn't really very meaningful.
Modern security relies on the wise supposition that there are and will always be flaws, therefore multiple layers of protection are employed to minimize the possibility of those flaws affecting you. This is called "defense in depth."
They were not given the order to shoot students walking to class, but that is who they shot. How did they select those targets?
Wire up some inputs and outputs, and let the kids program (with adult help) an arduino robot. Think "so what should it do when it sees motion? Sound an alrm? Blink a light?"
At some point, the soldiers selected targets and fired on them. No matter what the "tension" or "provocation," those men placed their cross-hairs on people who were obviously not a threat and executed them.
I would love to hear, in the soldiers' own words, how they picked their targets.
I have a degree in engineering. I design and analyze complex interconnected systems. What I do is magic to 99% of the population. It's engineering.
Now, there are IT engineers and there are IT technicians. Don't call yourself an engineer if your job is to answer the phone and advise people to reboot their laptops. But if you design software or make complex systems work together optimally, you're doing engineering.
The economy(GDP) has been growing for a while. The employment market overall is nearly stagnant, but that certainly differs by industry and specialty.
That's just marketing blather. Akami is one of those services that would be called "cloud hosting" if it had been invented more recently. It's just a big web hosting operation what has lots of geographically-dispersed, load-balanced server farms. If you have a heavy-traffic site and you want to make sure it feels fast to your customers, you host it on Akami.
On our network, a large portion of our traffic goes to Akami IP space just from user browsing.
1) forget about your ghost server
2) never patch it
3) you make my penetration test really easy; thanks!
The second page of the article states that the device shown costs $80, the wireless version is $130, and there are less-configurable models at lower price-points.
If you spend a lot of time using your mouse (gamers and geeks), it makes sense to spend more money for getting the best-possible comfort and a higher degree of accuracy. Obviously it won't be "worth" $80 to casual computer users or dedicated command-liners, but those aren't the target market.
(please reply with all spelling corrections below this post)
There target market is people with souls.
Very small rocks!
Churches!
You're right. NAT makes a pretty good firewall. But you know what makes an even better firewall? A FIREWALL.
They would go after the pirates, whose MAC addresses are logged by the NAT device.