If an artefac is made to have a simle intelligence, will it be possible for itself to understand its own reasonning ? From its point of view, conscious arise from unconscious matter (wires and even at a lower level minerals & metals). But we may guess we know how and what makes it think.
The matter can be adapted to man. The problem is you have no proof than someone can understand what you cannot understand : your mind. In fact the only solution to this is faith, but it does not help building the artefac;-)
how do you know everything ? did someone encode it into your brain ? nope
so why not trying to have an AI that learn things rather than trying to put things into its "head" ? The problem is it would probably need much time, and researchers lack time, they want things that can work rather quickly.
Just imagine a system that surf over the internet, there are so much stuff there that the AI will learn plenty of things by itself, and it can become fluent in plenty of languages;-)
moreover, let have one AI for many "parents", that is many people who train the AI in explaining new things, the AI will be the synthethis of them all... and probably crash ! ooops ! yes because one will say : weapons and evil & the second will say weapon are needed to protect against silly dictators
I guess that is the bigger problem : having coordinated knowledge...
I was just thinking of a game over the Internet that could be fun.
Just imagine some AI that's alone against every human players. Give it much much much resources so and nearly no intelligence. But give it the possibility to train itself in confronting to humans. With time and experience it would increase its intelligence.
The core question is : can we build such a mechanism that can get smarter and smarter and then can we compete against it ? When will we loose ?
My faith (even not a point of view since there is strictly no argument) is that there will be a point where no matter how much we will be together, it will dominate us all...
Given the definition of : "Today, "emergent behavior" is often used to describe computer systems grown so complex they exhibit capabilities not programmed in."
Then the question is : are bugs of windows programmed in or not ? If not, then does my Windows box think ?
Maybe Windows 2000 will be Space Odyssey's HAL... oops ("I can not let you do that David !";-)
Having a munchkin character is one thing, being able to keep him alive and prosperous is another.
Other players will have the opportunity to get things off the bought character. The former player would be good enough to keep his assets, the new one will find it trickier.
Look, when an industrial create a huge company and when he dies, its very rare that only one people (his child) keeps everything on the long term. In fact others come in, and even though the company continues to exist, we can say that its assets have been shared.
not necessarily, because very few companies tune servers M$ did. In fact the action of M$ proved that it is not easy to have a high end NT server.
Here at work we just buy a PC, install NT4 + SP3 and that's all. There is no customization and sometimes we even forget to stop some services that we don't need.
A few months ago a first miracle stroke upon M$. Before the M$ trial started everyone (or nearly) though nothing would get out of this. But if Linux is so hype these days, that because M$ people have shown to be very stupid (Gate's dumb testimony where he hardly reminded things was the stronger argument _against_ M$ ever).
Mindcraft test seems totally biased, and at first glance we cannot expect much thing from it (exactly like the trial). But maybe we'll get some nice surprise ?
However I will not bet a cent on it (unless you give me one;-)
I agree with you. And just add this : what if the test shows Linux is not far below NT ? Then Mindcraft _and_ Microsoft are shamed. For people at Mindcraft that would not only mean the corp dies and they loose their job, but also they'll probably not find any job in that field. Therefore the last test _has_ to support first tests. And that result might be much more dramatic to Linux. And after the test show bad figures for Linux it will be too late to say it was biased.
But just look at it. Maybe it is true that Linux is not at the same level of an highly tuned NT box ? This is not a shame to be weaker than a competitor in specific conditions, but it is shamefull if noone does anything to change this...
2 years ago I read an article in a serious scientific newspaper that people were creating some sort of new speaker. That uses a simple flat panel (no folding) and the whole surface is used as a panel, Then you can use ads panels, paintings, ceiling panels or whatever you want that is flat...
I'll be able to have a desk which is a computer dusplay. The resolution will be so hegh that I will not see any difference between the paper document and the digital document (besides the fact one has 3 dimensions...)
No more monitor, no more mouse or keyboard, just the table covered by a touch-screen layer. I am waiting this for years... and it comes closer, cool !
let them develop the following. I read in a scientific newspaper they planned to make screen with 3 primary colors, that way we will have real color display
and the refresh rate is about 30 pics / sec so thats a good beginning
> They're not in control of their road map. > They ship whatever happens to be current > in the Linux community. When you're selling > to [major corporations], they want to know > who you are, where you're going, where > you've been, how you treat customers.
What I understand from that is Michels means Linux cannot provide long term insgiht and can always possibly crumble (because no one really have the product). That's strong menace for customers.
I agree for the long term view & I think some kind of w3 org like would be cool for Linux.
But Linux can only strengthen, since I believe we passed the critical mass. It's now a social phenomenum, more and more people believe in it, and that makes it more interesting to others. That's like mobile phones. Who could say mobile phones will disappear ?
One can compare Linux with RISC cpu, Network Computers or Java (two have nearly disapeared and the other is not as strong as it was supposed to become). But you'll see that Linux has been more backened by big corps & is increasely (IBM, Intel & recently Dell & HP are astonishing examples). In fact Linux came into light at the right moment, just when corps saw that Microsoft was not so untouchable...
What about Asimov ? Ok I just finished "Foundation & Earth" and his books are really great ! But that's not ad I want to do here (or not only;-) Asimov proposed that when people believe in something, it makes that thing stronger, whether that thing really exist or not at the beginning, when people believe in it, it becomes a terrible force & nearly nothing can oppose it.
I think Linux has the potential to become such a force, and I dare think that even though Linus, A. Cox and others were in the same plane and it... had some problem...:'-{ then Linux would perfectly survive without not much harm.
Linux is now part of humanity. And maybe in some decades, people will make it the 8th wonder of the world;-)
Maybe you're not a punk, but surely a kid. "asshole" is no more answer than his talk...
How do you think suits & corporates of all worlds can interpret such remarks of yours ? They just think you're not mature, then linux guys are not mature, then linux is immature...
Be the white dove : fly above crap rampants... La bave du crapeau n'atteint pas la blanche colombe...;-)
Public will decide and you can choose whether or not you want to use that software until every software of the kind you look for use the same revenue model.
Then you are not in position to choose anymore... Can you choose not to view ads panels in the street or can you choose not to see tv ads during films ? No you can't.
I use the SVGA server for TNT which gives no acceleration. Unless a release changed that one or 2 months ago, it means there is no accelration for TNT which means TNT + Win9x should run faster. And indeed I find moving windows in X is slower than with win9x / D3D. But that's just the overhead of X ?
massacres, crashes & media
on
Why Kids Kill
·
· Score: 1
what's happening with this massacre, is the same as when a plane crashes. You have 200-500 people who die in a row, but in fact plane is far safer than car. But people just ficus on that and are afraid of planes crashing...
that's stupid to focus that way on the massacre & trying to explain things when you know nothing. But heh, if journalists were clever people, they would not do that job;-p
2/ death rate : not all dictors are bloody, Castro seems quiet this days, & I would not be surprised if there is far less crime in Cuba than in US (in proportion), but ok I don't know
3/ dictators : a dictatorial gouvernment kill people, but many not that much of US gangs, because these many dictators want an ordered & strong society (for them). I am not talking about civil wars (Kosovo) or puchts, in these times death rate increase, ok, but after its rather calm.
4/ war in europe : do not confuse war with dictators. And compares what's comparable. Compares US with western europe, only. Don't talk about about estern europe since it has not the same stability as western europe or US.
5/ major wars : in europe we have a long history (contrary to you young nation). For thousands years we were against every other neighbours, and in western europe we really start be be unified. That's why we had many wars and a few dictators.
6/ wars : but thats not the point we were talking... wars are not necessarily related to dictators (even though I agree it helps). We were talking about criminal rate & firearms usage in US.
7/ armed kosovar : it's nearly impossible to imagine what would have happened. As we say here : "with many 'if' you can change the world". Anyway, if they were armed, I propose the situation would have evolved in some Afghanistan or Bosnian way : civil war with a far more complicated situation & more deads.
Slashdot Mirror
read Isaac Asimov "Robots" novels
:-)
(and by the way also read the "Foundation" sequel...
If an artefac is made to have a simle intelligence, will it be possible for itself to understand its own reasonning ? From its point of view, conscious arise from unconscious matter (wires and even at a lower level minerals & metals). But we may guess we know how and what makes it think.
;-)
The matter can be adapted to man. The problem is you have no proof than someone can understand what you cannot understand : your mind. In fact the only solution to this is faith, but it does not help building the artefac
how do you know everything ?
;-)
did someone encode it into your brain ? nope
so why not trying to have an AI that learn things rather than trying to put things into its "head" ?
The problem is it would probably need much time, and researchers lack time, they want things that can work rather quickly.
Just imagine a system that surf over the internet, there are so much stuff there that the AI will learn plenty of things by itself, and it can become fluent in plenty of languages
moreover, let have one AI for many "parents", that is many people who train the AI in explaining new things, the AI will be the synthethis of them all... and probably crash ! ooops ! yes because one will say : weapons and evil & the second will say weapon are needed to protect against silly dictators
I guess that is the bigger problem : having coordinated knowledge...
thanx
I was just thinking of a game over the Internet that could be fun.
Just imagine some AI that's alone against every human players. Give it much much much resources so and nearly no intelligence. But give it the possibility to train itself in confronting to humans. With time and experience it would increase its intelligence.
The core question is : can we build such a mechanism that can get smarter and smarter and then can we compete against it ? When will we loose ?
My faith (even not a point of view since there is strictly no argument) is that there will be a point where no matter how much we will be together, it will dominate us all...
Funny and phylosophical game...
Given the definition of :
;-)
"Today, "emergent behavior" is often used to describe computer systems grown so complex they exhibit capabilities not programmed in."
Then the question is : are bugs of windows programmed in or not ? If not, then does my Windows box think ?
Maybe Windows 2000 will be Space Odyssey's HAL... oops ("I can not let you do that David !"
Having a munchkin character is one thing, being able to keep him alive and prosperous is another.
Other players will have the opportunity to get things off the bought character. The former player would be good enough to keep his assets, the new one will find it trickier.
Look, when an industrial create a huge company and when he dies, its very rare that only one people (his child) keeps everything on the long term. In fact others come in, and even though the company continues to exist, we can say that its assets have been shared.
not necessarily, because very few companies tune servers M$ did. In fact the action of M$ proved that it is not easy to have a high end NT server.
Here at work we just buy a PC, install NT4 + SP3 and that's all. There is no customization and sometimes we even forget to stop some services that we don't need.
A few months ago a first miracle stroke upon M$. Before the M$ trial started everyone (or nearly) though nothing would get out of this. But if Linux is so hype these days, that because M$ people have shown to be very stupid (Gate's dumb testimony where he hardly reminded things was the stronger argument _against_ M$ ever).
;-)
Mindcraft test seems totally biased, and at first glance we cannot expect much thing from it (exactly like the trial). But maybe we'll get some nice surprise ?
However I will not bet a cent on it (unless you give me one
with your conclusion ;-)
I agree with you. And just add this :
what if the test shows Linux is not far below NT ? Then Mindcraft _and_ Microsoft are shamed. For people at Mindcraft that would not only mean the corp dies and they loose their job, but also they'll probably not find any job in that field. Therefore the last test _has_ to support first tests.
And that result might be much more dramatic to Linux. And after the test show bad figures for Linux it will be too late to say it was biased.
But just look at it. Maybe it is true that Linux is not at the same level of an highly tuned NT box ? This is not a shame to be weaker than a competitor in specific conditions, but it is shamefull if noone does anything to change this...
2 years ago I read an article in a serious scientific newspaper that people were creating some sort of new speaker.
That uses a simple flat panel (no folding) and the whole surface is used as a panel, Then you can use ads panels, paintings, ceiling panels or whatever you want that is flat...
Mix both technologies... hmmm cool
but it is not
I'll be able to have a desk which is a computer dusplay. The resolution will be so hegh that I will not see any difference between the paper document and the digital document (besides the fact one has 3 dimensions...)
No more monitor, no more mouse or keyboard, just the table covered by a touch-screen layer. I am waiting this for years... and it comes closer, cool !
best use will be huge screens on walls (imagine a 3 feet per 5 feet display :-))
and that's cool TV sets...
let them develop the following. I read in a scientific newspaper they planned to make screen with 3 primary colors, that way we will have real color display
and the refresh rate is about 30 pics / sec so thats a good beginning
A fact found in "Caldera Statement of Facts" that is M$ talk makes me think of what M$ may plan for I2.
t ml#mmptm
http://www.calderathin.com/fullstory/factstat.h
No comment.
(I did not copy because of copyright concerns, just read it, it's 3 lines long).
no but this means that ipv6 will be moving to Windows
:-(
did they read the halloween memos at Internet2 ? Seem not
> They're not in control of their road map.
;-)
:'-{ then Linux would perfectly survive without not much harm.
;-)
> They ship whatever happens to be current
> in the Linux community. When you're selling
> to [major corporations], they want to know
> who you are, where you're going, where
> you've been, how you treat customers.
What I understand from that is Michels means Linux cannot provide long term insgiht and can always possibly crumble (because no one really have the product). That's strong menace for customers.
I agree for the long term view & I think some kind of w3 org like would be cool for Linux.
But Linux can only strengthen, since I believe we passed the critical mass. It's now a social phenomenum, more and more people believe in it, and that makes it more interesting to others. That's like mobile phones. Who could say mobile phones will disappear ?
One can compare Linux with RISC cpu, Network Computers or Java (two have nearly disapeared and the other is not as strong as it was supposed to become). But you'll see that Linux has been more backened by big corps & is increasely (IBM, Intel & recently Dell & HP are astonishing examples). In fact Linux came into light at the right moment, just when corps saw that Microsoft was not so untouchable...
What about Asimov ? Ok I just finished "Foundation & Earth" and his books are really great ! But that's not ad I want to do here (or not only
Asimov proposed that when people believe in something, it makes that thing stronger, whether that thing really exist or not at the beginning, when people believe in it, it becomes a terrible force & nearly nothing can oppose it.
I think Linux has the potential to become such a force, and I dare think that even though Linus, A. Cox and others were in the same plane and it... had some problem...
Linux is now part of humanity.
And maybe in some decades, people will make it the 8th wonder of the world
Maybe you're not a punk, but surely a kid. "asshole" is no more answer than his talk...
;-)
How do you think suits & corporates of all worlds can interpret such remarks of yours ? They just think you're not mature, then linux guys are not mature, then linux is immature...
Be the white dove : fly above crap rampants... La bave du crapeau n'atteint pas la blanche colombe...
Considering I quite never click on an ad, does it means I will have to pay for the product ?
Or will they enforce us to click or to be automatically oriented towards the site advertised so that they get paid ?
Public will decide and you can choose whether or not you want to use that software until every software of the kind you look for use the same revenue model.
Then you are not in position to choose anymore... Can you choose not to view ads panels in the street or can you choose not to see tv ads during films ? No you can't.
I use the SVGA server for TNT which gives no acceleration. Unless a release changed that one or 2 months ago, it means there is no accelration for TNT which means TNT + Win9x should run faster.
And indeed I find moving windows in X is slower than with win9x / D3D. But that's just the overhead of X ?
what's happening with this massacre, is the same as when a plane crashes. You have 200-500 people who die in a row, but in fact plane is far safer than car. But people just ficus on that and are afraid of planes crashing...
;-p
that's stupid to focus that way on the massacre & trying to explain things when you know nothing. But heh, if journalists were clever people, they would not do that job
1/ death rate : give me figures
2/ death rate : not all dictors are bloody, Castro seems quiet this days, & I would not be surprised if there is far less crime in Cuba than in US (in proportion), but ok I don't know
3/ dictators : a dictatorial gouvernment kill people, but many not that much of US gangs, because these many dictators want an ordered & strong society (for them). I am not talking about civil wars (Kosovo) or puchts, in these times death rate increase, ok, but after its rather calm.
4/ war in europe : do not confuse war with dictators. And compares what's comparable. Compares US with western europe, only. Don't talk about about estern europe since it has not the same stability as western europe or US.
5/ major wars : in europe we have a long history (contrary to you young nation). For thousands years we were against every other neighbours, and in western europe we really start be be unified. That's why we had many wars and a few dictators.
6/ wars : but thats not the point we were talking... wars are not necessarily related to dictators (even though I agree it helps). We were talking about criminal rate & firearms usage in US.
7/ armed kosovar : it's nearly impossible to imagine what would have happened. As we say here : "with many 'if' you can change the world". Anyway, if they were armed, I propose the situation would have evolved in some Afghanistan or Bosnian way : civil war with a far more complicated situation & more deads.