You're right. What actually happened was that minority Republicans tried to call a rare secret session last year, and it was voted down. This week's session was asked by Democrats, not Republicans.
But the reality is that the secret info the Republicans claimed justifying telco amnesty was in fact just a stunt - that nevertheless required that rare interruption that the Republicans bitched about. They went through with it past 11PM last night. Today it changed no one's mind, and the House refused to go along with telco amnesty.
So it's largely the same argument. I did flip the events. But that's why I link to their supporting documentation: so people can help me get it right. Thanks.
Missed it on February 27
on
Happy Pi Day
·
· Score: 1
Actually, since the calendar has about 365.25 days, and there's 2*pi days around its circumference, 365.25/(2*pi) = 58.1313430307395, the 58th day is "Pi Day".
We are at war. As usual, the war is by the government against the people. Just look at how this secret session protocol has been used since 1825, following heavy use during the 1812 War:
Reason / Date(s) Electronic Surveillance of Terror Suspects / March 13, 2008 (10:11pm-11:09pm)[1] U.S. support for paramilitary operations in Nicaragua / July 19, 1983 Involvement of Cuba and communist countries in Nicaragua / February 25, 1980 Implementing the Panama Canal Act of 1979 / June 20, 1979 Trade between the U.S. and Great Britain / May 27, 1830 Relations with Indian tribes / December 27, 1825
The earliest one, in 1825, covered the most treacherous dealings our government ever had, the genocide of the American tribes. The next one wrapped up America's 60 year conflict with Britain. Then it was a century and a half, out of two centuries available, until a flurry 1979-80, half the total secret sessions, starting as Republicans took over the White House. Which covered the Iran/Contra secret war in Nicaragua / Panama / Honduras / El Salvador. Now those Iran/Contra secret warriors have been running the government for 7-13 years, finally on their way out of power, and they're wrapping it up again.
Secret government. Covert wars. Your Republican Congress in action. OK, it's not yours, it's not the Republicans' Congress anymore. But they'll abuse their minority privileges at least as much as they just spent the past 13 years abusing their majority privileges.
Seriously, though, I just made a small mistake linking to one better article about the session that included only part of the quote, but not to another article that included the whole quote.
The Wired article I linked to has the fragment starting
There must be a very high bar to urge the House into a secret session for the first time in 25 years
Another report quotes more of the message, the full excerpts that I quoted, and mentions that Conyers' response was by email (and posted only in these kinds of reports, not an original source).
Thanks for clicking my link, and giving me the opportunity to clarify
This stunt is the first time in 25 years that the House has gone into secret session. John Conyers (D-MI), who chairs the Judiciary Committee, skeptically agreed with the move:
The more my colleagues know, the less they believe this Administration's rhetoric. As someone who has chaired classified hearings and reviewed classified materials on this subject, I believe the more information Members receive about this Administration's actions in the area of warrantless surveillance, the more likely they are to reject the Administration's scare tactics and threats. My colleagues who joined me in the hearings and reviewed the Administration's documents have walked away with an inescapable conclusion: the Administration has not made the case for unprecedented spying powers and blanket retroactive immunity for phone companies.
Whether this is a worthwhile exercise or mere grandstanding depends on whether Republicans have groundbreaking new information that would affect the legislative process. There must be a very high bar to urge the House into a secret session for the first time in 25 years. I eagerly await their presentation to see if it clears this threshold. As someone who has seen and heard an enormous amount of information already, I have my doubts.
Leave it to the Republicans. You have to, because they refused to let Democrats call a secret session last year, when Democrats wanted to review classified FISA evidence to decide how to revise FISA as Republicans have demanded (but didn't while they owned the majority):
[House Minority Leader] Boehner's spokesman, Kevin Smith, derided the secret session proposal as a stalling tactic.
"There are clear rules and procedures for how Congress handles classified information," Smith said. "This nonsense is nothing more than another stalling tactic from a bunch of liberals who don't want to give our intelligence officials all the tools they need to keep America safe."
That kind of severe contradiction should disqualify anyone from participation in either "Intelligence" or "Judiciary" decisions.
No, the disprovability criteria is different, because indeed "proven" is an ultimately weak condition, but acceptable to mathematicians.
But "intelligent" is a condition for which we want strong boundaries. However, we find that when we apply the Turing Test to humans, there are some humans who machines would beat on either side of the testing table. So it's really of no use.
Except perhaps, as I said, as a test of intelligence that requires the intelligence to reject TT as proof of intelligence. There is, though, a more scientific version of TT that says "it's not intelligent if a human can tell its not". And that TT^-1 is even more evidently tautological, so even less useful than the TT itself, whose rejection has value.
You're just introducing your own way of testing that's not in the Turing Test. But even if you're talking about a statistical correlation example, it's still only as good as the humans. Since real humans can easily fail the test, it's not a good test.
I might not have thought they were computers very often (though sometimes in fact I did), that's only because I'm guessing that no one put a computer into that scenario (or I could tell because we were together in person). In other words, their intelligence didn't prove anything that couldn't have been simulated by a non- "intelligent" computer. And no, I'm not kidding.
I think there's a huge future in ELIZA bots introducing product placement into IMs. Why shouldn't spam be interactive, when people are stupid enough to tolerate it?
In fact, that requirement would render the Turing Test a completely circular test. It might as well say only "AI is intelligent if it passes the Turing Test", recursively.
Though I suppose the real test would be that a real intelligence would just ignore the Turing Test, unless it were told to ignore it.
Paradoxes are fun. But maybe only if you're really intelligent.
But the point is that if they were subjected to the Turing Test, many would fail, even though they are "intelligent" in the way that the Turing Test supposedly tests for.
What the TT delivers is indeed "indistinguishable from intelligent". Which is because there is no universal criteria for intelligence. For example, given many conversations I've been forced to have, the only intelligent option is to say nothing.
Nah, like I said, it depends on the person doing the testing. Plenty of people I meet all the time would be convinced by ELIZA. And plenty of people I meet all the time would fail such a test run against them by someone normal.
The Turing Test is like saying that "2 + 2 == 5" if the "==" test means "sometimes, if you're stupid".
The Turing Test for AI says that if an AI can fool a human into thinking it's human by communicating over a teletype, then it's really "intelligent".
That's hogwash. Any number of real people I talk to could easily be simulated by some non-intelligent machine. Especially over the phone, to tech support etc.
Slashdot alone is proof of the fallacy of the Turing Test. Unless all you ACs and TrollMods are actually bots. Or maybe it's me. That would explain a lot:P.
The scientific research included injecting minke whale sperm into cows eggs, and attempts to produce test-tube whale babies.
That's not such a stupid experiment. Cross-species hybrids don't work (except maybe in some rare cases). But why, exactly?
Of course the different species animals don't copulate in the wild (again, maybe rare cases... that's why it's called the wild). Artificial insemination might fail for any number of reasons, none of them simply molecular genetics. Injecting the sperm directly into the egg could possibly show some results, and therefore expose whole mechanisms of reproduction. Even if it fails, the incompatibility is known to extend down to that deep level.
We don't know very much about genetics, especially at the rubber/road juncture, considering how much there is to know. Science works by disproving proposition (when possible), so failures are valuable.
And, if successful, a cowhale could be very valuable, especially in a country like Japan which has a hunger for whale that cows alone can't satisfy.
If the crooked abusers of both networks and the law are demanding Net Blackmail be allowed to further their enterprise, they are evidence that we need Net Neutrality to protect us from invading our privacy and hijacking our free speech.
Someday, all the non Hobbit/LotR books are going to be great source material for someone as brilliant as Tolkien to rewrite in a modern style, and again Middle Earth will take over the world with its magic.
In fact, that is what JRRT claimed he was doing himself: "translating" old stories from their ancient languages into "modern" English.
I'd love to see that "modern style" be some kind of videogame or - even better - a 3D game world in which the stories unfold among the characters, and players can just join the action to feel like part of it.
I ran down just how cheap the bandwidth would be. Even $5:min for a 6h flight is only $1800, which is nothing compared to, say, the cost of circling for an extra 5 minutes while the gate is busy, which happens all day long.
The black boxes take a long time to find, even using their current beacons. Adding GPS would make it easier, reduce cost and increase reliability.
That's what engineering is about. It's not some magic solution. It's updating the tech to use new tech that's now cheap and reliable to increase the reliability and cheapness of the overall system.
But not on Slashdot. On Slashdot, engineering is what you eat for breakfast with your spam.
You're annoyed because you can't tell the difference between the generously conservative estimate I first made of $2:h from the specific respearch I linked to in the later post that showed the amount would be much lower.
But hey, you can't even understand that if people don't have to search a remote area for black boxes, they can spend less time in total searching for everything they're searching for.
You don't care that lives would be saved. You won't admit that even a single crashed jet would be worth many millions of dollars. You insist that your excluded middle strawman about not flying is some kind of alternative argument.
You're not even bothering to think, much less read. It's a good thing people actually deploying aircraft remote telemetry aren't as unqualified to comment as you are. Enjoy your Slashdot. It's just about your speed.
I just hope that their patent isn't broader than their specific technology doing it. And that their tech isn't just connecting to existing standard satellite tech.
Not just because of general patent ethics. But also because it looks like their only taker is Pakistan's airline. If they can make Pakistan's airlines safe, while denying that safety to American (and other) airlines, then the terrorists who attacked the US (who live in Pakistan, are protected by its government, and probably fly in Pakistan's planes) will have won.
It's a Canadian patent, but that can have its effect globally under WTO. And would be that much more a thorn in the US' side.
My favorite exploration of musical spaces more complex than the familiar Equal Temperament visible/audible on a standard piano keyboard is James Tenney's "Harmonic Space". Tenney was one of the first to synthesize music, at Bell Labs, and collaborated with the foremost avant garde composers, like John Cage. Harmonic Space is a way of writing musical relationships that are then performed, but not simply as a script of which "notes" to play. Rather the space is described in which pitches are allowed, then performers can play them in various sequences (melodic), or explore different harmonic subspaces together, or indeed travel through the space according to a predefined path.
It's fascinating, possibly more accurate than "octave/fifths" models and probably more accurate than staff representations. And the music is really interesting, often beautiful, but also something other than beautiful while also compelling, and at least something new to the ear. And, as a space, to the mind.
Slashdot Mirror
You're right. What actually happened was that minority Republicans tried to call a rare secret session last year, and it was voted down. This week's session was asked by Democrats, not Republicans.
But the reality is that the secret info the Republicans claimed justifying telco amnesty was in fact just a stunt - that nevertheless required that rare interruption that the Republicans bitched about. They went through with it past 11PM last night. Today it changed no one's mind, and the House refused to go along with telco amnesty.
So it's largely the same argument. I did flip the events. But that's why I link to their supporting documentation: so people can help me get it right. Thanks.
Actually, since the calendar has about 365.25 days, and there's 2*pi days around its circumference, 365.25/(2*pi) = 58.1313430307395, the 58th day is "Pi Day".
Happy February 27, everyone!
I know, that's irrational.
And that plant, children, is the reason that no nukes have ever been built without Japan agreeing to it.
We are at war. As usual, the war is by the government against the people. Just look at how this secret session protocol has been used since 1825, following heavy use during the 1812 War:
Reason / Date(s)
Electronic Surveillance of Terror Suspects / March 13, 2008 (10:11pm-11:09pm)[1]
U.S. support for paramilitary operations in Nicaragua / July 19, 1983
Involvement of Cuba and communist countries in Nicaragua / February 25, 1980
Implementing the Panama Canal Act of 1979 / June 20, 1979
Trade between the U.S. and Great Britain / May 27, 1830
Relations with Indian tribes / December 27, 1825
The earliest one, in 1825, covered the most treacherous dealings our government ever had, the genocide of the American tribes. The next one wrapped up America's 60 year conflict with Britain. Then it was a century and a half, out of two centuries available, until a flurry 1979-80, half the total secret sessions, starting as Republicans took over the White House. Which covered the Iran/Contra secret war in Nicaragua / Panama / Honduras / El Salvador. Now those Iran/Contra secret warriors have been running the government for 7-13 years, finally on their way out of power, and they're wrapping it up again.
Secret government. Covert wars. Your Republican Congress in action. OK, it's not yours, it's not the Republicans' Congress anymore. But they'll abuse their minority privileges at least as much as they just spent the past 13 years abusing their majority privileges.
Seriously, though, I just made a small mistake linking to one better article about the session that included only part of the quote, but not to another article that included the whole quote.
The Wired article I linked to has the fragment starting
Another report quotes more of the message, the full excerpts that I quoted, and mentions that Conyers' response was by email (and posted only in these kinds of reports, not an original source).
Thanks for clicking my link, and giving me the opportunity to clarify
Leave it to the Republicans. You have to, because they refused to let Democrats call a secret session last year, when Democrats wanted to review classified FISA evidence to decide how to revise FISA as Republicans have demanded (but didn't while they owned the majority):
That kind of severe contradiction should disqualify anyone from participation in either "Intelligence" or "Judiciary" decisions.
No, I'm not joking, I'm just wrong.
I got the Linux Foundation confused with the Australian gambit to trademark "Linux" and then charge anyone using the term money.
Thanks for setting me straight.
No, the disprovability criteria is different, because indeed "proven" is an ultimately weak condition, but acceptable to mathematicians.
But "intelligent" is a condition for which we want strong boundaries. However, we find that when we apply the Turing Test to humans, there are some humans who machines would beat on either side of the testing table. So it's really of no use.
Except perhaps, as I said, as a test of intelligence that requires the intelligence to reject TT as proof of intelligence. There is, though, a more scientific version of TT that says "it's not intelligent if a human can tell its not". And that TT^-1 is even more evidently tautological, so even less useful than the TT itself, whose rejection has value.
My wife would resent the idea that something could pass the Turing "humans think you're human" Test, but women aren't qualified to run it.
If only she were just a machine...
You're just introducing your own way of testing that's not in the Turing Test. But even if you're talking about a statistical correlation example, it's still only as good as the humans. Since real humans can easily fail the test, it's not a good test.
I might not have thought they were computers very often (though sometimes in fact I did), that's only because I'm guessing that no one put a computer into that scenario (or I could tell because we were together in person). In other words, their intelligence didn't prove anything that couldn't have been simulated by a non- "intelligent" computer. And no, I'm not kidding.
I think there's a huge future in ELIZA bots introducing product placement into IMs. Why shouldn't spam be interactive, when people are stupid enough to tolerate it?
The Turing Test doesn't say "a good tester".
In fact, that requirement would render the Turing Test a completely circular test. It might as well say only "AI is intelligent if it passes the Turing Test", recursively.
Though I suppose the real test would be that a real intelligence would just ignore the Turing Test, unless it were told to ignore it.
Paradoxes are fun. But maybe only if you're really intelligent.
But the point is that if they were subjected to the Turing Test, many would fail, even though they are "intelligent" in the way that the Turing Test supposedly tests for.
What the TT delivers is indeed "indistinguishable from intelligent". Which is because there is no universal criteria for intelligence. For example, given many conversations I've been forced to have, the only intelligent option is to say nothing.
Nah, like I said, it depends on the person doing the testing. Plenty of people I meet all the time would be convinced by ELIZA. And plenty of people I meet all the time would fail such a test run against them by someone normal.
The Turing Test is like saying that "2 + 2 == 5" if the "==" test means "sometimes, if you're stupid".
The Turing Test for AI says that if an AI can fool a human into thinking it's human by communicating over a teletype, then it's really "intelligent".
:P.
That's hogwash. Any number of real people I talk to could easily be simulated by some non-intelligent machine. Especially over the phone, to tech support etc.
Slashdot alone is proof of the fallacy of the Turing Test. Unless all you ACs and TrollMods are actually bots. Or maybe it's me. That would explain a lot
That's not such a stupid experiment. Cross-species hybrids don't work (except maybe in some rare cases). But why, exactly?
Of course the different species animals don't copulate in the wild (again, maybe rare cases... that's why it's called the wild). Artificial insemination might fail for any number of reasons, none of them simply molecular genetics. Injecting the sperm directly into the egg could possibly show some results, and therefore expose whole mechanisms of reproduction. Even if it fails, the incompatibility is known to extend down to that deep level.
We don't know very much about genetics, especially at the rubber/road juncture, considering how much there is to know. Science works by disproving proposition (when possible), so failures are valuable.
And, if successful, a cowhale could be very valuable, especially in a country like Japan which has a hunger for whale that cows alone can't satisfy.
The Linux Foundation is nothing more that a trademark scam designed to steal "Linux" without producing anything.
Of course it would love to work with Microsoft. I'm sure the Pepzi Organization would love to work with the Coca-Cola Corporation, too.
If the crooked abusers of both networks and the law are demanding Net Blackmail be allowed to further their enterprise, they are evidence that we need Net Neutrality to protect us from invading our privacy and hijacking our free speech.
Someday, all the non Hobbit/LotR books are going to be great source material for someone as brilliant as Tolkien to rewrite in a modern style, and again Middle Earth will take over the world with its magic.
In fact, that is what JRRT claimed he was doing himself: "translating" old stories from their ancient languages into "modern" English.
I'd love to see that "modern style" be some kind of videogame or - even better - a 3D game world in which the stories unfold among the characters, and players can just join the action to feel like part of it.
You can get Playstation 3s for under $330.
And they run Linux.
Why don't you just stick the company actually doing this right up your obnoxious ass?
I ran down just how cheap the bandwidth would be. Even $5:min for a 6h flight is only $1800, which is nothing compared to, say, the cost of circling for an extra 5 minutes while the gate is busy, which happens all day long.
The black boxes take a long time to find, even using their current beacons. Adding GPS would make it easier, reduce cost and increase reliability.
That's what engineering is about. It's not some magic solution. It's updating the tech to use new tech that's now cheap and reliable to increase the reliability and cheapness of the overall system.
But not on Slashdot. On Slashdot, engineering is what you eat for breakfast with your spam.
You're annoyed because you can't tell the difference between the generously conservative estimate I first made of $2:h from the specific respearch I linked to in the later post that showed the amount would be much lower.
But hey, you can't even understand that if people don't have to search a remote area for black boxes, they can spend less time in total searching for everything they're searching for.
You don't care that lives would be saved. You won't admit that even a single crashed jet would be worth many millions of dollars. You insist that your excluded middle strawman about not flying is some kind of alternative argument.
You're not even bothering to think, much less read. It's a good thing people actually deploying aircraft remote telemetry aren't as unqualified to comment as you are. Enjoy your Slashdot. It's just about your speed.
I just hope that their patent isn't broader than their specific technology doing it. And that their tech isn't just connecting to existing standard satellite tech.
Not just because of general patent ethics. But also because it looks like their only taker is Pakistan's airline. If they can make Pakistan's airlines safe, while denying that safety to American (and other) airlines, then the terrorists who attacked the US (who live in Pakistan, are protected by its government, and probably fly in Pakistan's planes) will have won.
It's a Canadian patent, but that can have its effect globally under WTO. And would be that much more a thorn in the US' side.
My favorite exploration of musical spaces more complex than the familiar Equal Temperament visible/audible on a standard piano keyboard is James Tenney's "Harmonic Space". Tenney was one of the first to synthesize music, at Bell Labs, and collaborated with the foremost avant garde composers, like John Cage. Harmonic Space is a way of writing musical relationships that are then performed, but not simply as a script of which "notes" to play. Rather the space is described in which pitches are allowed, then performers can play them in various sequences (melodic), or explore different harmonic subspaces together, or indeed travel through the space according to a predefined path.
It's fascinating, possibly more accurate than "octave/fifths" models and probably more accurate than staff representations. And the music is really interesting, often beautiful, but also something other than beautiful while also compelling, and at least something new to the ear. And, as a space, to the mind.