That depends on whether 'good' refers to morality or aptitude. Though, admittedly, when it refers to aptitude the sort of person that would qualify commonly has an NSA non-compliant set of morals.
It is extremely unlikely that NSA wiretapping has had any direct influence on the European decision making process, as as is pointed out in TFA as well as its summary this exact same set of circumstances has occurred before with the drug sodium thiopental, when Europe at large wasn't yet aware of the NSA's activities.
"This states that there is no general way of knowing how an algorithm will finish, other than to run it. This means that when a human has to make a decision, there is no way of knowing in advance how it will end up. In other words, the familiar feeling of not knowing the final decision until it is thought through is a necessary feature of the decision-making process and why we have the impression of free will."
The conclusion from the halting problem to human decision making doesn't hold. Even if we allow that human decision making is an algorithmic process (which is a big if), it is not logically impossible to run that algorithm before the person in question makes the decision, which means there is a way of knowing in advance how it will end up. Secondly, the third quoted sentence is a complete non-sequitur. The preceding sentences do not argue in any way that the phenomenology of decision making is a necessary feature of the decision-making process, which leads me to believe the summarizer may not know what 'in other words' means. TFA may be better, but given what physicists have said about philosophy in the past I feel justified in making an induction-based judgement and not reading it.
This quote combined with what the NSA/GCHQ have done reminds me a lot of "...or through inaction allow a human being to come to harm." The state should serve us, yes. The state should prevent us from harm, yes. But there is a point at which we are no longer served by harm prevention, and the NSA has clearly passed it. Even if they started off with good intentions initially (as implausible as that may be), by simply doing their jobs well they have come over to the dark side, and that's pretty interesting to me. There aren't that many good things you can do so well they start becoming bad.
What the US has done should be judged against rights and laws, not the practices of other countries who may or may not be worse violators in similar respects.
"If it were moving at speed v, it would show up when I shifted the pictures by x pixels." Repeat for likely ranges of v, watch for bright spots. No contradictions required.
What you describe is a problem of ignorance, not a potential problem specific to GMO. Everything could be a problem depending on how it is executed. Wells can bring water to thousands. Shitting in wells can also bring cholera to thousands. Neither has anything to do with wells, and everything to do with knowledge.
"The most merciful thing in the world, I think, is the inability of the human mind to correlate all its contents. We live on a placid island of ignorance in the midst of black seas of infinity, and it was not meant that we should voyage far. The sciences, each straining in its own direction, have hitherto harmed us little; but some day the piecing together of dissociated knowledge will open up such terrifying vistas of reality, and of our frightful position therein, that we shall either go mad from the revelation or flee from the deadly light into the peace and safety of a new dark age."
Slashdot Mirror
That depends on whether 'good' refers to morality or aptitude. Though, admittedly, when it refers to aptitude the sort of person that would qualify commonly has an NSA non-compliant set of morals.
Literally every single one looks like a spider looking right at me to me.
Given the subject, maybe we can get an actual gibbon to write it this time.
Let's play blackjack some time.
but that doesn't make its referent any less barbaric or useless. Also, the irony of this article is pretty.
It is extremely unlikely that NSA wiretapping has had any direct influence on the European decision making process, as as is pointed out in TFA as well as its summary this exact same set of circumstances has occurred before with the drug sodium thiopental, when Europe at large wasn't yet aware of the NSA's activities.
There is a difference between rationality and thinking you're rational. Rationality is what has given us human rights in the first place.
a politician only interested in power. Additionally, facebook doesn't have to do shit.
"This states that there is no general way of knowing how an algorithm will finish, other than to run it. This means that when a human has to make a decision, there is no way of knowing in advance how it will end up. In other words, the familiar feeling of not knowing the final decision until it is thought through is a necessary feature of the decision-making process and why we have the impression of free will."
The conclusion from the halting problem to human decision making doesn't hold. Even if we allow that human decision making is an algorithmic process (which is a big if), it is not logically impossible to run that algorithm before the person in question makes the decision, which means there is a way of knowing in advance how it will end up. Secondly, the third quoted sentence is a complete non-sequitur. The preceding sentences do not argue in any way that the phenomenology of decision making is a necessary feature of the decision-making process, which leads me to believe the summarizer may not know what 'in other words' means. TFA may be better, but given what physicists have said about philosophy in the past I feel justified in making an induction-based judgement and not reading it.
This quote combined with what the NSA/GCHQ have done reminds me a lot of "...or through inaction allow a human being to come to harm." The state should serve us, yes. The state should prevent us from harm, yes. But there is a point at which we are no longer served by harm prevention, and the NSA has clearly passed it. Even if they started off with good intentions initially (as implausible as that may be), by simply doing their jobs well they have come over to the dark side, and that's pretty interesting to me. There aren't that many good things you can do so well they start becoming bad.
What the US has done should be judged against rights and laws, not the practices of other countries who may or may not be worse violators in similar respects.
Records break you!
This is a human rights prize, not a guts prize. Utilitaristically, Snowden has done a lot more for a lot more people than Malala Yousafzai.
That would give away their predictive edge to other traders.
Or why it is framed as 'banks break physics' rather than 'someone talked and then fraud happened'.
Mystery of Missing Martian Methane May Mean More Mars Missions.
Because subtlety and subterfuge offer advantages that brute force doesn't.
"If it were moving at speed v, it would show up when I shifted the pictures by x pixels." Repeat for likely ranges of v, watch for bright spots. No contradictions required.
Probably the closest you can get to living in the future.
that I couldn't attend. I got lost on the way, there was so much light pollution I couldn't see the milky way.
Mod parent up. That's a really interesting fact I never knew.
What you describe is a problem of ignorance, not a potential problem specific to GMO. Everything could be a problem depending on how it is executed. Wells can bring water to thousands. Shitting in wells can also bring cholera to thousands. Neither has anything to do with wells, and everything to do with knowledge.
Ignorance and fear are the problem.
"The most merciful thing in the world, I think, is the inability of the human mind to correlate all its contents. We live on a placid island of ignorance in the midst of black seas of infinity, and it was not meant that we should voyage far. The sciences, each straining in its own direction, have hitherto harmed us little; but some day the piecing together of dissociated knowledge will open up such terrifying vistas of reality, and of our frightful position therein, that we shall either go mad from the revelation or flee from the deadly light into the peace and safety of a new dark age."
Just because I don't want to saw off my legs with a chainsaw doesn't mean I'm ok with stepping into a bear trap.