I could give you access to any search engine you want, 100 times the computing power and 100 times the amount of time that IBM is using, and you couldn't write a program that could get even 1% of jeopardy questions correct.
This isn't a human assisted program. It is completely automated. And it's fucking amazing.
If Watson's algorithms don't count as intelligence, then human brains don't count as intelligence either. A human brain is a machine. Being human doesn't make you unique or put you above the restrictions of natural law. This tends to upset most humans who compensate by choosing to believe that they have soul, or anything that lets them believe that they are more than just another gear in the machine that is the universe.
Does it really require a language extension to throw a runtime error whenever a boolean is met with false?
Or is the amazing part that google has found a way to make java even more verbose? I didn't think it could be done.
As long as the US is giving information to citizens of other countries, it's anti censorship. But woe-to-him who gives information to US citizens that the rest of the world already knows, thats treason and terrorism, right?
The California law wasn't enacted because liberal freakazoids had a theory that they needed to put into law (like the Tea Partiers and their theories). This law was the product of historical experience. Read about Standard Oil and what they did!!!!! Read about the Railroad companies at the turn of the 20th Century. Those businesses were absolutely ruthless and screwd consumers got these kinds of laws passed.
Oil and Railroads are scarce resources, already protected by government rationing. In all the anti-freemarket anti-capitalist rants, you'll notice that the exceptions cited are in markets that depend on limited physical resources which prevent them from being free markets to begin with.
On the other hand, markets like insurance and pornography do not depend on scarce resources. If you are going to argue against a free market, then at least pick an example of where there was a free market to begin with.
This is not a P=NP paper. The paper solves a problem of a related data structure in polynomial time (quartic time), then shows that it can be used to solve some cases of 3SAT.
The 3 outputs the algorithm can give are "the formula is not satisfiable", "the formula is satisfiable" (and the solution is given), and "failure of classification" -- it couldn't solve the problem.
The important question we wait for on the experts on this paper isn't "is it correct" (it probably is) but "how effective is it".
Interesting theory... except for the fact that Obama's birth certificat has been produced, a copy is available on-line, and its validity has been repeatedly verified by the state of Hawaii.
It's more accurate to say that those right-wing nutters (and racists) will not be persuaded from their tin-hat conspiracy theories by anything as pesky as facts. They cling to it tenatiously, regardless.
It amazes me that this gets modded informative. Obama produced a "Certification of Live Birth", not a "birth certificat" [sic]. Birth Certificates and Certifications of Live Birth are TWO DIFFERENT DOCUMENTS.
They have different legal standing. They contain different fields of information. Until a document is produced that has a physicians or witness signature to the birth, no birth certificate has been produced, regardless of what you've been led to believe.
Hold off on calling people racist until you can actually get some facts down correctly.
Representative was shot! So were some other people! We have no idea who else was shot, who did it, why, or what the condition of the representative is!
We're at the scene with news outlets contradicting each other trying to be first to say anything-at-all to get their ratings up. Political trolls are drawing conclusions and throwing around blame with absolutely nothing to go on.
*YAWN*
Can't wait a day or 2 until we actually know anything, can we?
"There has to be intent to harm, intimidate, threaten, or defraud another person"
I'm betting most posters in this thread are going to skip over this phrase completely, and raise the "free speech no matter what" flag.
But on the other hand, if the impersonation is done with intent to harm, intimidate, threaten, or defraud, why can't we just prosecute people for fraud, criminal intimidation, or whatnot?
Harming, intimidating, threatening, and defrauding are all already illegal. Consequently, a law which makes a certain type of speech illegal, but qualifies that it should have existing illegal intent, should raise serious free speech concerns.
Slashdot Mirror
I could give you access to any search engine you want, 100 times the computing power and 100 times the amount of time that IBM is using, and you couldn't write a program that could get even 1% of jeopardy questions correct.
This isn't a human assisted program. It is completely automated. And it's fucking amazing.
If Watson's algorithms don't count as intelligence, then human brains don't count as intelligence either. A human brain is a machine. Being human doesn't make you unique or put you above the restrictions of natural law. This tends to upset most humans who compensate by choosing to believe that they have soul, or anything that lets them believe that they are more than just another gear in the machine that is the universe.
Does it really require a language extension to throw a runtime error whenever a boolean is met with false? Or is the amazing part that google has found a way to make java even more verbose? I didn't think it could be done.
As long as the US is giving information to citizens of other countries, it's anti censorship. But woe-to-him who gives information to US citizens that the rest of the world already knows, thats treason and terrorism, right?
The California law wasn't enacted because liberal freakazoids had a theory that they needed to put into law (like the Tea Partiers and their theories). This law was the product of historical experience. Read about Standard Oil and what they did!!!!! Read about the Railroad companies at the turn of the 20th Century. Those businesses were absolutely ruthless and screwd consumers got these kinds of laws passed.
Oil and Railroads are scarce resources, already protected by government rationing. In all the anti-freemarket anti-capitalist rants, you'll notice that the exceptions cited are in markets that depend on limited physical resources which prevent them from being free markets to begin with. On the other hand, markets like insurance and pornography do not depend on scarce resources. If you are going to argue against a free market, then at least pick an example of where there was a free market to begin with.
Slightly more informative article with a link to a PDF of the complaint: http://www.pcworld.com/article/218381/atandt_accused_of_overbilling_iphone_ipad_users.html
So when is the US/EU/etc going to step in and liberate Egypt?
Hopefully never.
This is not a P=NP paper. The paper solves a problem of a related data structure in polynomial time (quartic time), then shows that it can be used to solve some cases of 3SAT. The 3 outputs the algorithm can give are "the formula is not satisfiable", "the formula is satisfiable" (and the solution is given), and "failure of classification" -- it couldn't solve the problem. The important question we wait for on the experts on this paper isn't "is it correct" (it probably is) but "how effective is it".
Interesting theory... except for the fact that Obama's birth certificat has been produced, a copy is available on-line, and its validity has been repeatedly verified by the state of Hawaii.
It's more accurate to say that those right-wing nutters (and racists) will not be persuaded from their tin-hat conspiracy theories by anything as pesky as facts. They cling to it tenatiously, regardless.
It amazes me that this gets modded informative. Obama produced a "Certification of Live Birth", not a "birth certificat" [sic]. Birth Certificates and Certifications of Live Birth are TWO DIFFERENT DOCUMENTS.
They have different legal standing. They contain different fields of information. Until a document is produced that has a physicians or witness signature to the birth, no birth certificate has been produced, regardless of what you've been led to believe.
Hold off on calling people racist until you can actually get some facts down correctly.
Representative was shot! So were some other people! We have no idea who else was shot, who did it, why, or what the condition of the representative is! We're at the scene with news outlets contradicting each other trying to be first to say anything-at-all to get their ratings up. Political trolls are drawing conclusions and throwing around blame with absolutely nothing to go on. *YAWN* Can't wait a day or 2 until we actually know anything, can we?
Japan, for the nth time, you are so weird.
Sir, you have insulted my honour. I challenge you to a duel. To the bathroom!
"There has to be intent to harm, intimidate, threaten, or defraud another person"
I'm betting most posters in this thread are going to skip over this phrase completely, and raise the "free speech no matter what" flag.
But on the other hand, if the impersonation is done with intent to harm, intimidate, threaten, or defraud, why can't we just prosecute people for fraud, criminal intimidation, or whatnot?
Harming, intimidating, threatening, and defrauding are all already illegal. Consequently, a law which makes a certain type of speech illegal, but qualifies that it should have existing illegal intent, should raise serious free speech concerns.
Here is the article she is suing over. http://www.thestandard.co.zw/local/27601-first-lady-gono-in-diamond-scandal-wikileaks.html
A speech given outlining a history of DUI, how the supreme court has ruled on DUI vs the Constitution, and a little of the technical reasons why breathalyzers are bogus: http://drunkdrivingdefense.com/general/lawrence-taylor.htm