According to the article, the tumor was "95%" removed. It also sounds like morcellation instead of excision.
I'm glad that they got it before entanglement with the optic nerve, but they need to follow up carefully. Morcellation of some tumors can lead to metasticies.
Should measure the interaction between developers and product managers before coding even starts - see how the developer responds to impossible requests, contradictory requirements, and meaningless buzzword filled descriptions...
No need to devise the obligatory car analogy, the article comes with its own!:
"I would liken it to a car," he says. "A car on the road has many parts that facilitate its movement - the gas, the transmission, the engine - but there's only one spot where you turn the key and it all switches on and works together. So while consciousness is a complicated process created via many structures and networks - we may have found the key."
I'm watching it fine
3.11.0-14-generic #21-Ubuntu SMP Tue Nov 12 17:04:55 UTC 2013 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux
Firefox 25.0.1
I do have some browser plugins installed including VLC, Divx, shockwave
I concede the point. The multi object argument is compelling. However, I am frightened by how this could go wrong, and hope that the strong goal in the system is to not hit anything.
Bag: May involve gently changing direction, do not brake erratically, do not disturb flow of traffic.
Baby: May involve driving into the ditch, other traffic, making full use brakes, honking horn, etc.
And a bag with a baby in it?
You are missing the point - the system should not be trying to model the value of the thing on the road - at best it should model things for their expected behavior. Is it stationary or not? Is it likely to move or not?
Bitcoins are not infinitely divisible. They can be divided down to a satoshi.
If you have enough information to satisfactorily "report your lost Bitcoin", then you have the bitcoin itself.
For a bad analogy, think about a 20 dollar bill. You can't go into a bank and say "I a 20 dollar bill, can I have another 20?" and expect success. If you go into the bank and say "I lost a 20 dollar bill and I remember the serial number, can I have another 20?" you still won't succeed. If you could somehow go into the bank and say "I lost a 20 dollar bill and I remember the serial number, and I can prove that it is mine, and I can prove that I haven't already spent it, and that no-one else can spend it" then maybe you'd have a chance.
Once you can do all of that, you have enough information to "report your bitcoin lost"... but that means that you have enough information to rebuild your bitcoin.
That's nothing. Actual AI is seeing that the light has gone red, knowing that you should stop, but feeling that you don't really want to, and hoping that if you time it right you can kill the guy sitting inside you without damaging your own mind.
Perhaps you mean that you'd "guess that already 95% of people working in the IT field are autistic".
(or is that observation too obsessively detail oriented?) (you have no idea how long I struggled with where to put "already"... )
okay Ethan's Dad, it's time to give your kid some guidance:
from the transcript
one of our next app is Bargument which allows you to create a Wikipedia page that is completely fake, to prove arguments at bars, so that you are right and the other person is wrong
making it easier to add crap to Wikipedia is not being a good netizen.
So my question is: are the DNA synthesizing labs regulated? Will they just synthesize anything that is submitted, or is there some scrutiny?
And what is the risk if they do synthesize something bad? What is the amount of effort needed to weaponize even dangerous DNA? If it is relatively easy, then regulation of the synthesizing labs is well advised.
I agree entirely. It is not science to say "GMO is good" or "GMO is bad". GMO is broad enough to be both good and bad and it is broad enough to be both good and bad for both scientific and valid non scientific reasons.
not enough. You also must never do anything embarrassing (or which can be misconstrued as embarrassing) within eyesight of someone with a smartphone. Your web presence is not entirely up to you alone.
Does anybody know the projected steady-state water consumption rate when running in production?
From the report on the test plan, it looks like they are assuming (rather optimistically) a 2% leak in the in-ground flow, but it is unclear to me what the evaporative loss would be during a production run rather than a test.
uhhhmmm... that's an ad, not a competition or a test with any validity. Their conclusions should be treated as a forgone part of a branding campaign.
I would be curious about more information on the "competition", but in viewing the ad, they lost me as soon as they said that "putting together a PC takes concentration" while focusing on the VGA connector. Clearly they were pushing a message based on a the integrated monitor as a differentiator.
Slashdot Mirror
According to the article, the tumor was "95%" removed. It also sounds like morcellation instead of excision. I'm glad that they got it before entanglement with the optic nerve, but they need to follow up carefully. Morcellation of some tumors can lead to metasticies.
Should measure the interaction between developers and product managers before coding even starts - see how the developer responds to impossible requests, contradictory requirements, and meaningless buzzword filled descriptions...
"I would liken it to a car," he says. "A car on the road has many parts that facilitate its movement - the gas, the transmission, the engine - but there's only one spot where you turn the key and it all switches on and works together. So while consciousness is a complicated process created via many structures and networks - we may have found the key."
Please provide a link to the other version of this article if you are going to use it as the basis of your point.
the NSA must know, therefore Snowdon must know, therefore we will know QED.
I'm watching it fine 3.11.0-14-generic #21-Ubuntu SMP Tue Nov 12 17:04:55 UTC 2013 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux Firefox 25.0.1 I do have some browser plugins installed including VLC, Divx, shockwave
I concede the point. The multi object argument is compelling. However, I am frightened by how this could go wrong, and hope that the strong goal in the system is to not hit anything.
+informative
...objects that could be as much as 8 wavelengths of that monochromatic light
not 8 wavelengths, but "8 orders of magnitude bigger than the wavelength of light used in the imaging process" (from the linked article)
Bag: Should be avoided. Baby: Should be avoided.
Bag: May involve gently changing direction, do not brake erratically, do not disturb flow of traffic. Baby: May involve driving into the ditch, other traffic, making full use brakes, honking horn, etc.
And a bag with a baby in it?
You are missing the point - the system should not be trying to model the value of the thing on the road - at best it should model things for their expected behavior. Is it stationary or not? Is it likely to move or not?
Mod Up Parent +Informative
I suggest reading Debt the first 5000 years for a broader view on the meaning of and origin of money.
If you have enough information to satisfactorily "report your lost Bitcoin", then you have the bitcoin itself.
For a bad analogy, think about a 20 dollar bill. You can't go into a bank and say "I a 20 dollar bill, can I have another 20?" and expect success. If you go into the bank and say "I lost a 20 dollar bill and I remember the serial number, can I have another 20?" you still won't succeed. If you could somehow go into the bank and say "I lost a 20 dollar bill and I remember the serial number, and I can prove that it is mine, and I can prove that I haven't already spent it, and that no-one else can spend it" then maybe you'd have a chance.
Once you can do all of that, you have enough information to "report your bitcoin lost"... but that means that you have enough information to rebuild your bitcoin.
That's nothing. Actual AI is seeing that the light has gone red, knowing that you should stop, but feeling that you don't really want to, and hoping that if you time it right you can kill the guy sitting inside you without damaging your own mind.
didn't microsoft learn its lesson yet about ambiguating the desktop and tablet market spaces with its metrosexual user interface?
Was it any more successful for Ubuntu when they went to Unity?
Perhaps you mean that you'd "guess that already 95% of people working in the IT field are autistic". (or is that observation too obsessively detail oriented?) (you have no idea how long I struggled with where to put "already"... )
Great. And thanks for the response. I think its great that you are mentoring Ethan through this and I wish you success.
from the transcript
one of our next app is Bargument which allows you to create a Wikipedia page that is completely fake, to prove arguments at bars, so that you are right and the other person is wrong
making it easier to add crap to Wikipedia is not being a good netizen.
Once satisfied with the results, a scientist can save her invention to a file, click the order button and ship the virtual creature’s specs to a DNA synthesizing lab such as GenScript or GeneArt, which can assemble actual physical DNA based on the specs. Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/science/2013/02/27/programming-life-with-click-mouse/#ixzz2M8XF9cfu
So my question is: are the DNA synthesizing labs regulated? Will they just synthesize anything that is submitted, or is there some scrutiny? And what is the risk if they do synthesize something bad? What is the amount of effort needed to weaponize even dangerous DNA? If it is relatively easy, then regulation of the synthesizing labs is well advised.
perhaps making chips by sputtering is experimental?
I agree entirely. It is not science to say "GMO is good" or "GMO is bad". GMO is broad enough to be both good and bad and it is broad enough to be both good and bad for both scientific and valid non scientific reasons.
not enough. You also must never do anything embarrassing (or which can be misconstrued as embarrassing) within eyesight of someone with a smartphone. Your web presence is not entirely up to you alone.
Does anybody know the projected steady-state water consumption rate when running in production? From the report on the test plan, it looks like they are assuming (rather optimistically) a 2% leak in the in-ground flow, but it is unclear to me what the evaporative loss would be during a production run rather than a test.
uhhhmmm... that's an ad, not a competition or a test with any validity. Their conclusions should be treated as a forgone part of a branding campaign. I would be curious about more information on the "competition", but in viewing the ad, they lost me as soon as they said that "putting together a PC takes concentration" while focusing on the VGA connector. Clearly they were pushing a message based on a the integrated monitor as a differentiator.
I second that