A test of intelligence should be dealing with unforeseen input. The problem with chatbots is that they are just giving pre-planned responses. How about trying to land a rocket on the moon while being bombarded with spurious input from a radar device that was accidentally left on? Given the computers in use by NASA in 1969 that's pretty intelligent behavior.
Another would be landing a rocket on a small floating platform. We'll see how that plays out tonight.
If police response was less drastic, there would be no swatting. The problem is that police don't just show up, knock on the door, and ask if everything's OK They show up assuming that people in the house are armed and likely to shoot at them. The swatting perpetrator is hoping that people will die and should be prosecuted for attempted murder. If USA did not have its weird belief that guns make you safer then maybe fewer people would be pulling guns out during domestic disputes and fewer would consider it a pastime to incite armed invasions.
Not the same. Embedded development was mostly about reducing cost by replacing custom mechanical and electronic devices with microprocessors and software. IoT is about taking inexpensive things and adding features in order to boost revenue, and also to create new revenue streams by collecting and selling personal data.
Oh, I assumed it was DNA as in GMO... but it's just DNA... that makes a lot of food!
Possibly more interesting to know which foods are free of DNA. Which would indicate they either had nothing to do with any living organism, are highly processed or both!
The problem is that the model method is a very good way to learn things. When you learn electricity it's always compared to water in a pipe: voltage is like pressure, current is like flow rate, etc. Where it breaks down, as Djikstra says, is on radically new things like quantum mechanics. There is not much in real world experience that you can model that on.
But how much of software is radically new? What in the last 10 years, say, is so new there isn't a well-undertood precept for?
In the case of AQ / ISIS / others, it's because they will never give up and we never "finish the job" in the way Churchill, Stalin, Caesar, Ganghis Khan, early Americans, etc, would have done..
But, in this particular of Sony vs. North Korea, it's pretty hard to blame a private company that's under attack from a military totalitarian state. Especially one that's used to always bullying its way in every possible manner for every possible topic.
It's pretty hard to blame a private company that made a movie about killing a current head of state?
Greenpeace has been, for quite some time now, nothing but a group lobbying for its self-interest...
Really? What interest is that? Please be specific. You really need to stop parroting Fox news talking points and thinking for yourself. While this stunt is nothing, if not stupid, Greenpeace's stated mission can hardly be described as "self interest".
Were they planting trees on the Nazca plains? No? Were they advertising themselves? Yes!
Drugs you can show completion of a program, swear you've been clean for two years, have testimonials from your preacher, rabbi and yoga instructor.
Theft is tougher and would probably be a bar for any financial company (except apparently at the top executive levels). Might be better to lie or not check either "Do you have a criminal record" checkbox and hope they don't do the background check.
Violent crime, property damage stuff you can just give your side and claim that it was a minor offense and the other party was out to get you. Doesn't look good if you have multiple offenses, though.
Slashdot Mirror
Ratings on IMDB:
Hmmm.
It means that you don't know that Les is a common English name.
There is nothing stopping you from "using it at work". You just aren't allowed to distribute someone else's code without abiding by their license.
So pay for proprietary code. Nothing is stopping you. Just don't whine that can't sell code that you didn't write or pay for.
A test of intelligence should be dealing with unforeseen input. The problem with chatbots is that they are just giving pre-planned responses. How about trying to land a rocket on the moon while being bombarded with spurious input from a radar device that was accidentally left on? Given the computers in use by NASA in 1969 that's pretty intelligent behavior.
Another would be landing a rocket on a small floating platform. We'll see how that plays out tonight.
It would be a trivial program to listen for the laugh track.
To be fair the test has to be something possible for a human, also
The difference is that the "swiftboaters" were lying and ended up getting sued.
Probably referring to the Prisoner's Dilemma which is a payoff matrix that results in trusting players doing better than rational players.
If police response was less drastic, there would be no swatting. The problem is that police don't just show up, knock on the door, and ask if everything's OK They show up assuming that people in the house are armed and likely to shoot at them. The swatting perpetrator is hoping that people will die and should be prosecuted for attempted murder. If USA did not have its weird belief that guns make you safer then maybe fewer people would be pulling guns out during domestic disputes and fewer would consider it a pastime to incite armed invasions.
Not the same. Embedded development was mostly about reducing cost by replacing custom mechanical and electronic devices with microprocessors and software. IoT is about taking inexpensive things and adding features in order to boost revenue, and also to create new revenue streams by collecting and selling personal data.
I had to google IoT....
I just asked my toaster.
Oh, I assumed it was DNA as in GMO... but it's just DNA... that makes a lot of food!
Possibly more interesting to know which foods are free of DNA. Which would indicate they either had nothing to do with any living organism, are highly processed or both!
Marshmallow peeps are DNA-free!
How big a market is this "defensive" drone problem? Seems more likely the market is bullies chasing down innocent drones
Seems like you are a child who lacks a bass understanding of how drones
are used in the real world.
If you ever leave your mother's basement you are in for a shock, son.
The treble with that remark is that it's totally off-key.
To ensure it's inclusion as default in RSA products.
Yup. $10M to use it as the default encryption mode. They also tried to require it for FIPS certification so pardon my gasps of disbelief.
Obviously.
In some places it is the sale that is illegal, not possession. That makes it interesting to decide whether a crime was committed and who is guilty.
The problem is that the model method is a very good way to learn things. When you learn electricity it's always compared to water in a pipe: voltage is like pressure, current is like flow rate, etc. Where it breaks down, as Djikstra says, is on radically new things like quantum mechanics. There is not much in real world experience that you can model that on.
But how much of software is radically new? What in the last 10 years, say, is so new there isn't a well-undertood precept for?
You mean the oven timer? The smoke alarm is how I tell when my food is ready.
Sure. Take Snow White for example. Nobody owns a character from a fairy tale.
English, motherfucker, learn to write it.
ITYM "hire"
No. I find younger creative workers are frequently higher than older workers.
Anyway it's incorrect. The incentive it would create is to kill artists when you want to pirate their booty, er, works.
In the case of AQ / ISIS / others, it's because they will never give up and we never "finish the job" in the way Churchill, Stalin, Caesar, Ganghis Khan, early Americans, etc, would have done..
But, in this particular of Sony vs. North Korea, it's pretty hard to blame a private company that's under attack from a military totalitarian state. Especially one that's used to always bullying its way in every possible manner for every possible topic.
It's pretty hard to blame a private company that made a movie about killing a current head of state?
The red cross also advertises. Does that mean that they are only self-interested, exclusively acting on behalf of themselves and no-one else?
It would if they carved their name in your chest when you donated blood.
Greenpeace has been, for quite some time now, nothing but a group lobbying for its self-interest...
Really? What interest is that? Please be specific. You really need to stop parroting Fox news talking points and thinking for yourself. While this stunt is nothing, if not stupid, Greenpeace's stated mission can hardly be described as "self interest".
Were they planting trees on the Nazca plains? No? Were they advertising themselves? Yes!
Lying is a felony? Why aren't any politicians in jail?
Drugs you can show completion of a program, swear you've been clean for two years, have testimonials from your preacher, rabbi and yoga instructor.
Theft is tougher and would probably be a bar for any financial company (except apparently at the top executive levels). Might be better to lie or not check either "Do you have a criminal record" checkbox and hope they don't do the background check.
Violent crime, property damage stuff you can just give your side and claim that it was a minor offense and the other party was out to get you. Doesn't look good if you have multiple offenses, though.