I do recall reading a while back experiments done with AI in which programs compete for resources by generating programs to do tasks given to it (computing sums etc). Some programs did generate code that were completely unexpected.
It raises the question programs that are evolved are designed by the programmer or the program, or the process of evolution. And it also raises the philosophical question about whether we should be more humble and accept that our "creativity" that we think is what makes humans intelligent could be nothing more than a process of the evolution of ideas (I hesitate to use the word meme) that we don't actually originate nor control.
If we consider programs that can create things through evolution as "intelligent", that would ironically make natural selection intelligent, since DNA is a digital program that is evolved into complex things over time that can't be reduced to first principles.
It does, because its own citizens are complaining about the environment more and more. Say what you like about the CCP, and I know bloody well I do, but they're deathly afraid of losing control. When pollution gets too bad, there will be riots. Actually, given the previous arrests of environmental activists in China, you can tell they're really keeping an eye on it.
Upgrading would cost money, but you have to think more creatively doing business with the Chinese. Each province has its own interests and you can sweeten the deal quite a lot.
Why should China, or any developing country, give up its own economic development when the currently developed and powerful countries didn't have to and because they lack the political will do their part? Developed countries should see this as an opportunity to make money from China by selling them back cleaner technology that the developed countries invent.
It's bollocks to say "well, we already have a developed economy and we're too scared to change anything, so we'll make you live by the sink or float rules that we impose on you because we can".
You've provided no backing for the assertion the bible says its "OK" under any circumstances at any time.
If you are talking about Adam and Eve, see my previous post regarding that.
Your previous post doesn't help. You selectively choose what made up bits fit your desired understanding, but provide no good reason to accept those additions in the first place.
If there were pre-Adamics, then it is entirely possible that Adam and Eve's descendants all died off while we are descendant from the supposed pre-Adamics, and thus we do not magically inherit "original sin".
Or you could recognize the adhoc made up bollocks and realize it's not true.
Given that the slashdot post is about Korean culture and air disasters, let's stick to that? Do you see me playing the race card? I'm not saying it's racist. I'm saying it's unproven, suggested only by shoddy reasoning. What I see is not people being defensive playing the race card, but people preemptively accusing anyone who disagrees with culturally based explanations as being part of the PC police. If there's anything more popular than playing the race card today, it's people who try to protect their idiotic views from criticism by claiming to be oppressed by "political correctness".
How about the proof that the Asiana crash still happened? How do you explain that as a culture thing if you really believe the problems about culture really were fixed? By your standard of proof, I'd have converted to Evangelical Christianity and a believer in Young Earth Creationism.
also shutting up about a problem you see to save face(even if risky) is a real asian thing...
Which explains why Chinese history is littered with examples of ministers risking and most often losing their lives while criticizing the emperor, and those ministers later becoming revered as a model for loyal ministers. Please tell us more, since you know so much about us Asians.
I'd like to add that the blog actually reinforces Gladwell's position on the flight 801accident.
.
.
.
Not just in Korea, but worldwide. Chatting about the weather.
Gladwell's position is that it is Korean thing. That chatting about the weather is a roundabout Korean way of saying they're in the wrong location.
So you're saying a Korean pilot is like a driver paralyzed from the waist down? I think not. Compare like with like. Prove that the hierarchical thing is at play regarding Asiana. If we're to go by anecdotes, I can conclude a lot of things about Americans I've worked with, or Germans I've worked with. I can prove anything I find agreeable with the right anecdote.
Wow, you have really low standards. I bet you've also found well written overly technical ramblings proving that 9/11 was an inside job and the moon landing was a hoax. Nice that you finally expose your ridiculously flawed standards.
Strawman. The point is "inherent weaknesses" of a culture has NOT been proven to be a factor. There's nothing more sad than people who jump on the "I hate political correctness" bandwagon to try to gain credibility when it has nothing to do with political correctness. How about the fact that it's likely wrong? No, paint it as some white-hate thing because otherwise you have nothing but an unsourced anecdote to "back up" your ignorance. I can make up anecdotes to prove anything I believe to if I were as desperate as you.
Slashdot Mirror
Unless the panel of judges is a bunch of hipsters who will always say it sounds derivative.
I do recall reading a while back experiments done with AI in which programs compete for resources by generating programs to do tasks given to it (computing sums etc). Some programs did generate code that were completely unexpected.
It raises the question programs that are evolved are designed by the programmer or the program, or the process of evolution. And it also raises the philosophical question about whether we should be more humble and accept that our "creativity" that we think is what makes humans intelligent could be nothing more than a process of the evolution of ideas (I hesitate to use the word meme) that we don't actually originate nor control.
If we consider programs that can create things through evolution as "intelligent", that would ironically make natural selection intelligent, since DNA is a digital program that is evolved into complex things over time that can't be reduced to first principles.
First, clear the mountain with a Big Fucking Explosion. Then assemble the Huge Ass Mirrors.
Or their enchanted shin.
It does, because its own citizens are complaining about the environment more and more. Say what you like about the CCP, and I know bloody well I do, but they're deathly afraid of losing control. When pollution gets too bad, there will be riots. Actually, given the previous arrests of environmental activists in China, you can tell they're really keeping an eye on it.
Upgrading would cost money, but you have to think more creatively doing business with the Chinese. Each province has its own interests and you can sweeten the deal quite a lot.
Why should China, or any developing country, give up its own economic development when the currently developed and powerful countries didn't have to and because they lack the political will do their part? Developed countries should see this as an opportunity to make money from China by selling them back cleaner technology that the developed countries invent.
It's bollocks to say "well, we already have a developed economy and we're too scared to change anything, so we'll make you live by the sink or float rules that we impose on you because we can".
You'r crazy to think the US Democrats are as left as the ALP.
Someone should dress up in an ant costume and walk into the beam.
An experiment performed with every identical twin.
You've provided no backing for the assertion the bible says its "OK" under any circumstances at any time. If you are talking about Adam and Eve, see my previous post regarding that.
Your previous post doesn't help. You selectively choose what made up bits fit your desired understanding, but provide no good reason to accept those additions in the first place.
If there were pre-Adamics, then it is entirely possible that Adam and Eve's descendants all died off while we are descendant from the supposed pre-Adamics, and thus we do not magically inherit "original sin".
Or you could recognize the adhoc made up bollocks and realize it's not true.
That's no dune.
Turns out, it was sourced... to an online forum called PPRuNe, which stands for Professional Pilots Rumour Network.
PPRuNe.org, the forum that has, in the title: "Professional Pilots Rumour Network"?
Given that the slashdot post is about Korean culture and air disasters, let's stick to that? Do you see me playing the race card? I'm not saying it's racist. I'm saying it's unproven, suggested only by shoddy reasoning. What I see is not people being defensive playing the race card, but people preemptively accusing anyone who disagrees with culturally based explanations as being part of the PC police. If there's anything more popular than playing the race card today, it's people who try to protect their idiotic views from criticism by claiming to be oppressed by "political correctness".
How about the proof that the Asiana crash still happened? How do you explain that as a culture thing if you really believe the problems about culture really were fixed? By your standard of proof, I'd have converted to Evangelical Christianity and a believer in Young Earth Creationism.
also shutting up about a problem you see to save face(even if risky) is a real asian thing...
Which explains why Chinese history is littered with examples of ministers risking and most often losing their lives while criticizing the emperor, and those ministers later becoming revered as a model for loyal ministers. Please tell us more, since you know so much about us Asians.
I'd like to add that the blog actually reinforces Gladwell's position on the flight 801accident. . . . Not just in Korea, but worldwide. Chatting about the weather.
Gladwell's position is that it is Korean thing. That chatting about the weather is a roundabout Korean way of saying they're in the wrong location.
Or maybe open hostilities isn't a good solution and this supposed differentiation of soldier vs agent is purely one of convenience?
So you're saying a Korean pilot is like a driver paralyzed from the waist down? I think not. Compare like with like. Prove that the hierarchical thing is at play regarding Asiana. If we're to go by anecdotes, I can conclude a lot of things about Americans I've worked with, or Germans I've worked with. I can prove anything I find agreeable with the right anecdote.
Wow, you have really low standards. I bet you've also found well written overly technical ramblings proving that 9/11 was an inside job and the moon landing was a hoax. Nice that you finally expose your ridiculously flawed standards.
I've written other comments you illiterate arsehole.
Because a terrorist working for the North Korean government is not really a military person. Right. I gotcha.
Illogical? What, that the Korean language explanation doesn't exactly explain anything given the facts of actual language use?
"Therefore, I can allow myself to believe the most stupid shit, because I don't have to prove my stupid shit to anyone but my own prejudices"
Strawman. The point is "inherent weaknesses" of a culture has NOT been proven to be a factor. There's nothing more sad than people who jump on the "I hate political correctness" bandwagon to try to gain credibility when it has nothing to do with political correctness. How about the fact that it's likely wrong? No, paint it as some white-hate thing because otherwise you have nothing but an unsourced anecdote to "back up" your ignorance. I can make up anecdotes to prove anything I believe to if I were as desperate as you.