No, because the Christian Right voted for Trump. They consider themselves good. So by their definition, people like me are evil. People who believe we make our own morals inspired by reason and evidence. Reason and evidence still says mercury (and lead) is bad.
A real estate mogul who defrauded people with his "deals" and "university". Then hired guys to run his campaign who stole money. And now he wants to give people nerve damage.
You live in a sick world where you think poisoning people with mercury is a good thingl.
What does "normal" have to do with anything? What does that have to do with intelligence?
People freezing up when experiencing something unfamiliar is not a rare thing. Or they make rash, "unnormal" decisions. That's why people can crash cars. That's why people can crash planes.
People just keep proving my point - they put up a strawman perfect human as an example when most humans fuck up all the time without adequate, directed, training.
But it isn't bullshit. It has problems. Things having problems doesn't make it bullshit.
By your stupid reasoning, no one should fund basic science research because it will have lots of problems for a long while before people start making progress slowly.
No you don't. The first time you ever see a fire truck, you don't know it's a fire truck. You only know, through your brain's parallax processing, that is is an object that would probably hurt if you collided with it. That it's a fire truck would not be obvious to anyone who wasn't "trained" with the knowledge of what a fire truck.
That was the point. Humans fail if given inadequate training for a task. That includes being trained (deceived) for one task while not being told the true task. Given "the true task", an AI wouldn't fail either. Read the comment I was replying to - it wasn't about the article.
Humans have all sorts of visual processing anomalies and weaknesses, and yes I bet there are people out there who would completely miss the elephant, or mistake his wife for a hat. Hell, people readily missed the fact of a man in a gorilla suit when they count how many times people pass a ball to each other.
When we stop putting humans on a pedestal by default, we start to see our flaws, and yes given the right lack of training data, you can tease out surprising failures of our own deep learning.
The question didn't say anything about "advanced" or not. And birds can fly fast and avoid many non-mirror things. You don't want to have even an "unadvanced" system like that?
So you're angry because they're trying to get funding for their work? You want them to research for free, and then only once they have something that can catch up to moving goalposts, THEN you'll have no problem funding them?
Funny how, if data apparently supports that women do not suit tech roles, it's just the facts. But if data apparently supports that boys are self-centered, it's misandry.
So what do you call people who keep banging on about crypto when none of its promises had actualized and revealed to suffer the same flaws as real currencies? Idiots?
If you earn in a month 6 times more than what professionals in other industries earn in a year, how about just quit after a few months? Learn some financial managment (ie, don't spend more than you have) and be set for life.
Really? Because it's been my experience that there are more people like you complaining about those people than those people actually complaining.
It's as though if five of you complain about someone, it would be the equivalent, in your mind, of that person having acted out at five distinct times.
But the point it is it isn't. It's not personally or socially useful because it's not useful. I don't want my money to have good purchasing power one day and then almost none the other. It becomes even worse than the GFC that it was trying to bypass.
A stable, and widely agreed upon, value is required.
Slashdot Mirror
No, because the Christian Right voted for Trump. They consider themselves good. So by their definition, people like me are evil. People who believe we make our own morals inspired by reason and evidence. Reason and evidence still says mercury (and lead) is bad.
A real estate mogul who defrauded people with his "deals" and "university". Then hired guys to run his campaign who stole money. And now he wants to give people nerve damage.
You live in a sick world where you think poisoning people with mercury is a good thingl.
Good, because I can never actually picture what the ultrasound is showing.
You'd think intelligent humans would learn to write legibly.
What does "normal" have to do with anything? What does that have to do with intelligence?
People freezing up when experiencing something unfamiliar is not a rare thing. Or they make rash, "unnormal" decisions. That's why people can crash cars. That's why people can crash planes.
People just keep proving my point - they put up a strawman perfect human as an example when most humans fuck up all the time without adequate, directed, training.
But it isn't bullshit. It has problems. Things having problems doesn't make it bullshit.
By your stupid reasoning, no one should fund basic science research because it will have lots of problems for a long while before people start making progress slowly.
Slow progress is not zero progress.
Do your own homework.
No you don't. The first time you ever see a fire truck, you don't know it's a fire truck. You only know, through your brain's parallax processing, that is is an object that would probably hurt if you collided with it. That it's a fire truck would not be obvious to anyone who wasn't "trained" with the knowledge of what a fire truck.
That was the point. Humans fail if given inadequate training for a task. That includes being trained (deceived) for one task while not being told the true task. Given "the true task", an AI wouldn't fail either. Read the comment I was replying to - it wasn't about the article.
Humans have all sorts of visual processing anomalies and weaknesses, and yes I bet there are people out there who would completely miss the elephant, or mistake his wife for a hat. Hell, people readily missed the fact of a man in a gorilla suit when they count how many times people pass a ball to each other.
When we stop putting humans on a pedestal by default, we start to see our flaws, and yes given the right lack of training data, you can tease out surprising failures of our own deep learning.
The question didn't say anything about "advanced" or not. And birds can fly fast and avoid many non-mirror things. You don't want to have even an "unadvanced" system like that?
Funnily enough, if humans don't have certain data patterns in their training sets, their output also blows up in arbitrary ways.
And therefore the solution is to stop working on it until it works? Right...
So you're angry because they're trying to get funding for their work? You want them to research for free, and then only once they have something that can catch up to moving goalposts, THEN you'll have no problem funding them?
So animals that fail the mirror test do not have object recognition systems?
Funny how, if data apparently supports that women do not suit tech roles, it's just the facts. But if data apparently supports that boys are self-centered, it's misandry.
Don't forget to account for all of the West's misleading, wrong and outright fake papers published in fake journals.
So what do you call people who keep banging on about crypto when none of its promises had actualized and revealed to suffer the same flaws as real currencies? Idiots?
I used the word "quit". What definition of "quit" means "pick up where he left off"? READ.
If you earn in a month 6 times more than what professionals in other industries earn in a year, how about just quit after a few months? Learn some financial managment (ie, don't spend more than you have) and be set for life.
Really? Because it's been my experience that there are more people like you complaining about those people than those people actually complaining.
It's as though if five of you complain about someone, it would be the equivalent, in your mind, of that person having acted out at five distinct times.
So you were prepared for an imagined reaction that you imagine because of perceived stereotypes that people imagine to be the case?
But ducks also float.
What's it made of?
But the point it is it isn't. It's not personally or socially useful because it's not useful. I don't want my money to have good purchasing power one day and then almost none the other. It becomes even worse than the GFC that it was trying to bypass.
A stable, and widely agreed upon, value is required.