Sea level change isn't slowing down. In the last 20 years, it's been going up by 3.3 mm/year, while in the decades before that it was only 1.7 mm/year. Major glaciers in Greenland and Antarctica are speeding up. The most likely scenario is that it will keep speeding up the next century.
The Alphago computer may be 100 times as large, but that doesn't mean it's 100 times as fast. At first glance, games should be easy to parallelize, but that's not really true, as one node can find a good move that automatically invalidates a whole bunch of work that other nodes have already done. Also, transposition between move sequences (i.e. the same moves but in different order) means that work is duplicated on parallel systems. In addition, 10 years of further research will undoubtedly lead to better software, just as was the case with chess computers.
You just use intuition to skip over moves that might not be worth your time, but you still consider them.
I don't think so. Out of a hundred+ moves, a good player may consider a dozen or so, but the majority isn't even looked at. The patterns of the stones already on the board, guides the brain directly to a bunch of candidate moves.
Even if CPU speed increases at twice the rate of doubling every two years (hint: that's not going to happen), we would not see this on the desktop in ten years
Deep Blue needed a ton of hardware, including specialized VLSI chess chips, to narrowly beat Kasparov in 1997. Just 9 years later, World Champion Kramnik lost to a dual Xeon desktop PC.
Expecting to be able to watch cat movies with no financial cost and no advertisements is unreasonable.
If can only watch cat movies after being forced to watch an ad, I'll skip the cat movies. I hope you won't find it unreasonable that Google has to pay all the expenses for setting up a huge server network for videos that I'm not watching.
The purpose of the Turing Test is to convince skeptical people that the AI being tested is intelligent.
No, the purpose is to provide an answer to the question if computers can think. Because that question is too vague, and we're lacking a good definition of "thinking", Turing proposed this test as a practical definition. If a machine passes the test, it has everything we require for "thinking", without having to go through the trouble of coming up with an accurate definition.
But AlphaGo is not such a program. Sure, it learns from its mistakes (it is designed that way). But as we don't understand the inner workings of the net that well, there might well be a level of play at which such neural net based systems simply ceiling out at.
There is no ceiling. You can always evaluate the tree wider, deeper, and more efficiently for starters, and you can improve the evaluation.
AlphaGo was made in 2 years time. People have been working on chess playing programs for decades, and they still haven't hit a ceiling.
But as we don't understand the inner workings of the net that well,
That hasn't stopped people from reaching current standards. Why would it stop them from reaching even higher standards ?
That doesn't even make fucking sense. A Turing test is used to try to test self awareness
Neurotypicals use language in a fluid way, assuming the reader is flexible enough to understand the meaning even if not correct in a literal sense. Just because you have trouble with that, doesn't make the others stupid.
Slashdot Mirror
Sea level change isn't slowing down. In the last 20 years, it's been going up by 3.3 mm/year, while in the decades before that it was only 1.7 mm/year. Major glaciers in Greenland and Antarctica are speeding up. The most likely scenario is that it will keep speeding up the next century.
The Alphago computer may be 100 times as large, but that doesn't mean it's 100 times as fast. At first glance, games should be easy to parallelize, but that's not really true, as one node can find a good move that automatically invalidates a whole bunch of work that other nodes have already done. Also, transposition between move sequences (i.e. the same moves but in different order) means that work is duplicated on parallel systems. In addition, 10 years of further research will undoubtedly lead to better software, just as was the case with chess computers.
You just use intuition to skip over moves that might not be worth your time, but you still consider them.
I don't think so. Out of a hundred+ moves, a good player may consider a dozen or so, but the majority isn't even looked at. The patterns of the stones already on the board, guides the brain directly to a bunch of candidate moves.
We still argue over the definition of intelligence.
I predict people will still argue over it even after it's been duplicated on a computer.
Even if CPU speed increases at twice the rate of doubling every two years (hint: that's not going to happen), we would not see this on the desktop in ten years
Deep Blue needed a ton of hardware, including specialized VLSI chess chips, to narrowly beat Kasparov in 1997. Just 9 years later, World Champion Kramnik lost to a dual Xeon desktop PC.
Not boring at all. It's one of if not the most interesting atmospheres in the solar system.
Compared to other atmospheres yes, but not compared to walking on the ground.
Venus, which offers earthlike gravity, earthlike pressures, earthlike temperatures
Not on the surface, though. And the atmosphere is boring.
so use the same account for everyone, stupid?
If you're going to do that, you might as well use an adblocker, right ?
Expecting to be able to watch cat movies with no financial cost and no advertisements is unreasonable.
If can only watch cat movies after being forced to watch an ad, I'll skip the cat movies. I hope you won't find it unreasonable that Google has to pay all the expenses for setting up a huge server network for videos that I'm not watching.
It's an excuse for me, and your disagreement is irrelevant.
That's $40 for a family of 4, just to see some funny cat movies. Sounds like there's plenty of excuse.
Sites that are that anal about you *seeing* the ads will often want to show you an ad AGAIN if you rewind.
In that case, the last part of my comment applies: just stop watching. There's plenty of other stuff to do.
we'd turn off the AC at the server room and disconnect those CPU fans.
I'm sorry, Dave, I can't allow you to turn off the AC.
The purpose of the Turing Test is to convince skeptical people that the AI being tested is intelligent.
No, the purpose is to provide an answer to the question if computers can think. Because that question is too vague, and we're lacking a good definition of "thinking", Turing proposed this test as a practical definition. If a machine passes the test, it has everything we require for "thinking", without having to go through the trouble of coming up with an accurate definition.
whales would be way more intelligent than humans (their brains are significantly larger, after all).
Their brains are larger, but humans have more neurons in the neo-cortex.
Turn down the volume, switch to another tab for a minute, return to first tab and rewind to start of real video. Or just stop watching.
I don't see any ads either, just using Chrome with ABP in default mode.
BSD license = you are free to do with the software what you want.
Depends on what BSD license you're talking about. The original BSD license required an advertising clause.
You can make changes to it and close the changes you made, but you can not take the original code and close it.
That's probably what he means.
So basically, you are flat out lying.
No, just a communication error.
But AlphaGo is not such a program. Sure, it learns from its mistakes (it is designed that way). But as we don't understand the inner workings of the net that well, there might well be a level of play at which such neural net based systems simply ceiling out at.
There is no ceiling. You can always evaluate the tree wider, deeper, and more efficiently for starters, and you can improve the evaluation. AlphaGo was made in 2 years time. People have been working on chess playing programs for decades, and they still haven't hit a ceiling.
But as we don't understand the inner workings of the net that well,
That hasn't stopped people from reaching current standards. Why would it stop them from reaching even higher standards ?
What's left the the research project of a few people who want to see if they can make a super-unix with a microkernel.
Most people have realized that the answer is "no".
Even when you consider that several projects have already succeeded in replacing the Linux kernel with existing, proven microkernels?
Nobody has replaced Linux with a microkernel. Some people have run Linux as a service inside a microkernel, though.
and it being a mathematical problem requiring no consciousness
Consciousness is also a mathematical problem.
That doesn't even make fucking sense. A Turing test is used to try to test self awareness
Neurotypicals use language in a fluid way, assuming the reader is flexible enough to understand the meaning even if not correct in a literal sense. Just because you have trouble with that, doesn't make the others stupid.
About the media choosing to cover this.
If people stopped reading and responding, the media would stop reporting.