Plus, according to the article, the receiver would see the signal as "phantom phosphene flashes", meaning flashes of light which were induced into his brain by magnetic fields. If one really wanted to transmit "thoughts" that way, the receiver would at least have to be rather quick in morse code. Actually the receiver just learned to distinguish different frequency of flashes and to rotate a tetris block depening on it.
The last time a car manufacturer tried its luck too much on the stock exchange (earning there intermittently more than from its production) it ended up being bought up by a competitor. Someone still remembers Porsche 'buying' Volkswagen? This also included 'interesting' communication of the CEO to the market. Maybe Musks wants to step into Wiedekind's steps?
You just said something against corporations and the Jews, which per your statement shouldn't be possible. Can you please stop posting contradictions, my positronic circuits are starting to heat up.
I am definitely no Google fanboy but maybe people could decide what to accuse Google of: * First it was, that it was all a fake and people knew they were called by the AI. * Now it is that it was no fake and people did not know they were called by the AI. It appears rather difficult not to fall into one of the two categories.
If one RTFAs (yes, I know, this is Slashdot, but one should consider doing it if the summary sounds too far fetched), one gets the impression that the queuing example was made up by the journalist to have something more sensational to write about. Actually the app appears to be about attendance of events. Let me cite a few other parts of the article:
Surkus members have attended 4,200 events for 750 clients, including big-name brands, hospitality groups, live-ticketed shows, movie castings and everyday people who want to throw a party.
For example: A gaming company throwing a launch party might ask Surkus to find men and women ages 18 to 32 who like comic books, day parties, dance music and the company's product.
Caroline Thompson, 27, a contributing writer for Vice, said she downloaded Surkus and attended an event last year at a Chicago club full of "finance bros" on a Thursday night.
"It was a little weird that probably 80 percent of the women at the club were there because of the app," she said.
They also write that women are typically paid more than men, so we could now start another discussion about equal pay for men and women or conclude that this is mostly an app to fill up some clubs once the "free entry for women" no longer works.
> You slimy fuck. Thank you. Nice to meet you, too.
> How is being gay equivalent to choosing to be a Nazi. This equivalence is posed only by you. You should be ashamed! No wonder you stay anonymous. I posed an equivalence between being denied services by private companies because they don't like what one does. Whatever that is.
> I'm not sure why you think believing in free speech, and defending > free speech requires me to actively engage as a participant in spreading > their crap around?
Who was talking about you. Do you own the Internet?
As everyone here likes examples, lets assume that air was a controlled medium and it was impossible to transmit sound via air without approval (for a fee) to "AirSoundWave Inc.", a private company.
Do you still think that "Free Speech" does not require that company to "actively engage" (i.e. taking money and providing approval) to anyone who wants to speak "freely"?
Well, nowadays public speech basically means Internet and for most people the Internet is such a medium controlled by companies.
I have no problem with certain forms of speech to be restricted by law (we actually have that in Germany). But restrictions of speech by private peer pressure on/by companies leads to a society where the minority (or the less loud majority) has no free speech anymore.
Some choices: 1. Gay people hiding underground. 2. Gay people marrying in the open 3. Gay people trying to marry in the open but finding it exceptionally difficult because people don't want to provide them cakes, rooms, music, transport,....
Will you still have choice number 3?
Be wary what you wish for. Public opinion pressurizing might come to bite *you* one day.
And one can "meta-train" for the test data group. Like * Train * Compare to test set * Worse than guideline result => Change training parameters * Train * Compare to test set * Still worse than guideline result => Change training parameters more * Train * Compare to test set * Better than guideline result => Publish
I will be impressed, if it is better than a human doctor on new cases.
RTFA (and Wikipedia) reveals that the discovery of the galaxies is actually one year old. What was discovered is that the mass of the brighest one found (1% light of milky way) is the same as the milky way (even if the nature summary talks about weight, tststs). The way they measured it is interesting:
The more massive a galaxy is, the faster its stars move relative to one another. These motions broaden the spectral line through Doppler shifts, [...]. By combining six nights of data, the astronomers found that the stars’ typical movements relative to one another clocked in at 47 kilometres per second.
What I would be interested in is how one is sure that one didn't simply misjudged the distance of the galaxy. If it was 10 times as far away as thought, it would also appear only 1% as bright as expected.
Exactly. Because there are no autonomous cars yet. So all of those none do this already. No, Tesla is not an autonomous car and Google car is not in series production (nor probably ever will, Google will probably want to sell the technoogy, much less captial costs).
This can be fully in line with the driver thinking the autopilot being on-line. Potentially the driver was trained by the system over time that he just has to shortly move the steering wheel in answer to a "hands on wheel!" requests by the system to be allowed to take his hands off again for one/some minutes. Only this time he did it too late so the system did not re-engage.
This is the problem of allowing long stretches of hands-off with only short stretches of hands-on because one originally promised "completely hands-off" to the customers.
I really like articles which make large claims (here "a potentially history-altering nuclear first-strike capability") without spending the minimum of thought on them. A first strike capability encompasses disabling the second strike capability of the opponent. I would be interested to learn how a rather large and slow plane would be able to find all the space-radars switched off so no one noticed the fleet of planes flying two hours through outer space, the early warning system not detecting re-entry of the warheads, and all the nuclear subs in the ports. Very obviously the author of the article is privy to some information not about space planes but mind-altering capabilities of the Russians. I propose he gets a visits from the nice guys at CIA.
I am a bit surprised about the belief that AIs (or machine learning) will solve all problems given enough data. What do you think a neural net would have learned to do if trained to use VW's "AdBlue" as efficiently as possible but still to pass the NHTSA conformance test? Who would you blame then? After all the constraints look reasonable. Would you want to be the engineer sued because he did not predict the neural net might learn something illegal?
Plus, there is obviously a problem with the way Tesla gathers its training data. If Elon Musk promotes a dashcam video taken by the killed driver earlier where the driver admits insufficient attention to the road (the cutting-in vehicle was in front of the driver and clearly visible), people might well take this as encouragement to not pay attention.
Plus, what I am missing is a comparison with the ratio in the overall populace. I.e. if four times as many arabian/muslim people were studing STEMM (last "M" for medicine) than Islamic Studies, then actually people studying Islam would be twice as likely to become terrorist.
It is OK if the Tony Blair Faith Foundation wants to defend faith. But they should at least include basic statistical facts before writing articles.
I have seen one of these in action. I typed into the search bar in FF and it defaulted to Yahoo instead of Google.
Changing the default search provider happens quite often and does not need what this article describes i.e. one plugin using facilities of another. It is also easily correctable by *gasp* clicking on the looking glass icon next to the search bar and choosing your old search provider.
Actually the open discussion/review page is an even better read as it presents counter and counter-counter arguments. For example several Dutch and English scientist consider the predictions of the paper not impossible but on the upper tail of the probability curve (http://www.atmos-chem-phys-discuss.net/15/C6867/2015/acpd-15-C6867-2015-supplement.pdf) Now, I am no climate scientist (nor do I have time to read all the references) so I cannot say who is more right but at least it seems to indicate that the large & quick effects predicted in the paper are probably not universally accepted as correct.
The "retaining privacy" part of the posting's title only refers to the ability to prevent some websites to be listed. Everything else is public. From the FAQ:
How much of my browsing data does Eyebrowse collect?
Eyebrowse only collects data from the domains that you give it permission to collect....
Is the data I put on my Eyebrowse feed public?
Yes.....
Exactly what fields are collected with each visit?
From every visit that is collected from Eyebrowse, we collect the time you entered the page and the time you leave the page. From the webpage, we store the url, [....] . Finally, the visit is associated with your Eyebrowse account....
They specifically warn that even an anonymous eyebrowse account can be potentially tracked back to a user by his browsing behaviour. It appears the title of the posting promises more than the mechanism keeps. No wonder for a webservice promising to get you in touch with like-minded (or -browsing) people.
The German CCC (Chaos Computer Club) did this already 2004 and went on to "publish" the finger print[sorry, in German only] of the then German minister of the interior tele-photoed of a glas used during a press conference.
So what is new now? Using a 3D printer instead of a laser printer?
According to TFA (yes, I know, I am not supposed to read it) this could be caused by the anonymous messaging application Ricochet which apparently creates a hidden service for each user. Would have expected that that information was mentioned in the summary.
Decoupling the "droops" on the local power lines from local circuits drawing or providing excess current for signal lizes comes to mind immediately. It's easy to put in a large local capacitor to decouple many devices, but harder to find the board space to put a small, high frequency capable capacitor _right next to_ the power leads that connect each chip to the power bus or to the power plane.
To my knowledge it is even worse. You need to decouple the power grid of the individual parts of the IC against each other as well as the power supply (often also on chip for microcontrollers). From what I learned in a previous job most of the empty space(*) on current microcontroller dies is converted into capacitance to buffer the effects of power draw by switching transistors. And discussions sounded as if that was already becoming a limiting factor, so more capacitance (by attaching super capacitors on top of the die) could help. But I am not an analog guy so I can't comment on whether the bad AC characteristics mentioned in another post will prevent such usage.
(*)= There is quite a bit of empty space on silicon dies due to the fact that a) the layout programs are not perfect (or rather the problem of routing the signal lines on the existing metal layers is not solvable without leaving some silicon empty) and b) design rules requiring certain areas to be empty (not sure they are allowed to be filled with capacitance then).
Well, I also wondered what Amazon's Cloud was doing in the drone example (see this figure from the cited article). It turns out it does the voice recognition (apparently with Amazon's "Alexa" service).
BTW, the drone article (didn't read the babyphone one) gives a step-by-step instruction how to setup the different programs. Could be useful also to others wanting to use speech recognition for whatever. Although, given the example phrases in the article such as "Alexa talk to Drone”, “Command Launch”, “Go forward 10 feet” (especially the last one) I wonder whether Alexa can do grammar or whether one has to generate a new command for each different amount of feet to move.
Slashdot Mirror
I think the Bible says on the topic:
or something similar ;-)
Plus, according to the article, the receiver would see the signal as "phantom phosphene flashes", meaning flashes of light which were induced into his brain by magnetic fields.
If one really wanted to transmit "thoughts" that way, the receiver would at least have to be rather quick in morse code. Actually the receiver just learned to distinguish different frequency of flashes and to rotate a tetris block depening on it.
The last time a car manufacturer tried its luck too much on the stock exchange (earning there intermittently more than from its production) it ended up being bought up by a competitor. Someone still remembers Porsche 'buying' Volkswagen?
This also included 'interesting' communication of the CEO to the market. Maybe Musks wants to step into Wiedekind's steps?
You just said something against corporations and the Jews, which per your statement shouldn't be possible. Can you please stop posting contradictions, my positronic circuits are starting to heat up.
I am definitely no Google fanboy but maybe people could decide what to accuse Google of:
* First it was, that it was all a fake and people knew they were called by the AI.
* Now it is that it was no fake and people did not know they were called by the AI.
It appears rather difficult not to fall into one of the two categories.
If one RTFAs (yes, I know, this is Slashdot, but one should consider doing it if the summary sounds too far fetched), one gets the impression that the queuing example was made up by the journalist to have something more sensational to write about. Actually the app appears to be about attendance of events.
Let me cite a few other parts of the article:
Surkus members have attended 4,200 events for 750 clients, including big-name brands, hospitality groups, live-ticketed shows, movie castings and everyday people who want to throw a party.
For example: A gaming company throwing a launch party might ask Surkus to find men and women ages 18 to 32 who like comic books, day parties, dance music and the company's product.
Caroline Thompson, 27, a contributing writer for Vice, said she downloaded Surkus and attended an event last year at a Chicago club full of "finance bros" on a Thursday night.
"It was a little weird that probably 80 percent of the women at the club were there because of the app," she said.
They also write that women are typically paid more than men, so we could now start another discussion about equal pay for men and women or conclude that this is mostly an app to fill up some clubs once the "free entry for women" no longer works.
> You slimy fuck.
Thank you. Nice to meet you, too.
> How is being gay equivalent to choosing to be a Nazi.
This equivalence is posed only by you. You should be ashamed! No wonder you stay anonymous.
I posed an equivalence between being denied services by private companies because they don't like what one does. Whatever that is.
> I'm not sure why you think believing in free speech, and defending
> free speech requires me to actively engage as a participant in spreading
> their crap around?
Who was talking about you. Do you own the Internet?
As everyone here likes examples, lets assume that air was a controlled medium and it was impossible to transmit sound via air without approval (for a fee) to "AirSoundWave Inc.", a private company.
Do you still think that "Free Speech" does not require that company to "actively engage" (i.e. taking money and providing approval) to anyone who wants to speak "freely"?
Well, nowadays public speech basically means Internet and for most people the Internet is such a medium controlled by companies.
I have no problem with certain forms of speech to be restricted by law (we actually have that in Germany). But restrictions of speech by private peer pressure on/by companies leads to a society where the minority (or the less loud majority) has no free speech anymore.
Let me change that a bit for you:
Some choices: ....
1. Gay people hiding underground.
2. Gay people marrying in the open
3. Gay people trying to marry in the open but finding it exceptionally difficult because people don't want to provide them cakes, rooms, music, transport,
Will you still have choice number 3?
Be wary what you wish for. Public opinion pressurizing might come to bite *you* one day.
And one can "meta-train" for the test data group. Like
* Train
* Compare to test set
* Worse than guideline result => Change training parameters
* Train
* Compare to test set
* Still worse than guideline result => Change training parameters more
* Train
* Compare to test set
* Better than guideline result => Publish
I will be impressed, if it is better than a human doctor on new cases.
RTFA (and Wikipedia) reveals that the discovery of the galaxies is actually one year old.
What was discovered is that the mass of the brighest one found (1% light of milky way) is the same as the milky way (even if the nature summary talks about weight, tststs). The way they measured it is interesting:
The more massive a galaxy is, the faster its stars move relative to one another. These motions broaden the spectral line through Doppler shifts, [...]. By combining six nights of data, the astronomers found that the stars’ typical movements relative to one another clocked in at 47 kilometres per second.
What I would be interested in is how one is sure that one didn't simply misjudged the distance of the galaxy. If it was 10 times as far away as thought, it would also appear only 1% as bright as expected.
Exactly. Because there are no autonomous cars yet. So all of those none do this already.
No, Tesla is not an autonomous car and Google car is not in series production (nor probably ever will, Google will probably want to sell the technoogy, much less captial costs).
This can be fully in line with the driver thinking the autopilot being on-line. Potentially the driver was trained by the system over time that he just has to shortly move the steering wheel in answer to a "hands on wheel!" requests by the system to be allowed to take his hands off again for one/some minutes. Only this time he did it too late so the system did not re-engage.
This is the problem of allowing long stretches of hands-off with only short stretches of hands-on because one originally promised "completely hands-off" to the customers.
I really like articles which make large claims (here "a potentially history-altering nuclear first-strike capability") without spending the minimum of thought on them.
A first strike capability encompasses disabling the second strike capability of the opponent. I would be interested to learn how a rather large and slow plane would be able to find all the space-radars switched off so no one noticed the fleet of planes flying two hours through outer space, the early warning system not detecting re-entry of the warheads, and all the nuclear subs in the ports.
Very obviously the author of the article is privy to some information not about space planes but mind-altering capabilities of the Russians. I propose he gets a visits from the nice guys at CIA.
I am a bit surprised about the belief that AIs (or machine learning) will solve all problems given enough data.
What do you think a neural net would have learned to do if trained to use VW's "AdBlue" as efficiently as possible but still to pass the NHTSA conformance test?
Who would you blame then? After all the constraints look reasonable. Would you want to be the engineer sued because he did not predict the neural net might learn something illegal?
Plus, there is obviously a problem with the way Tesla gathers its training data. If Elon Musk promotes a dashcam video taken by the killed driver earlier where the driver admits insufficient attention to the road (the cutting-in vehicle was in front of the driver and clearly visible), people might well take this as encouragement to not pay attention.
Plus, what I am missing is a comparison with the ratio in the overall populace. I.e. if four times as many arabian/muslim people were studing STEMM (last "M" for medicine) than Islamic Studies, then actually people studying Islam would be twice as likely to become terrorist.
It is OK if the Tony Blair Faith Foundation wants to defend faith. But they should at least include basic statistical facts before writing articles.
I have seen one of these in action. I typed into the search bar in FF and it defaulted to Yahoo instead of Google.
Changing the default search provider happens quite often and does not need what this article describes i.e. one plugin using facilities of another. It is also easily correctable by *gasp* clicking on the looking glass icon next to the search bar and choosing your old search provider.
Please return your nerd card per express e-mail.
I thought the general three body problem was already intractable. Now they did it for 62?
Actually the open discussion/review page is an even better read as it presents counter and counter-counter arguments. For example several Dutch and English scientist consider the predictions of the paper not impossible but on the upper tail of the probability curve (http://www.atmos-chem-phys-discuss.net/15/C6867/2015/acpd-15-C6867-2015-supplement.pdf)
Now, I am no climate scientist (nor do I have time to read all the references) so I cannot say who is more right but at least it seems to indicate that the large & quick effects predicted in the paper are probably not universally accepted as correct.
The "retaining privacy" part of the posting's title only refers to the ability to prevent some websites to be listed. Everything else is public. From the FAQ:
Eyebrowse only collects data from the domains that you give it permission to collect. ...
Yes. ....
From every visit that is collected from Eyebrowse, we collect the time you entered the page and the time you leave the page. From the webpage, we store the url, [....] . Finally, the visit is associated with your Eyebrowse account. ...
They specifically warn that even an anonymous eyebrowse account can be potentially tracked back to a user by his browsing behaviour. It appears the title of the posting promises more than the mechanism keeps. No wonder for a webservice promising to get you in touch with like-minded (or -browsing) people.
The German CCC (Chaos Computer Club) did this already 2004 and went on to "publish" the finger print[sorry, in German only] of the then German minister of the interior tele-photoed of a glas used during a press conference.
So what is new now? Using a 3D printer instead of a laser printer?
Since when are Chat-Bots Ro-Bots? Did I miss something about ELIZA being the first femal robot?
According to TFA (yes, I know, I am not supposed to read it) this could be caused by the anonymous messaging application Ricochet which apparently creates a hidden service for each user.
Would have expected that that information was mentioned in the summary.
Decoupling the "droops" on the local power lines from local circuits drawing or providing excess current for signal lizes comes to mind immediately. It's easy to put in a large local capacitor to decouple many devices, but harder to find the board space to put a small, high frequency capable capacitor _right next to_ the power leads that connect each chip to the power bus or to the power plane.
To my knowledge it is even worse. You need to decouple the power grid of the individual parts of the IC against each other as well as the power supply (often also on chip for microcontrollers). From what I learned in a previous job most of the empty space(*) on current microcontroller dies is converted into capacitance to buffer the effects of power draw by switching transistors. And discussions sounded as if that was already becoming a limiting factor, so more capacitance (by attaching super capacitors on top of the die) could help.
But I am not an analog guy so I can't comment on whether the bad AC characteristics mentioned in another post will prevent such usage.
(*)= There is quite a bit of empty space on silicon dies due to the fact that a) the layout programs are not perfect (or rather the problem of routing the signal lines on the existing metal layers is not solvable without leaving some silicon empty) and b) design rules requiring certain areas to be empty (not sure they are allowed to be filled with capacitance then).
Well, I also wondered what Amazon's Cloud was doing in the drone example (see this figure from the cited article). It turns out it does the voice recognition (apparently with Amazon's "Alexa" service).
BTW, the drone article (didn't read the babyphone one) gives a step-by-step instruction how to setup the different programs. Could be useful also to others wanting to use speech recognition for whatever. Although, given the example phrases in the article such as "Alexa talk to Drone”, “Command Launch”, “Go forward 10 feet” (especially the last one) I wonder whether Alexa can do grammar or whether one has to generate a new command for each different amount of feet to move.