I wonder what sufficiently advanced robots would expect of themselves?
Or, take a human soldier, for instance. Can that person behave morally, yet also carry out their military duties? It's a dilemma that soldiers struggle with often. Thinking machines will have to deal with it too, eventually.
Re:Skill and not language used?
on
The Return of Ada
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
Mod parent up. Bondage and discipline prevents sloppy hack jobs, yet hinders quick hackish projects. For small projects, rapid hacks are ok. For large projects, you want thoughtful organization and testing along the way.
Laws of nature stem from theories of nature, when sufficiently proven through empirical evidence. Asimov's laws, on the other hand, can obviously be violated just by building a robot with certain behavior. They're not "law" in the same sense.
The framework of ancient Jewish law is not entirely rational, and thus it is not necessarily entirely moral. However, once rationality is thrown out the window, all bets are off as to the definitions of law and morality. No offense intended to Judaism, btw. Most every religion and philosophy get into the same sort of trouble.
Just as some people observe the laws and others do not, some robots might observe Asimov's laws while others do not. Legality is not tantamount to morality. Some might argue that a robot is morally justified in killing a human in some situation, but whether it's moral or not is the wrong question in a discussion about which side of the law it falls on. Leviticus tells observers what is legal. Only reason can tell us what is moral.
Taken with a grain of salt, perhaps. Both Asimov's and the bible's laws make no distinction as to what is moral; they are mere laws. Morality more difficult than a simple boolean.
Two similar questions with very different implications: 1. Is it ever moral for a robot to kill? 2. Is it ever legal for a robot to kill?
Rembmer, Asimov's laws of robotics are science fiction. They are relevant in same way as the laws of the old testament: both are prominent literary works...of fiction.
AFAIK it's perfectly legal in the US as long as there's a login banner that mentions consent to monitoring.
This Yoyodyne computer is for authorized users only. By
accessing this system, you are consenting to complete monitoring
with no expectation of privacy. Unauthorized access or use may
subject you to disciplinary action and criminal prosecution.
Photoshop's UI is just a different flavor of batshit insane. I don't mind that the menus and graphical doodads are different, but it would freakin awesome if Adobe and GIMP could standardize a bit more on the keyboard shortcuts.
Ask any serious user. It's all about muscle memory and keyboard shortcuts.
Just guessing, but the patent in question might be about Ed Belbruno's US patent #6999860, "Low energy method for changing the inclinations of orbiting satellites using weak stability boundaries and a computer process for implementing same"
It's the similar to the trick that Hiten used back in the 90's. Basically, a spacecraft in Earth orbit enters a highly eccentric yet fairly low energy trajectory that takes it out very far from Earth. As the vehicle passes approaches apogee the perturbations from the moon and the sun become significant, altering the trajectory. Only difference is that in Hiten's case, the return trajectory resulted in a free capture at the moon.
It's been said that the most secure computer is one that's turned off. So, it would follow that the most secure application is one that won't compile. That'll teach those darn users to compromise system security by daring to run stuff!
In OBSD's defence, they do contribute useful work. SSH and pf are great, and OBSD makes a fine software router and firewall on gigabit sized pipes and smaller. For general purpose server use, it'll work but there's better options.
Elite? There is no consipracy theory. Plenty of non-elite military people use it, too. I'm a civilian scientist, and I've used it. Provigil is an great tool.
It's funny how the Times' editors felt it necessary to punctuate each letter in "G.P.S.". What is this, the Man from U.N.C.L.E.? Maybe some year they'll realize that GPS is regular everyday stuff. You know, like A.T.M. machines and D.V.D. players.
Not knocking higher education, but PhD's stereotypically tend to be pretty flaky when it comes to security (or any sort of common sense, for that matter).
What about physical security for Google facilities? Last time I was in Mountain View I took a leisurely stroll right through the middle of the Googleplex, right past the life sized dinosaur skeleton, right past the sand volleyball court and hot tub and right through a couple of their office buildings. I like how the Googleplex is set up like an academic campus, but it's pretty trivial for a bad guy to bypass the card access doors by piggybacking behind somebody else.
Also, the whole place is made out of floor to ceiling glass windows. Would be really simple to shoulder surf somebody's display through a telescopic lens or listen against a windows with a laser mic. There's a reason high security buildings tend to resemble windowless block houses. Hopefully, anybody with a window seat at the Googleplex never processes sensitive data.
I've been spending the better part of today refactoring some ugly C++ that was written by a crusty old Fortran engineer. It might as well have been Fortran.
Please please please learn a functional programming language. Even if you don't use it in your daily work, your brain will be improved.
The Free Software Foundation has a transparent agenda: GPL at all costs. It's not wise to reference the FSF for an unbiased list of open source licenses.
Slashdot Mirror
I wonder what sufficiently advanced robots would expect of themselves? Or, take a human soldier, for instance. Can that person behave morally, yet also carry out their military duties? It's a dilemma that soldiers struggle with often. Thinking machines will have to deal with it too, eventually.
Mod parent up. Bondage and discipline prevents sloppy hack jobs, yet hinders quick hackish projects. For small projects, rapid hacks are ok. For large projects, you want thoughtful organization and testing along the way.
Laws of nature stem from theories of nature, when sufficiently proven through empirical evidence. Asimov's laws, on the other hand, can obviously be violated just by building a robot with certain behavior. They're not "law" in the same sense.
The framework of ancient Jewish law is not entirely rational, and thus it is not necessarily entirely moral. However, once rationality is thrown out the window, all bets are off as to the definitions of law and morality. No offense intended to Judaism, btw. Most every religion and philosophy get into the same sort of trouble.
Good clarification. Sometimes the media makes little or no distinction between autonomy and teleoperation.
Just as some people observe the laws and others do not, some robots might observe Asimov's laws while others do not. Legality is not tantamount to morality. Some might argue that a robot is morally justified in killing a human in some situation, but whether it's moral or not is the wrong question in a discussion about which side of the law it falls on. Leviticus tells observers what is legal. Only reason can tell us what is moral.
Taken with a grain of salt, perhaps. Both Asimov's and the bible's laws make no distinction as to what is moral; they are mere laws. Morality more difficult than a simple boolean.
Two similar questions with very different implications:
1. Is it ever moral for a robot to kill?
2. Is it ever legal for a robot to kill?
Rembmer, Asimov's laws of robotics are science fiction. They are relevant in same way as the laws of the old testament: both are prominent literary works...of fiction.
Well, be completely nitpicky, Slashdot ate your o with double acute accent. Apparently the filter doesn't like them.
obligatory disagreement. I never could get comfortable with the clitmouse. Touchpad is better for me, or an actual mouse if there's room to use it.
So true. Wish I could mod you up.
AFAIK it's perfectly legal in the US as long as there's a login banner that mentions consent to monitoring. This Yoyodyne computer is for authorized users only. By accessing this system, you are consenting to complete monitoring with no expectation of privacy. Unauthorized access or use may subject you to disciplinary action and criminal prosecution.
Photoshop's UI is just a different flavor of batshit insane. I don't mind that the menus and graphical doodads are different, but it would freakin awesome if Adobe and GIMP could standardize a bit more on the keyboard shortcuts. Ask any serious user. It's all about muscle memory and keyboard shortcuts.
Just guessing, but the patent in question might be about Ed Belbruno's US patent #6999860, "Low energy method for changing the inclinations of orbiting satellites using weak stability boundaries and a computer process for implementing same" It's the similar to the trick that Hiten used back in the 90's. Basically, a spacecraft in Earth orbit enters a highly eccentric yet fairly low energy trajectory that takes it out very far from Earth. As the vehicle passes approaches apogee the perturbations from the moon and the sun become significant, altering the trajectory. Only difference is that in Hiten's case, the return trajectory resulted in a free capture at the moon.
I LOL laughed.
It's been said that the most secure computer is one that's turned off. So, it would follow that the most secure application is one that won't compile. That'll teach those darn users to compromise system security by daring to run stuff!
In OBSD's defence, they do contribute useful work. SSH and pf are great, and OBSD makes a fine software router and firewall on gigabit sized pipes and smaller. For general purpose server use, it'll work but there's better options.
They're those machines that ask for your P.I.N. number ;)
Elite? There is no consipracy theory. Plenty of non-elite military people use it, too.
I'm a civilian scientist, and I've used it. Provigil is an great tool.
It's funny how the Times' editors felt it necessary to punctuate each letter in "G.P.S.". What is this, the Man from U.N.C.L.E.? Maybe some year they'll realize that GPS is regular everyday stuff. You know, like A.T.M. machines and D.V.D. players.
Not knocking higher education, but PhD's stereotypically tend to be pretty flaky when it comes to security (or any sort of common sense, for that matter).
What about physical security for Google facilities? Last time I was in Mountain View I took a leisurely stroll right through the middle of the Googleplex, right past the life sized dinosaur skeleton, right past the sand volleyball court and hot tub and right through a couple of their office buildings. I like how the Googleplex is set up like an academic campus, but it's pretty trivial for a bad guy to bypass the card access doors by piggybacking behind somebody else.
Also, the whole place is made out of floor to ceiling glass windows. Would be really simple to shoulder surf somebody's display through a telescopic lens or listen against a windows with a laser mic. There's a reason high security buildings tend to resemble windowless block houses. Hopefully, anybody with a window seat at the Googleplex never processes sensitive data.
We are looking for the sound card wessels.
At first I parsed the headline as "Raytracing in Direct X11". Would be amusing to see, at least.
Curry that function! Then, ADD(1)(2)(3) returns 6.
I've been spending the better part of today refactoring some ugly C++ that was written by a crusty old Fortran engineer. It might as well have been Fortran.
Please please please learn a functional programming language. Even if you don't use it in your daily work, your brain will be improved.
The Free Software Foundation has a transparent agenda: GPL at all costs. It's not wise to reference the FSF for an unbiased list of open source licenses.