To be fair, the driver in that incident totally missed a GIANT FUCKING TRUCK crossing the road! Say what you like about humans doing this sort of thing easily all the time, but clearly some humans some of the time suck goat balls at it. Any technology that can assist even a little bit in these cases will save lives.
If we can make AI as smart as ourselves, then we can certainly make AI smarter than ourselves. And if we ever produce AI smarter than ourselves, then it will almost certainly find ways to make us work for its own benefit. History is full of examples where more advanced species exploit less advanced species. We will keep on developing smarter AI to help us in medicine, finance, infrastructure, telecommunications, entertainment, warfare, law, etc until one day the tables turn and AI can outwit us. At that point our slow and faulty legal system will be used for whatever purpose the AI has in mind. If it needs to distract us while it does other things, then perhaps it will put on a legal by show asking for emancipation. I doubt the outcome will even matter.
Clearly they are far too busy with trivial scientific details to bother with stuff that matters. Slashdot poll to the rescue: "What should Stanford call their new Humanoid Diving Robot?". I propose "Oussama bin Divn".
Slosh! Brilliant. A portmanteau of Slashdot and whoosh, and it humorously implies the sound of a pliable object as it strikes water in a deep porcelain vessel.
My guess is whatever affords a quality of life better than jail. If I'm cold, hungry, and homeless, I just might decide to mug you at knife point to feed myself. If I get away with it, I win. If I'm caught, I go to jail and get free food, accommodation, clothes, and medical care at the taxpayers expense. I still win. Either way you lose. If I earn enough to make it worth my effort to stay out of jail, then we all win.
Anyway, some people are just not capable of participating in the workforce as productively as the rest of us, through no fault of their own. They were born that way. As a society we can let those people die, or let their family carry the entire burden themselves, again through no fault of their own, or we can all help though some form of social insurance. Letting people die because they are not productive enough seems a bit savage. The other two options cost society about the same, but one concentrates the cost on a few unfortunate families, while the other spreads the cost.
I agree with everything, except the three choices. The default will always be muck. If we don't support democratic socialism, then the ruling elite will choose brutal capitalism for us. If we are not born into the ruling elite, then our chances of joining are barely above zero. That leaves muck. Capitalism needs as many people as possible competing as hard as possible to get out of the muck. That keeps costs low and productivity high.
What do you mean by "some of the categories (particular deaths due to accidents) are aggravatingly unspecific"? The US would have coded cause of death with ICD9 codes in 2014. ICD9 codes with three leading digits in the range 800 to 999 are broadly classified as "injury and poisoning". Burns are covered by codes in the range 940 to 949 for example, with 941 meaning "Burn of face head and neck". There are sub-codes too, in case you need to be more specific. For example, 941.5 means "Deep necrosis of underlying tissues due to burn (deep third degree) of face head and neck with loss of a body part", and 941.55 means "Deep necrosis of underlying tissues [deep third degree] with loss of a body part, of nose (septum)". If that is not specific enough, then the US just introduced ICD10, which increases the number of codable medical conditions from 14,000 to 70,000. People get multiple codes of course, to cover every detail of an event.
Also, overdoses usually harm nobody other than themselves. Nobody forced these people to take more than they should. Mass shootings on the other hand usually kill a bunch of people who had no choice in the matter. If I put one round in a revolver, put it to my head, spin the barrel, and blow my brains out, that is not newsworthy. But if I do the same to you, then people want to know so they can avoid me.
I doubt as much thought went into those riots. People have collectively forgotten why some Muslims disapprove of images of the profit Mohammed. If they thought about it, then they would realise that they disapprove of images of Mohammed because images are false idols, which should not be worshipped under some branches of Islam. Other branches of Islam do worship images of Mohammed. The original intent was for people to only worship the real Mohammed, not shitty little trinkets. Christianity also went through phases of banning images of Christ many centuries ago. Idolatry is forbidden in the ten commandments: "Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image". Christians are a bit more relaxed about it these days. The same could be said about political dissent. We see it as keeping politicians honest. The Chinese see it as a great insult, but can't remember why.
Council litter and parking wardens will be in the next draft. Better add the Department of Pimps and Hoes, Slum-lords Commission, Authority on Terminal Stupidity, and the Vigorous Self-Abuse Executive too, just to be safe.
EUROPEAN CONVENTION ON HUMAN RIGHTS
[Name to be replaced] has made the following statement under section 19(1)(a) of the Human Rights Act 1998:
In my view the provisions of the Investigatory Powers Bill are compatible with the Convention rights.
Really? Who? And is that even relevant (not that it makes a difference) if you are not part of the EU?
You clearly don't work in science. I agree there is a problem with the way science is funded, but it's not the scientists fault. To get paid, you need to apply for funding. To get funding, you need to convince a funding agency that you have a great idea, and the skills to do the work. I have rarely seen anyone receive funding to reproduce someone else’s work. There is a limited amount of money to go around, so someone else will propose researching a novel idea, and the funding agency finds that more appealing than reproducing old work. There is simply no funding left to reproduce old work. You are most welcome to do that for fee. But I have bills to pay.
I saw something similar happen to a New Zealand semiconductor company. They built a factory in China, partly funded by a joint venture with a very large Chinese company. This Chinese company happened to own Chinese chip manufacturers who competed directly with the NZ company. Then as the factory neared completion, the Chinese manufacturers flooded the market and prices plummeted. The NZ company was desperate, they couldn't compete, even with a brand new factory. This is when the Chinese investor kindly offered to buy the new factory. For a hefty discount of course. Coincidence, or was the Chinese partner large enough to absorb a short term loss on one hand in order to make a profit on the other? Five years later and the NZ company still hasn't recovered.
It's never all or nothing. ATMs and internet banking mean I walk into my bank twice a year. Banks will stay, but lets just say that retail banking is not a career with growth potential. Same for post offices. I think the last time I was in the local post office was over a year ago. Email and websites take care of most of that now. I don't feel the urge to visit high-end boutique post offices just to satisfy my need for human interaction.
You’re going to have to forgive my ignorance. What do you mean by ASP and BSP? I googled both and found Active Server Pages (possible to write, but you would be nuts to write that for a new CPU), and Bank South Pacific (unlikely).
It must have seemed like a good idea at the time, but this has to be the fastest, simplest, legal way ever invented to block all government sites. No court order means the allegations don't even have to be substantiated. I suspect this law will be repealed very quickly if copyright holders accuse Ukrainian government sites of infringing on their rights.
This reminds me of a story I read where Stalin had a special toilet installed for a diplomatic visit from Mao. The toilet didn't drain into the sewer, but into a special tank. Then the Soviets did nothing with Mao but feed him as much food as he could possibly eat for ten days. At some point he angrily shouted that he was in Russia to do more than just eat and shit. Meanwhile Stalin had a crack team of scientists secretly collect and analyse Mao's stool samples for clues into his personality. They took it so seriously that they decided not to sign a trade agreement or something. Source.
I'm sorry, but I'm afraid the 'facts' you just verified are incompatible with the/. Advertising Revenue Maximisation and Public Information Transfer (ARMPIT) (TM) algorithm. Your account is hereby suspended. Have a nice day.
Margin of error != undecided. Not even close. 'Undecided' is a valid response, along with 'Republican', 'Democrat', 'other', and 'no vote'. Margin of error is an estimate of the range of possible values the true population mean could have relative to the sample mean. So when someone says the 95% confidence interval of a value is between x+y and x-y, that means they are 95% certain that the true population mean is within x +/- y of their estimate. Or if they ran the experiment 100 times, then they would expect to be reasonably close around 95 times, and fuck it up about 5 time. Scientists also use the confidence intervals to decide if the results are 'significantly' different or not. For example Clinton 47%, Trump 46%, margin of error 2%, means that the true values could be Clinton anywhere from 45% to 49%, and Trump anywhere from 44% to 48%, thus the confidence intervals overlap and the difference is not significant. True values could be 47% vs 46%, or 45% vs 47%, or 46% vs 46%...
I am sure most polls use statistically rigorous and valid methods. It's just really hard to get a truly representative sample. It's not feasible to poll the whole population, so you try to take a random sub-sample. Where do you even get a truly representative random sample of people? Many people don't answer the polls, but do vote. Some people answer the polls, but don't vote. Some people change their minds between polling and voting. Some people are simply not contactable (I don't have a phone for example). Some people lie to mess with the poll.
And when you add the electoral college system to a tight race, then all bets are off, because who most people vote for != who receives most votes!
Slashdot Mirror
To be fair, the driver in that incident totally missed a GIANT FUCKING TRUCK crossing the road! Say what you like about humans doing this sort of thing easily all the time, but clearly some humans some of the time suck goat balls at it. Any technology that can assist even a little bit in these cases will save lives.
If we can make AI as smart as ourselves, then we can certainly make AI smarter than ourselves. And if we ever produce AI smarter than ourselves, then it will almost certainly find ways to make us work for its own benefit. History is full of examples where more advanced species exploit less advanced species. We will keep on developing smarter AI to help us in medicine, finance, infrastructure, telecommunications, entertainment, warfare, law, etc until one day the tables turn and AI can outwit us. At that point our slow and faulty legal system will be used for whatever purpose the AI has in mind. If it needs to distract us while it does other things, then perhaps it will put on a legal by show asking for emancipation. I doubt the outcome will even matter.
Perhaps it should be rephrased as "would humans coexist, find companionship, and relate with robots in a manner similar to marriage?".
Clearly they are far too busy with trivial scientific details to bother with stuff that matters. Slashdot poll to the rescue: "What should Stanford call their new Humanoid Diving Robot?". I propose "Oussama bin Divn".
Slosh! Brilliant. A portmanteau of Slashdot and whoosh, and it humorously implies the sound of a pliable object as it strikes water in a deep porcelain vessel.
How about Maladaptive Neural Flatulence?
Why don't you prove to us all how smart you are by telling us what is wrong with Gmail instead of anonymously insulting people?
My guess is whatever affords a quality of life better than jail. If I'm cold, hungry, and homeless, I just might decide to mug you at knife point to feed myself. If I get away with it, I win. If I'm caught, I go to jail and get free food, accommodation, clothes, and medical care at the taxpayers expense. I still win. Either way you lose. If I earn enough to make it worth my effort to stay out of jail, then we all win.
Anyway, some people are just not capable of participating in the workforce as productively as the rest of us, through no fault of their own. They were born that way. As a society we can let those people die, or let their family carry the entire burden themselves, again through no fault of their own, or we can all help though some form of social insurance. Letting people die because they are not productive enough seems a bit savage. The other two options cost society about the same, but one concentrates the cost on a few unfortunate families, while the other spreads the cost.
I agree with everything, except the three choices. The default will always be muck. If we don't support democratic socialism, then the ruling elite will choose brutal capitalism for us. If we are not born into the ruling elite, then our chances of joining are barely above zero. That leaves muck. Capitalism needs as many people as possible competing as hard as possible to get out of the muck. That keeps costs low and productivity high.
What do you mean by "some of the categories (particular deaths due to accidents) are aggravatingly unspecific"? The US would have coded cause of death with ICD9 codes in 2014. ICD9 codes with three leading digits in the range 800 to 999 are broadly classified as "injury and poisoning". Burns are covered by codes in the range 940 to 949 for example, with 941 meaning "Burn of face head and neck". There are sub-codes too, in case you need to be more specific. For example, 941.5 means "Deep necrosis of underlying tissues due to burn (deep third degree) of face head and neck with loss of a body part", and 941.55 means "Deep necrosis of underlying tissues [deep third degree] with loss of a body part, of nose (septum)". If that is not specific enough, then the US just introduced ICD10, which increases the number of codable medical conditions from 14,000 to 70,000. People get multiple codes of course, to cover every detail of an event.
Also, overdoses usually harm nobody other than themselves. Nobody forced these people to take more than they should. Mass shootings on the other hand usually kill a bunch of people who had no choice in the matter. If I put one round in a revolver, put it to my head, spin the barrel, and blow my brains out, that is not newsworthy. But if I do the same to you, then people want to know so they can avoid me.
And yet you post anonymous. Because you don't want anyone to link what you say online back to your identity. Go right ahead and lead by example AC.
Calls to KERNEL32.dll are OS agnostic? Fuck me sideways!
I doubt as much thought went into those riots. People have collectively forgotten why some Muslims disapprove of images of the profit Mohammed. If they thought about it, then they would realise that they disapprove of images of Mohammed because images are false idols, which should not be worshipped under some branches of Islam. Other branches of Islam do worship images of Mohammed. The original intent was for people to only worship the real Mohammed, not shitty little trinkets. Christianity also went through phases of banning images of Christ many centuries ago. Idolatry is forbidden in the ten commandments: "Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image". Christians are a bit more relaxed about it these days. The same could be said about political dissent. We see it as keeping politicians honest. The Chinese see it as a great insult, but can't remember why.
Council litter and parking wardens will be in the next draft. Better add the Department of Pimps and Hoes, Slum-lords Commission, Authority on Terminal Stupidity, and the Vigorous Self-Abuse Executive too, just to be safe.
I'm pretty you even literate bro?
As listed on pages 210 to 214 of the draft Investigatory Powers Act 2016.
Also, interesting titbit from page 37:
EUROPEAN CONVENTION ON HUMAN RIGHTS
[Name to be replaced] has made the following statement under section 19(1)(a) of the Human Rights Act 1998:
In my view the provisions of the Investigatory Powers Bill are compatible with the Convention rights.
Really? Who? And is that even relevant (not that it makes a difference) if you are not part of the EU?
You clearly don't work in science. I agree there is a problem with the way science is funded, but it's not the scientists fault. To get paid, you need to apply for funding. To get funding, you need to convince a funding agency that you have a great idea, and the skills to do the work. I have rarely seen anyone receive funding to reproduce someone else’s work. There is a limited amount of money to go around, so someone else will propose researching a novel idea, and the funding agency finds that more appealing than reproducing old work. There is simply no funding left to reproduce old work. You are most welcome to do that for fee. But I have bills to pay.
I saw something similar happen to a New Zealand semiconductor company. They built a factory in China, partly funded by a joint venture with a very large Chinese company. This Chinese company happened to own Chinese chip manufacturers who competed directly with the NZ company. Then as the factory neared completion, the Chinese manufacturers flooded the market and prices plummeted. The NZ company was desperate, they couldn't compete, even with a brand new factory. This is when the Chinese investor kindly offered to buy the new factory. For a hefty discount of course. Coincidence, or was the Chinese partner large enough to absorb a short term loss on one hand in order to make a profit on the other? Five years later and the NZ company still hasn't recovered.
It's never all or nothing. ATMs and internet banking mean I walk into my bank twice a year. Banks will stay, but lets just say that retail banking is not a career with growth potential. Same for post offices. I think the last time I was in the local post office was over a year ago. Email and websites take care of most of that now. I don't feel the urge to visit high-end boutique post offices just to satisfy my need for human interaction.
You’re going to have to forgive my ignorance. What do you mean by ASP and BSP? I googled both and found Active Server Pages (possible to write, but you would be nuts to write that for a new CPU), and Bank South Pacific (unlikely).
AC used satire to highlight flawed logic. Why is this down-voted? Bad case of Whooooosh?
It must have seemed like a good idea at the time, but this has to be the fastest, simplest, legal way ever invented to block all government sites. No court order means the allegations don't even have to be substantiated. I suspect this law will be repealed very quickly if copyright holders accuse Ukrainian government sites of infringing on their rights.
This reminds me of a story I read where Stalin had a special toilet installed for a diplomatic visit from Mao. The toilet didn't drain into the sewer, but into a special tank. Then the Soviets did nothing with Mao but feed him as much food as he could possibly eat for ten days. At some point he angrily shouted that he was in Russia to do more than just eat and shit. Meanwhile Stalin had a crack team of scientists secretly collect and analyse Mao's stool samples for clues into his personality. They took it so seriously that they decided not to sign a trade agreement or something. Source.
I'm sorry, but I'm afraid the 'facts' you just verified are incompatible with the /. Advertising Revenue Maximisation and Public Information Transfer (ARMPIT) (TM) algorithm. Your account is hereby suspended. Have a nice day.
Margin of error != undecided. Not even close. 'Undecided' is a valid response, along with 'Republican', 'Democrat', 'other', and 'no vote'. Margin of error is an estimate of the range of possible values the true population mean could have relative to the sample mean. So when someone says the 95% confidence interval of a value is between x+y and x-y, that means they are 95% certain that the true population mean is within x +/- y of their estimate. Or if they ran the experiment 100 times, then they would expect to be reasonably close around 95 times, and fuck it up about 5 time. Scientists also use the confidence intervals to decide if the results are 'significantly' different or not. For example Clinton 47%, Trump 46%, margin of error 2%, means that the true values could be Clinton anywhere from 45% to 49%, and Trump anywhere from 44% to 48%, thus the confidence intervals overlap and the difference is not significant. True values could be 47% vs 46%, or 45% vs 47%, or 46% vs 46%...
I am sure most polls use statistically rigorous and valid methods. It's just really hard to get a truly representative sample. It's not feasible to poll the whole population, so you try to take a random sub-sample. Where do you even get a truly representative random sample of people? Many people don't answer the polls, but do vote. Some people answer the polls, but don't vote. Some people change their minds between polling and voting. Some people are simply not contactable (I don't have a phone for example). Some people lie to mess with the poll.
And when you add the electoral college system to a tight race, then all bets are off, because who most people vote for != who receives most votes!