If your name is Rahul Patel you don't need privacy because there are about a million other guys with the same name who you can blame for what you have done.
People seem to be obsessed with the idea that machines will gain AGI, but they overlook the obvious shortest path to superintendence, some super rich and or powerful person of questionable humanity uses technology to enhance themselves to the point where they are more technology than nature.
Surely some sort of amoral or psychopathic ubermensch is the greatest threat to humanity and it will be effectively indistinguishable from a pure AGI anyway?
If you can see it on the screen you can print it to an image, or record the entire interaction with your email client using a screen recorder.
If you have the required credentials you can record somebody else's remote desktop too.
I would not be surprised if Google block the extension on the grounds that it is deceptive.
Their law may be annoying and inconvenient but it is far from stupid or insane if it gives the NZ CAA more money and power.
It may be a bastard move, but they are smart bastards.
Furthermore there is nothing to stop a club from flying drones on private land and have everyone sign a consent form on entry onto the property, therefore the bit about killing off a hobby is a load of hysterical hyperbole.
Why push human space flight at all when it is so obvious that humans as profoundly maladapted to such environmental conditions? Surely our money and efforts would be better focused on advancing robotics and quantum communications so as to advance remote avatar technology options? Why go anywhere if you can send your senses in a machine that will do you bidding in real-time without lag?
I expect that the search for civilisations could be futile as a civilisation may only remain detectable for a couple of centuries during it's development therefore when you add that small window to all of the other factors that reduce the chance of detection the probability of success is very small. However while they are doing all that scanning they could record data that offers other insights into the cosmos that are of scientific value.
Remember that detectable equates to wasteful and that is not sustainable therefore civilisations should not do so for any longer than necessary.
Give many people the chance to destroy themselves through one indulgence or another and they will do so, look at what cheap and plentiful food has done to the majority of people in the first world. They are eating themselves to death, because they can.
I'd agree with that to a point, and being a vegetarian is helpful, but there are clearly genetic factors at work too. I think that an examination of the mean time to first and last offspring within family trees may correlate with longevity too. If I had access to an API for ancestry.com it would not be hard to pull out that data, but alas I do not....
i.e. Bloodlines that successfully reproduce while stretching out the span of each generation are probably selecting for longevity genes, even if it is subtle things such as behavioural differences (lifestyle choices) that otherwise would be seen as environmental influences.
As everyone should know, amphetamines increase dopamine levels. Just a coincidence that they were brutal, or was their national drug habit in part to blame for their behaviour? North Korea has a huge amphetamine problem too, and treats humans just as badly.
If you can make it to Mars, land and build a self-sufficient colony there you probably have developed the technology to build ships that can serve as the same thing, permanently in space. i.e. You have solved fusion power, space radiation deflection and the atomic level reconstitution of matter, nano deconstruction and manufacturing. We are not there yet, but the technology will exist within the next 50 years if technological progress continues to accelerate.
So why would you want to deal with all the problems a big gravity well (massive object like a planet) causes? Why mess with planets when there is an entire asteroid belt to convert in to materials?
Why does anyone pretend that their program is about anything other than having nuclear weapons to (counter)threaten their neighbours with?
It is about power, but not about energy.
I know it is hard for many to be rational and factual about some topics but, I have see the same categorisation choices made by young children on more than one occasion. We must be forgiving and understanding toward Google's AI and it's faux pas because it has not received the social conditioning necessary to discriminate politically and override it's simple visual correlation matches.
We may also learn something about the deeper causes of xenophobia and politically incorrect behaviour in humans if we consider this topic rationally.
We must come full circle from the rational (a match is a match), to the shared social illusion (political correctness) , and back to the rational view (understand the process) in order to understand the phenomena fully.
And if Google tells you that the city of Cusco in Peru is gay, please just be wise enough to understand that the AI is young and still learning the complex and ambiguous ways of human society.
I have to admire him for just getting on with it in a sensible manner and putting his money where his mouth is, unlike some other wealthy individuals who make more noise about what other's should do while not investing on the scale that Gates does. I see the sense in not attacking old energy, but simply inducing growth in new energy technologies, it is a more creative and positive attitude that will get results without making enemies.
Sure, why not do it, just don't try to fake the results or parade the hand full of exceptions you find, in front of the media, if the results are otherwise disappointing.
All it takes to learn code, for any human, is the will to learn and an computing device with access to MIT's Scratch website and the Khan Academy etc. The difficulty is in transmitting to the student a genuine appreciation of why trying to learn the subject will empower them, and the confidence to believe that they are capable of doing so. This is increasingly harder to do in a world and Internet full of eye, ear and brain candy that will keep their minds sated and distracted while otherwise leaving them intellectually malnourished.
If the system can interface with a database of face data it would still help to reduce the number of possible suspects by a huge amount. Then by a process of elimination and cross referencing with other data, such as phone meta-data, geo-location etc., it could allow for the very rapid identification of the average, impulsive, criminal who's crimes are opportunistic or reactive. The covert collection of DNA from the small list of final suspects would be all it would take to be sure the correct person had been identified before an arrest warrant was executed, catching them completely by surprise. This would leave innocent, face matches completely unaware that they were under scrutiny, which is a good thing as they should not suffer from the psychological, social and potentially financial harm of been wrongly accused. The only problem I see is if they find their DNA profile is retained after the investigation is completed, but even then there is an argument for using their DNA to refine the system as it will then learn to generate better images that reduce the number of false positives.
Or so Mathworld tells me, http://reference.wolfram.com/l... because x/0 is a Complex Infinity, therefore the answer must symbolic, NaN and so the answer to your question is that, the harm is that your code could be non-deterministic if you do not define what the outcome should be in each case. i.e. Assumptions are dangerous.
Slashdot Mirror
So what does Guam have going for it?
It is already a fibre hub. http://www.submarinecablemap.c...
It is less than 150 km north of the bottom of a very deep ocean trench. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
It is politically stable because it is a US territory. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Already taken, what about Zzzzzzzzing! drives?
If your name is Rahul Patel you don't need privacy because there are about a million other guys with the same name who you can blame for what you have done.
super-intelligence, not superintendence :-)
People seem to be obsessed with the idea that machines will gain AGI, but they overlook the obvious shortest path to superintendence, some super rich and or powerful person of questionable humanity uses technology to enhance themselves to the point where they are more technology than nature. Surely some sort of amoral or psychopathic ubermensch is the greatest threat to humanity and it will be effectively indistinguishable from a pure AGI anyway?
If you can see it on the screen you can print it to an image, or record the entire interaction with your email client using a screen recorder. If you have the required credentials you can record somebody else's remote desktop too. I would not be surprised if Google block the extension on the grounds that it is deceptive.
They voated with their bleet, https://voat.co/
Their law may be annoying and inconvenient but it is far from stupid or insane if it gives the NZ CAA more money and power.
It may be a bastard move, but they are smart bastards.
Furthermore there is nothing to stop a club from flying drones on private land and have everyone sign a consent form on entry onto the property, therefore the bit about killing off a hobby is a load of hysterical hyperbole.
Why push human space flight at all when it is so obvious that humans as profoundly maladapted to such environmental conditions? Surely our money and efforts would be better focused on advancing robotics and quantum communications so as to advance remote avatar technology options? Why go anywhere if you can send your senses in a machine that will do you bidding in real-time without lag?
It misleads people into thinking that you can pwn a Mac via Twitter.
Challenge accepted!
I expect that the search for civilisations could be futile as a civilisation may only remain detectable for a couple of centuries during it's development therefore when you add that small window to all of the other factors that reduce the chance of detection the probability of success is very small. However while they are doing all that scanning they could record data that offers other insights into the cosmos that are of scientific value. Remember that detectable equates to wasteful and that is not sustainable therefore civilisations should not do so for any longer than necessary.
http://i.imgur.com/h9Pnxun.png
Give many people the chance to destroy themselves through one indulgence or another and they will do so, look at what cheap and plentiful food has done to the majority of people in the first world. They are eating themselves to death, because they can.
There has to be a catch, some cost that undermines the advantage, otherwise it would be more common surely?
I'd agree with that to a point, and being a vegetarian is helpful, but there are clearly genetic factors at work too. I think that an examination of the mean time to first and last offspring within family trees may correlate with longevity too. If I had access to an API for ancestry.com it would not be hard to pull out that data, but alas I do not.... i.e. Bloodlines that successfully reproduce while stretching out the span of each generation are probably selecting for longevity genes, even if it is subtle things such as behavioural differences (lifestyle choices) that otherwise would be seen as environmental influences.
As everyone should know, amphetamines increase dopamine levels. Just a coincidence that they were brutal, or was their national drug habit in part to blame for their behaviour? North Korea has a huge amphetamine problem too, and treats humans just as badly.
If you can make it to Mars, land and build a self-sufficient colony there you probably have developed the technology to build ships that can serve as the same thing, permanently in space. i.e. You have solved fusion power, space radiation deflection and the atomic level reconstitution of matter, nano deconstruction and manufacturing. We are not there yet, but the technology will exist within the next 50 years if technological progress continues to accelerate. So why would you want to deal with all the problems a big gravity well (massive object like a planet) causes? Why mess with planets when there is an entire asteroid belt to convert in to materials?
Why does anyone pretend that their program is about anything other than having nuclear weapons to (counter)threaten their neighbours with? It is about power, but not about energy.
Yes it does, that is why we teach children to respect other people, no matter what they superficially resemble. Were you neglected as a child?
I know it is hard for many to be rational and factual about some topics but, I have see the same categorisation choices made by young children on more than one occasion. We must be forgiving and understanding toward Google's AI and it's faux pas because it has not received the social conditioning necessary to discriminate politically and override it's simple visual correlation matches. We may also learn something about the deeper causes of xenophobia and politically incorrect behaviour in humans if we consider this topic rationally. We must come full circle from the rational (a match is a match), to the shared social illusion (political correctness) , and back to the rational view (understand the process) in order to understand the phenomena fully. And if Google tells you that the city of Cusco in Peru is gay, please just be wise enough to understand that the AI is young and still learning the complex and ambiguous ways of human society.
I have to admire him for just getting on with it in a sensible manner and putting his money where his mouth is, unlike some other wealthy individuals who make more noise about what other's should do while not investing on the scale that Gates does. I see the sense in not attacking old energy, but simply inducing growth in new energy technologies, it is a more creative and positive attitude that will get results without making enemies.
Why, given it could launch multiple drones from it's weapons bays?
Sure, why not do it, just don't try to fake the results or parade the hand full of exceptions you find, in front of the media, if the results are otherwise disappointing. All it takes to learn code, for any human, is the will to learn and an computing device with access to MIT's Scratch website and the Khan Academy etc. The difficulty is in transmitting to the student a genuine appreciation of why trying to learn the subject will empower them, and the confidence to believe that they are capable of doing so. This is increasingly harder to do in a world and Internet full of eye, ear and brain candy that will keep their minds sated and distracted while otherwise leaving them intellectually malnourished.
If the system can interface with a database of face data it would still help to reduce the number of possible suspects by a huge amount. Then by a process of elimination and cross referencing with other data, such as phone meta-data, geo-location etc., it could allow for the very rapid identification of the average, impulsive, criminal who's crimes are opportunistic or reactive. The covert collection of DNA from the small list of final suspects would be all it would take to be sure the correct person had been identified before an arrest warrant was executed, catching them completely by surprise. This would leave innocent, face matches completely unaware that they were under scrutiny, which is a good thing as they should not suffer from the psychological, social and potentially financial harm of been wrongly accused. The only problem I see is if they find their DNA profile is retained after the investigation is completed, but even then there is an argument for using their DNA to refine the system as it will then learn to generate better images that reduce the number of false positives.
Or so Mathworld tells me, http://reference.wolfram.com/l... because x/0 is a Complex Infinity, therefore the answer must symbolic, NaN and so the answer to your question is that, the harm is that your code could be non-deterministic if you do not define what the outcome should be in each case. i.e. Assumptions are dangerous.