And which part of 'it's subjective not objective' you can't understand? I can't show you xyz; you have to see it yourself. And science/symbolic processing of information has its limits (Godel's incompleteness theorem)
That's a neat trick. You stated the word 'magic' and then talk about rationality. The point is there are intelligent things which you may not understand (say a squirrel may not understand quantum mechanics).
You also didn't answer where these character flaws come from, or how they can somehow magically be controlled in some way that other psychological traits with a physiological basis - like depression, dipshit, try to keep up - cannot.
Traits come from within. Yes, external factors will try to push you in the wrong direction; but there is something inside you, call it will-power/trust/faith that if strong enough will let you pull yourself out of the hole.
But for vast majority, it's much easier to say it's impossible and not try. Oh yeah, and they always ask for scientific evidence which can't be provided. This is subjective not objective. In fact for such folks their only search is how to justify their position to not try and continue to wallow in the misery.
I believe having multiple hardware cores/threads to make a system UI responsive on user input (keyboard/mouse) is an overkill; it's like using an elephant gun to kill a mouse. The system grinds to a crawl due to poor OS system/scheduler which doesn't give real-time apps a quick response and letting some CPU hogging process to hold on to the CPU.
A human keyboard or mouse input is such a small task to do and still the so called modern OSes can't handle it right.
The sluggishness is surely due to poor software implementation (say some task unnecessarily holding on to a lock on which another is waiting) and not about hardware limits (surely CPU is not at 100%.. even if it is..again due to poor software like someone doing a spin-wait etc... we know a normal user is not running CPU intensive math calculations)
I bet none of these change the CG of the object (space craft, cg center of gravity); To move the CG, you need to push some mass in the opposite side as required by the law of conservation of momentum; and this mass is some fuel burnt and the resulting hot exhaust gases (mass x velocity). motors etc can make some some internal part of the craft spin and likely cause other parts to compensate for (conservation of angular momentum).
Basic income won't work in any society because the money you will be given will find its way to a loan sharks at ridiculous high rates or to alcohol/drug dealers. The person is poor because he has low intelligence; has low awareness - has wrong priorities in life. He/She is not going to use it cultivate a healthy life style exploring the sciences or arts or doing other health activities. But will likely stay in low intelligence and fall for others who are a little higher in the awareness ladder to poach their free govt given money.
So what is the end result..the poor stay poor in unhealthy situation. So what is the solution? you don't try to make a dumb person smart; it's only if they decide to climb out of the hole, they can. Else it's okay if they fail n die lying a miserable life.
your definition of "nice" (as in nice house, nice car) are also societal programming as someone believing working is life. it's possible to quit way early if you are okay to cut your needs
Likely it uses electrostatic forces to fine tune the 'air foil' on the fly.. note it's not flying in vacuum; so surely it's riding on the air/wind however slow the wind may be. By minutely n instantly adjusting the airfoil, you can create the lift needed.
they also tend to hang out at coffee shops.. leading to more social interaction; lonely ppl hv comparatively lower lifespan; just going out n seeing other folks contributes to your well being (when you see lot of folks you will know your situation is afterall not that bad).
How can you prove something is constant if you yourself is a product of those laws? It's like you hacked a server and obtained root access; now you can cover your tracks anyway you wish (like erase contents in log files n things like that). So if laws of physics conspire to give you an illusion that they are fixed, you can't uncover it. Unless you are operating out the box.. outside the confines of physics; how can you tell anything concrete about it.
Their motive is selfish as well. It's not to advance tech; their cities have become unlivable with horrible air quality. Likely it's a do something or die situation.
This should be used even for the usual image recognition. You don't need 1000s of dog pictures/photos to detect a dog. A 3 year old child knows what a dog is - not by seeing 1000s but even one dog is enough. A generator AI using laws of physics/rotation/scaling etc should generate images for what a dog will look like using a base 3D model of a dog (like a dog toy you find in a toystore) [say from a given point of view/positioning of the 2D camera]. The final image recognizer will work even if the dog is made tiny, rotated, turning its head etc (in the model, you have to program which part can turn to what degree - like head say 80 degrees..knee say 120 degrees). The point is your abstraction of the object/content should go deeper - and look at the content/data generation process. Just seeing final bit pattern is going to be very hard as it's done today with photos - you lose those 3D movement/laws information.
yes will be fun; when those recycling is all done by machines drawing energy from say a distant star/galaxy (using new yet to discover science/physics).
we already experience this to some extent like enjoying a morning sunrise.. and throwing it away for a totally new image in evening as in sunset. Just that this is nature made without human driving it.
May be from the human point of you, you did not make yourself visible enough; May be you were too quiet (was it an electric vehicle?) ? may be your head lights were too weak/dim? may be you were going too fast compared to other traffic (so it was a surprise to me that you suddenly appeared in front of me).
The point is just like you want to see the pedestrian x seconds early; you must also make yourself visible/audible/perceivable those x seconds early for the pedestrian. From the video, it shows clearly the lady had no idea the vehicle was coming; may be she was absent minded; but we can't rule out the vehicle was way too quiet/sneaky/invisible.
Yeah just like car can say I didn't see the person; she can say she never saw the car. That is humans instinctively know based on the headlight range what speed the driver will drive (based on past experience of encountering numerous cars in similar dark environment); if suddenly a vehicle pops up in front at tremendous speed, the human on road will get shocked as well. May be the head lights were too dim as the software may be using sensors based on non-visible spectrum waves (lidar n such).
That is it's a case of surprising someone outside their normal expected behavior. The software should try not to surprise one and go along their predicted expectation.
In fact something even more bizarre could happen. If you have never seen an object before, when the object is shown to you -- you can't see it. They say the native indians during the 1400s never saw say columbus's (european explorers) ship -- because they have never seen anything like that in their past/memory. So if the incoming stimulus is totally new, you will fail to see it. It doesn't register in your object recognition system. It is like invisible to you.
You go metaphysical when you are bored or not satisfied with the physical/matter answers. No one compels that you do; you just do when u r ready.
about rats mating etc; these can be explained by matter. But claiming thoughts/intuition also arises from dna/matter is just a belief -- nothing different from a say religious belief. Science/math must be rigorous. You need proof; repeatable experiments. Can you provide me a model where I can elicit a particular thought in a human? If you think it's possible -- again there is no proof. When you don't have proof, as a rational scientific person, you can only answer 'I don't know'. You can't claim something true. [there is no double standard here, in fact it is the claiming of something which has no scientific proof that sounds like double-standard]
Yeah your definition of magic sounds reasonable. I believe the universe's magic sphere is infinite; as you dig, you get more n more; some understand xyz; for them xyz is not magic. For those who are still learning, xyz appears magic. I guess the joy of being existent is to enjoy these surprises as moving from magic to non-magic; and new magic appearing ahead. [for a less studied villager, a cellphone video call may appear like magic; for a computer engineer it's just bits flowing]
of course one needs to go beyond logic/math, if one wants to experience what is outside that feels like.
You need to go meta physical. outside matter. I guess like godel's incompleteness theorem there may be things which our mind/symbolic-encoding can't grasp. That doesn't mean they can't exist. The claim about intuition encoded in matter/DNA -- is there a scientific proof for it? isn't that just a belief?
NOTE that once u find an algorithm (like ML/recursive NN), there is no longer any magic left in say image recognition or natural language processing. it's just some math/matrix manipulations. We have to move to problems which math cant' solve.
How about intelligence is the ability to provide answers when the input to output processing cannot be encoded in symbols? [vaguely things like 'intuition']; so you basically rule out any computer/turing machine..anything that needs symbolic encoding of information.
You have trillions of nanobots called microbes in your gut which can do the work for you. These were designed over a billion years. They can process any natural food; so move to a simple vege diet; steam veges and add spices; push in some boiled whole grains like rice and then watch your health.
Slashdot Mirror
And which part of 'it's subjective not objective' you can't understand? I can't show you xyz; you have to see it yourself. And science/symbolic processing of information has its limits (Godel's incompleteness theorem)
That's a neat trick. You stated the word 'magic' and then talk about rationality. The point is there are intelligent things which you may not understand (say a squirrel may not understand quantum mechanics).
You also didn't answer where these character flaws come from, or how they can somehow magically be controlled in some way that other psychological traits with a physiological basis - like depression, dipshit, try to keep up - cannot.
Traits come from within. Yes, external factors will try to push you in the wrong direction; but there is something inside you, call it will-power/trust/faith that if strong enough will let you pull yourself out of the hole.
But for vast majority, it's much easier to say it's impossible and not try. Oh yeah, and they always ask for scientific evidence which can't be provided. This is subjective not objective. In fact for such folks their only search is how to justify their position to not try and continue to wallow in the misery.
I believe having multiple hardware cores/threads to make a system UI responsive on user input (keyboard /mouse) is an overkill; it's like using an elephant gun to kill a mouse. The system grinds to a crawl due to poor OS system/scheduler which doesn't give real-time apps a quick response and letting some CPU hogging process to hold on to the CPU.
.. even if it is ..again due to poor software like someone doing a spin-wait etc... we know a normal user is not running CPU intensive math calculations)
A human keyboard or mouse input is such a small task to do and still the so called modern OSes can't handle it right. The sluggishness is surely due to poor software implementation (say some task unnecessarily holding on to a lock on which another is waiting) and not about hardware limits (surely CPU is not at 100%
Not if the tick bites you when are you are asleep. You need to be awake and actively scratch it. So it's okay to sleep.
I bet none of these change the CG of the object (space craft, cg center of gravity); To move the CG, you need to push some mass in the opposite side as required by the law of conservation of momentum; and this mass is some fuel burnt and the resulting hot exhaust gases (mass x velocity). motors etc can make some some internal part of the craft spin and likely cause other parts to compensate for (conservation of angular momentum).
Basic income won't work in any society because the money you will be given will find its way to a loan sharks at ridiculous high rates or to alcohol/drug dealers. The person is poor because he has low intelligence; has low awareness - has wrong priorities in life. He/She is not going to use it cultivate a healthy life style exploring the sciences or arts or doing other health activities. But will likely stay in low intelligence and fall for others who are a little higher in the awareness ladder to poach their free govt given money.
So what is the end result..the poor stay poor in unhealthy situation. So what is the solution? you don't try to make a dumb person smart; it's only if they decide to climb out of the hole, they can. Else it's okay if they fail n die lying a miserable life.
yes safe, if your brain can send a faster abort signal to your arm to prevent yanking while LED flashing.
your definition of "nice" (as in nice house, nice car) are also societal programming as someone believing working is life. it's possible to quit way early if you are okay to cut your needs
Likely it uses electrostatic forces to fine tune the 'air foil' on the fly.. note it's not flying in vacuum; so surely it's riding on the air/wind however slow the wind may be. By minutely n instantly adjusting the airfoil, you can create the lift needed.
they also tend to hang out at coffee shops.. leading to more social interaction; lonely ppl hv comparatively lower lifespan; just going out n seeing other folks contributes to your well being (when you see lot of folks you will know your situation is afterall not that bad).
waste can't be sacred? wow.. news!
You will be doing what your body does.
How can you prove something is constant if you yourself is a product of those laws? It's like you hacked a server and obtained root access; now you can cover your tracks anyway you wish (like erase contents in log files n things like that). So if laws of physics conspire to give you an illusion that they are fixed, you can't uncover it. Unless you are operating out the box.. outside the confines of physics; how can you tell anything concrete about it.
Their motive is selfish as well. It's not to advance tech; their cities have become unlivable with horrible air quality. Likely it's a do something or die situation.
This should be used even for the usual image recognition. You don't need 1000s of dog pictures/photos to detect a dog. A 3 year old child knows what a dog is - not by seeing 1000s but even one dog is enough. A generator AI using laws of physics/rotation/scaling etc should generate images for what a dog will look like using a base 3D model of a dog (like a dog toy you find in a toystore) [say from a given point of view/positioning of the 2D camera]. The final image recognizer will work even if the dog is made tiny, rotated, turning its head etc (in the model, you have to program which part can turn to what degree - like head say 80 degrees..knee say 120 degrees). The point is your abstraction of the object/content should go deeper - and look at the content/data generation process. Just seeing final bit pattern is going to be very hard as it's done today with photos - you lose those 3D movement/laws information.
yes will be fun; when those recycling is all done by machines drawing energy from say a distant star/galaxy (using new yet to discover science/physics).
we already experience this to some extent like enjoying a morning sunrise.. and throwing it away for a totally new image in evening as in sunset. Just that this is nature made without human driving it.
May be from the human point of you, you did not make yourself visible enough; May be you were too quiet (was it an electric vehicle?) ? may be your head lights were too weak/dim? may be you were going too fast compared to other traffic (so it was a surprise to me that you suddenly appeared in front of me).
The point is just like you want to see the pedestrian x seconds early; you must also make yourself visible/audible/perceivable those x seconds early for the pedestrian. From the video, it shows clearly the lady had no idea the vehicle was coming; may be she was absent minded; but we can't rule out the vehicle was way too quiet/sneaky/invisible.
Yeah just like car can say I didn't see the person; she can say she never saw the car. That is humans instinctively know based on the headlight range what speed the driver will drive (based on past experience of encountering numerous cars in similar dark environment); if suddenly a vehicle pops up in front at tremendous speed, the human on road will get shocked as well. May be the head lights were too dim as the software may be using sensors based on non-visible spectrum waves (lidar n such).
That is it's a case of surprising someone outside their normal expected behavior. The software should try not to surprise one and go along their predicted expectation.
In fact something even more bizarre could happen. If you have never seen an object before, when the object is shown to you -- you can't see it. They say the native indians during the 1400s never saw say columbus's (european explorers) ship -- because they have never seen anything like that in their past/memory. So if the incoming stimulus is totally new, you will fail to see it. It doesn't register in your object recognition system. It is like invisible to you.
You go metaphysical when you are bored or not satisfied with the physical/matter answers. No one compels that you do; you just do when u r ready.
about rats mating etc; these can be explained by matter. But claiming thoughts/intuition also arises from dna/matter is just a belief -- nothing different from a say religious belief. Science/math must be rigorous. You need proof; repeatable experiments. Can you provide me a model where I can elicit a particular thought in a human? If you think it's possible -- again there is no proof. When you don't have proof, as a rational scientific person, you can only answer 'I don't know'. You can't claim something true. [there is no double standard here, in fact it is the claiming of something which has no scientific proof that sounds like double-standard]
Yeah your definition of magic sounds reasonable. I believe the universe's magic sphere is infinite; as you dig, you get more n more; some understand xyz; for them xyz is not magic. For those who are still learning, xyz appears magic. I guess the joy of being existent is to enjoy these surprises as moving from magic to non-magic; and new magic appearing ahead. [for a less studied villager, a cellphone video call may appear like magic; for a computer engineer it's just bits flowing]
of course one needs to go beyond logic/math, if one wants to experience what is outside that feels like.
You need to go meta physical. outside matter. I guess like godel's incompleteness theorem there may be things which our mind/symbolic-encoding can't grasp. That doesn't mean they can't exist. The claim about intuition encoded in matter/DNA -- is there a scientific proof for it? isn't that just a belief?
NOTE that once u find an algorithm (like ML/recursive NN), there is no longer any magic left in say image recognition or natural language processing. it's just some math/matrix manipulations. We have to move to problems which math cant' solve.
How about intelligence is the ability to provide answers when the input to output processing cannot be encoded in symbols? [vaguely things like 'intuition']; so you basically rule out any computer/turing machine..anything that needs symbolic encoding of information.
why it's called 'home loan' .. 'home buying'. home ownership when it's really 'house buying'? ..house this n house that
why would someone write such a report? hint: follow the money. I guess some coffee growers association paid/sponsored the report.
You have trillions of nanobots called microbes in your gut which can do the work for you. These were designed over a billion years. They can process any natural food; so move to a simple vege diet; steam veges and add spices; push in some boiled whole grains like rice and then watch your health.