It's the opposite. *You* tell the computer what to look at (by feeding it data) and then it calculates an answer (=makes a decision) based on what you feed it. Just like any computer ever. AI is not magic.
What is new about AI is precisely that it lets computers begin to usurp the decision-making role. If the only thing the AI did was collate information and present it to a human, nobody would be worried about it.
that's my pint about "where to look." You have given it data, it uses it to make a recommendation, which you can then use to dig deeper into teh solution to determine if it works. Ideally, it would tell you what logic it used to draw the conclusion so you can verify its correctness. One of the problems with using AI for say, stock analysis, is if enough people use the same logic it could become a self fulfilling prophecy as everyone buys or sell X at the same time, driving the price in the predicted direction; then the race becomes to see who can get the answer the fastest..
Problem with using AI in these scenarios is that it's really good at finding correlations in what you tell it to look at. So maybe it finds correlations between interconnected stock prices, or maybe futures and trading volumes, or the consumer price index and stock prices of certain retail stocks, things like that.
When everyone has AI's doing this, the margins get eaten up pretty quick, since everyone is getting the same results and takes the same positions.
The areas you make money on are finding the niche correlations. A nationalistic dictator takes over some African country and shuts down rare mineral exports causing a spike in prices. A geothermal plant in Iceland goes down, shutting down it's aluminum smelters and aluminum prices rise. Those are the things AI sucks at.
Which is why I think AI will be good at identifying where to look, but needs a human to decide what it is really revealing and what else may be useful.
DirectTVNow has teased a cloud DVR is coming but has not yet made it available beyond a limited beta test. I suspect they want to unify their DirectTV, DirectTVNow and Uverse into a single offering; right now the lack of a DVR makes DTVNow less than compelling for me. The 4 day look back doesn't correspond to my viewing habits but add a DVR, especially a cloud one that allows viewing anywhere, and DTVNow becomes interesting; especially if the combine the Uverse channel list with DTV's resulting in a border choice of channels.
Good luck delivering massive quantities of 4K TV over metered, data-limited lines that most of us are getting now.
Implying this is a bug...
If they follow their Uverse model there will be no data cap if you get internet plus DirectTV from them; or it will be high enough that 99% of the users will never hit it. That seems to be the new model, at least where I am. Even Xfinity has a 1TB cap which pretty much covers a lot of streaming, for current video. As for 4K, I would be not surprised if tehy "optimize" the data stream to reduce its size while not"impacting" the picture quality; since most of their subscribers won't notice the difference or even have equipment capable of a 4K picture.
Proving once again, as many cops say, most crooks are stupid.
Cops are stupid too, the difference is they get be wrong as many times as they like, whereas the crooks only have to get it wrong once and they are taken out of circulation. So the game is biased in favour of the cops, it has nothing to do with smarts.
In my experience, most cops aren't that stupid, especially compared to crocks; although I agree tehy have an advantage as they only have to be right once whereas a crook can't make a mistake.
Spot on. If your system relies on a single point of failure for critical functions you have a serious problem; "Human Error" is a convent excuse to avoid finding and firing the real problem.
Electric cars were the norm until the internal combustion engine became a practical power source. As with today's EVs, the ICE's greater range made it more popular.
Tesla may one day be as big as ford is today, but their upside isn't much bigger than ford is today, and their downside is bankruptcy.
I think they'll survive long enough to learn how to design a car that the driver can safely interact with the comfortably (or that auto pilot is standard), and I think they'll figure out how to efficiently build cars, but it's a while off. I'm not sure they'll ever compete at the low to mid end. It'll likely be too late for those markets by the time they get the time they get the kinks worked out.
You hit on a couple of key points:
1. The major automakers are all planning big pushes into electric vehicles, which will give Tesla a lot of competition in all categories. Once that happens,Tesla will have to decide if they are a major player or a niche high end brand.
2. Tesla's technology is probably more valuable than car manufacturing. Software is critical to the innovations we see in areas such as self driving cars, battery management, etc. I could see a car company buying Tesla for the tech alone. For that to happen,however, Tesla will need to be ahead if the curve, which will be tough to do as others invest significant sums in development.
Of course, if Tesla runs out of juice and heads towards bankruptcy some company could pick up the tech on the cheap.
One thing you need to know about analyst is the new ones tend to make outlandish claims. While you might think that is due to inexperience there is a very rational reason for doing just that. If you get it right all of a sudden you are a genius for seeing what others didn't and have made a name for yourself. At that point, most analyst don't stray far from the pack because if they spectacularly wrong they'll lose their cache; whereas being wrong for the new ones are written off as rookie mistakes.
"Nietzsche is about as far from SJW as you can get." Well most people interested in their purported virtue in racism haven't read Nietzsche very carefully either.
It is also the first time Apple has released its new phones with the premium model being delayed a few months, I know if I intend to upgrade there is little reason to get the 8 over the X.
It will be interesting to see what the numbers are once the X comes out. I would guess a number of iPhone users who view it as fashion statement will wait for the X simply because, well it is the X. Some will actually find the new features compelling and useful and will wait for it. Are there enough of those to overcome slow sales of the 8? Will be interesting to see. Personally, I see no compelling reason to upgrade from a 7 to an 8; and an X isn't worth $1000 to me.
So now the legal standard is, "as long as no one ever got hurt, it's fine?" What if I build a cheap, shoddy bridge using unsafe practises? So long as it doesn't fall apart before the lawsuit, I'm not at fault? What a shitty country this is. I hope this gets appealed and overruled.
You bring up an interesting point. If you build a bridge using unsafe practices you would violate close and be subject to enforcement actions. Absent a law definingbminimum standards for routers then building one with poor security doesn't open you up to lawsuits until someone can prove actual damages. That's been part of the law for a long time, hypothetical future harms are not reason enough to be able to sue. To build on your bridge example, if you paint the entrance to look wider then it is someone can't sue you simply because they may hit a post if the drive over it. An interesting question is if you know dLink makes poor products but continue to use them how much liability do you assume when a breach does occur?
...not as I do. Horrible! As someone who ran a presentation to Intel execs back in 2003 using OO running under Linux on an Itanium, I call Bullshit(TM) on anyone who says "Oh - nothing else measures up to Powerpoint!".
True. There are many options for making boring presentations full of useless eye candy...
'They were not in real careers,' said Tri Nguyen, Network Capital chief executive.
That's a pretty disgusting attitude from Mr. Nguyen. I won't be doing business with Network Capital.
There are a lot of people in that situation that are looking for a career. When the job market tanked a while back, college graduates wound up in jobs that were not careers but at least paid the bills. Now that the market is stronger those people will be looking to move to better jobs that offer career advancement. Companies at the low end that had it easy hiring when the job market sucked will now face challenge getting the same caliber employee at the same price. I saw that first hand when a company a friend worked at starting losing staff that had degrees as they bailing for better jobs as the job market improved. They took the job because it was all that was available and viewed their job simply as a way to stay afloat until things got better; a smart move.
It wouldn't take that many Republicans to put a DACA bill through, given D cooperation (which I think would be forthcoming). The only problem would be if Trump vetoed it, and he's sufficiently unpredictable so I don't know what would happen.
While I agree Trump's unpredictable I also doubt he would veto as no matter what Congress does he will say he won and move on. Vetoing a bill would me he had to take a stand and it becomes his doing and he'd rather blame Congress whatever happens. I mean, he just got crammed down by the D's on the raising the debt ceiling limit; of course he is calling it a great deal he worked out.
and they'll get slaughtered in their primaries if they come to DACA's defense. It's the same problem they had with Obamacare but worse since in that case they could at least try to repeal it.
He's put Congress in a bind - DACA may be unpopular with Trump's base but is more broadly popular so if they let it die they may survive a primary but in some districts it may be an issue in the primary. If they pass legislation saving DACA they may get killed in a primary. Either way Trump wins - he gets to say to his base he kept his promise to kill DACA and killed it or Congress saved it despite his trying to kill it.
Slashdot Mirror
It's the opposite. *You* tell the computer what to look at (by feeding it data) and then it calculates an answer (=makes a decision) based on what you feed it. Just like any computer ever. AI is not magic. What is new about AI is precisely that it lets computers begin to usurp the decision-making role. If the only thing the AI did was collate information and present it to a human, nobody would be worried about it.
that's my pint about "where to look." You have given it data, it uses it to make a recommendation, which you can then use to dig deeper into teh solution to determine if it works. Ideally, it would tell you what logic it used to draw the conclusion so you can verify its correctness. One of the problems with using AI for say, stock analysis, is if enough people use the same logic it could become a self fulfilling prophecy as everyone buys or sell X at the same time, driving the price in the predicted direction; then the race becomes to see who can get the answer the fastest..
Problem with using AI in these scenarios is that it's really good at finding correlations in what you tell it to look at. So maybe it finds correlations between interconnected stock prices, or maybe futures and trading volumes, or the consumer price index and stock prices of certain retail stocks, things like that.
When everyone has AI's doing this, the margins get eaten up pretty quick, since everyone is getting the same results and takes the same positions.
The areas you make money on are finding the niche correlations. A nationalistic dictator takes over some African country and shuts down rare mineral exports causing a spike in prices. A geothermal plant in Iceland goes down, shutting down it's aluminum smelters and aluminum prices rise. Those are the things AI sucks at.
Which is why I think AI will be good at identifying where to look, but needs a human to decide what it is really revealing and what else may be useful.
DirectTVNow has teased a cloud DVR is coming but has not yet made it available beyond a limited beta test. I suspect they want to unify their DirectTV, DirectTVNow and Uverse into a single offering; right now the lack of a DVR makes DTVNow less than compelling for me. The 4 day look back doesn't correspond to my viewing habits but add a DVR, especially a cloud one that allows viewing anywhere, and DTVNow becomes interesting; especially if the combine the Uverse channel list with DTV's resulting in a border choice of channels.
Good luck delivering massive quantities of 4K TV over metered, data-limited lines that most of us are getting now.
Implying this is a bug...
If they follow their Uverse model there will be no data cap if you get internet plus DirectTV from them; or it will be high enough that 99% of the users will never hit it. That seems to be the new model, at least where I am. Even Xfinity has a 1TB cap which pretty much covers a lot of streaming, for current video. As for 4K, I would be not surprised if tehy "optimize" the data stream to reduce its size while not"impacting" the picture quality; since most of their subscribers won't notice the difference or even have equipment capable of a 4K picture.
It was done to cut cost. One transporter set eliminated the need to fly down every time and disembark.
I can imagine that conversation....
"So, you're a field researcher? What do you study?"
"Great tits!"
"Ah, you're an ornithologist?"
"No, I study birds in the UK..."
Proving once again, as many cops say, most crooks are stupid.
Cops are stupid too, the difference is they get be wrong as many times as they like, whereas the crooks only have to get it wrong once and they are taken out of circulation. So the game is biased in favour of the cops, it has nothing to do with smarts.
In my experience, most cops aren't that stupid, especially compared to crocks; although I agree tehy have an advantage as they only have to be right once whereas a crook can't make a mistake.
Vallerius flew to the U.S. for a beard-growing competition in Austin, Texas
Proving once again, as many cops say, most crooks are stupid.
Obviously a Libertarian, motorcycle gang member, or ham radio operator.
or a Linux sysadmin...
Spot on. If your system relies on a single point of failure for critical functions you have a serious problem; "Human Error" is a convent excuse to avoid finding and firing the real problem.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_car
Tesla may one day be as big as ford is today, but their upside isn't much bigger than ford is today, and their downside is bankruptcy.
I think they'll survive long enough to learn how to design a car that the driver can safely interact with the comfortably (or that auto pilot is standard), and I think they'll figure out how to efficiently build cars, but it's a while off. I'm not sure they'll ever compete at the low to mid end. It'll likely be too late for those markets by the time they get the time they get the kinks worked out.
You hit on a couple of key points:
1. The major automakers are all planning big pushes into electric vehicles, which will give Tesla a lot of competition in all categories. Once that happens,Tesla will have to decide if they are a major player or a niche high end brand.
2. Tesla's technology is probably more valuable than car manufacturing. Software is critical to the innovations we see in areas such as self driving cars, battery management, etc. I could see a car company buying Tesla for the tech alone. For that to happen,however, Tesla will need to be ahead if the curve, which will be tough to do as others invest significant sums in development.
Of course, if Tesla runs out of juice and heads towards bankruptcy some company could pick up the tech on the cheap.
One thing you need to know about analyst is the new ones tend to make outlandish claims. While you might think that is due to inexperience there is a very rational reason for doing just that. If you get it right all of a sudden you are a genius for seeing what others didn't and have made a name for yourself. At that point, most analyst don't stray far from the pack because if they spectacularly wrong they'll lose their cache; whereas being wrong for the new ones are written off as rookie mistakes.
Goodbye NBC, we hardly watched you...
"Nietzsche is about as far from SJW as you can get." Well most people interested in their purported virtue in racism haven't read Nietzsche very carefully either.
I TL;DR it by just listening to the tone poem...
Then why are you commenting?
Why are you asking?
It is also the first time Apple has released its new phones with the premium model being delayed a few months, I know if I intend to upgrade there is little reason to get the 8 over the X.
It will be interesting to see what the numbers are once the X comes out. I would guess a number of iPhone users who view it as fashion statement will wait for the X simply because, well it is the X. Some will actually find the new features compelling and useful and will wait for it. Are there enough of those to overcome slow sales of the 8? Will be interesting to see. Personally, I see no compelling reason to upgrade from a 7 to an 8; and an X isn't worth $1000 to me.
So now the legal standard is, "as long as no one ever got hurt, it's fine?" What if I build a cheap, shoddy bridge using unsafe practises? So long as it doesn't fall apart before the lawsuit, I'm not at fault? What a shitty country this is. I hope this gets appealed and overruled.
You bring up an interesting point. If you build a bridge using unsafe practices you would violate close and be subject to enforcement actions. Absent a law definingbminimum standards for routers then building one with poor security doesn't open you up to lawsuits until someone can prove actual damages. That's been part of the law for a long time, hypothetical future harms are not reason enough to be able to sue. To build on your bridge example, if you paint the entrance to look wider then it is someone can't sue you simply because they may hit a post if the drive over it. An interesting question is if you know dLink makes poor products but continue to use them how much liability do you assume when a breach does occur?
...not as I do. Horrible! As someone who ran a presentation to Intel execs back in 2003 using OO running under Linux on an Itanium, I call Bullshit(TM) on anyone who says "Oh - nothing else measures up to Powerpoint!".
True. There are many options for making boring presentations full of useless eye candy...
'They were not in real careers,' said Tri Nguyen, Network Capital chief executive. That's a pretty disgusting attitude from Mr. Nguyen. I won't be doing business with Network Capital.
There are a lot of people in that situation that are looking for a career. When the job market tanked a while back, college graduates wound up in jobs that were not careers but at least paid the bills. Now that the market is stronger those people will be looking to move to better jobs that offer career advancement. Companies at the low end that had it easy hiring when the job market sucked will now face challenge getting the same caliber employee at the same price. I saw that first hand when a company a friend worked at starting losing staff that had degrees as they bailing for better jobs as the job market improved. They took the job because it was all that was available and viewed their job simply as a way to stay afloat until things got better; a smart move.
Piracy, not privacy.
Canada to be aimed at him. The Kodi folks ought to just redirect any to him as a favor.
It wouldn't take that many Republicans to put a DACA bill through, given D cooperation (which I think would be forthcoming). The only problem would be if Trump vetoed it, and he's sufficiently unpredictable so I don't know what would happen.
While I agree Trump's unpredictable I also doubt he would veto as no matter what Congress does he will say he won and move on. Vetoing a bill would me he had to take a stand and it becomes his doing and he'd rather blame Congress whatever happens. I mean, he just got crammed down by the D's on the raising the debt ceiling limit; of course he is calling it a great deal he worked out.
and they'll get slaughtered in their primaries if they come to DACA's defense. It's the same problem they had with Obamacare but worse since in that case they could at least try to repeal it.
He's put Congress in a bind - DACA may be unpopular with Trump's base but is more broadly popular so if they let it die they may survive a primary but in some districts it may be an issue in the primary. If they pass legislation saving DACA they may get killed in a primary. Either way Trump wins - he gets to say to his base he kept his promise to kill DACA and killed it or Congress saved it despite his trying to kill it.
My proposed category #3 is missing from that list.
Yes, because you can't have uncontrolled generation; load dispatchers need to be able to properly balance land to keep the grid working.