So basically there'll be a new version that supports only a different sort of browser add-on using a different API, and not that it won't suport ANY add-ons? Wha'ts the big deal? I'll just keep using what I have until such a time that the new-and-shiny version that supports add-ons using the new API has all the add-ons that I want, then I'll worry about switching over. Why is this even a big deal? What am I missing, that someone else is getting all anxious over it?
Even a dog or a cat can think, even if it's on the level of about a 2-year old human, and that's still better than the so-called 'AI' they keep trotting out.
We're trending towards so-called 'AI' being put in charge of critical things, some of which involve human safety, the most notable of which are so-called 'self driving cars'. The garbage they're trying to pass off as real 'AI' doesn't know the difference between a human being and any other inanimate object; that's because it cannot actually THINK.
Microprocessor manufacturers find ways to game the system when it comes to benchmark tests on their products, and it's entirely likely Comcast and T-Mobile are doing the same.
Since you bring it up.. at current we can't even build a machine that emulates the cognitive abilities of a cat's brain, either; they don't even really know how an animals brain works yet.
I did not say, "as smart as a human", that is something YOU are superimposing on what I did say, which is being able to 'think' like a human brain can.
Also your cat or dog is, in fact, smarter than the junk they're trying to pass off as 'AI'.
1. Isn't it true that this sort of thing isn't exactly new? That we could do it to any number of countries, too, if we wanted to, right now?
2. If this is actually more than just FUD, then why isn't, for instance Cal ISO issuing a press release about it? I'd think they'd know before anyone else would.
The waters are so muddied by marketing hype, media hype, and hype from so many other sources, that it's easier to explain what is not 'AI': Nothing that you've seen or heard about is 'artificial intelligence'. It's all ersatz. At the rate we're going we won't have real 'AI' anytime soon, probably not in our lifetimes -- not unless neuroscience makes a big breakthrough in how our own human minds are able to actually 'think' and be 'conscious' and 'self aware' like we are; in other words we have to solve the riddle of "I think, therefore I am" before we can create machines that can do the same thing.
Marketing hype, media hype, yes. Note that it's just as bad if not worse for so-called 'self driving/autonomous cars'. Media hypes it up, TV and movies present you with science-fiction versions that aren't anywhere NEAR existing in the real world, and people think it's all real. IT IS NOT.
With a population of 1.3 million, it is one of the least-populous member states of the European Union, Eurozone, North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), OECD and Schengen Area.
Why should the rest of the EU even listen to them? 'President of the EU' or not? Also, good luck censoring the rest of the non-EU world.
In this particular case, that's the problem: The machine is incapable of 'thinking'. It's not 'conscious'. There is no 'personality'. You can't talk to it. It can't relate to you in any way whatsoever. It's all just 'information'. There are no machines that actually 'think'. We won't have those for a long, long time to come -- if at all, ever.
“Has there ever been a randomized trial of parachutes for paratroopers?”
Without even looking, I'd say "yes, there was" -- just not with live human beings, probably human-shaped dummies that weighed the same as their human counterparts. Idiot doesn't know how rigorously the military expects it's contractors to test and prove things before accepting them.
Also: Does anyone actually believe that they don't collect all that information anyway? They just want people to make it easier for them to do so. At least, until things get so bad that they force people to be monitored like this is China.
She teaches them to post daily on the class Twitter and Instagram accounts she set up.
Let me translate that for you:
She indoctrinates them to provide free personalized information to marketers, corporations, and governments, and brainwashes them into believing that 'sharing' (i.e. not preserving your very much human RIGHT to privacy) is 'normal' and 'natural' and that 'hiding things' (i.e. 'exercising your right to privacy') is WRONG and BAD.
These kids will grow up, even more so than Millennials, to believe that anyone who doesn't have so-called 'social media' accounts, and doesn't share everything about their day-to-day lives with the entire WORLD, must either be suffering from a mental illness, or is some sort of criminal.
Wonder how far they'll get before Microsoft sics their team of lawyers on them claiming infringement of some sort, sueing them into oblivion, then scooping up the whole project, copyrighting it, and preventing anyone from using it, ever?
Slashdot Mirror
Guess I'll have to turn off the automatic updates, then.
Truth hurts, doesn't it? Get your act together, America.
So basically there'll be a new version that supports only a different sort of browser add-on using a different API, and not that it won't suport ANY add-ons? Wha'ts the big deal? I'll just keep using what I have until such a time that the new-and-shiny version that supports add-ons using the new API has all the add-ons that I want, then I'll worry about switching over. Why is this even a big deal? What am I missing, that someone else is getting all anxious over it?
Even a dog or a cat can think, even if it's on the level of about a 2-year old human, and that's still better than the so-called 'AI' they keep trotting out.
We're trending towards so-called 'AI' being put in charge of critical things, some of which involve human safety, the most notable of which are so-called 'self driving cars'. The garbage they're trying to pass off as real 'AI' doesn't know the difference between a human being and any other inanimate object; that's because it cannot actually THINK.
The real question here is: if Philo T. Farnsworth were alive today to see what's become of television, would he be happy or sad?
Microprocessor manufacturers find ways to game the system when it comes to benchmark tests on their products, and it's entirely likely Comcast and T-Mobile are doing the same.
Since you bring it up.. at current we can't even build a machine that emulates the cognitive abilities of a cat's brain, either; they don't even really know how an animals brain works yet.
I did not say, "as smart as a human", that is something YOU are superimposing on what I did say, which is being able to 'think' like a human brain can.
Also your cat or dog is, in fact, smarter than the junk they're trying to pass off as 'AI'.
*Nodding* yeah, you're right; 'troll accounts'.
1. Isn't it true that this sort of thing isn't exactly new? That we could do it to any number of countries, too, if we wanted to, right now?
2. If this is actually more than just FUD, then why isn't, for instance Cal ISO issuing a press release about it? I'd think they'd know before anyone else would.
The waters are so muddied by marketing hype, media hype, and hype from so many other sources, that it's easier to explain what is not 'AI': Nothing that you've seen or heard about is 'artificial intelligence'. It's all ersatz. At the rate we're going we won't have real 'AI' anytime soon, probably not in our lifetimes -- not unless neuroscience makes a big breakthrough in how our own human minds are able to actually 'think' and be 'conscious' and 'self aware' like we are; in other words we have to solve the riddle of "I think, therefore I am" before we can create machines that can do the same thing.
Marketing hype, media hype, yes. Note that it's just as bad if not worse for so-called 'self driving/autonomous cars'. Media hypes it up, TV and movies present you with science-fiction versions that aren't anywhere NEAR existing in the real world, and people think it's all real. IT IS NOT.
With a population of 1.3 million, it is one of the least-populous member states of the European Union, Eurozone, North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), OECD and Schengen Area.
Why should the rest of the EU even listen to them? 'President of the EU' or not? Also, good luck censoring the rest of the non-EU world.
Politicians, when will they learn?
In this particular case, that's the problem: The machine is incapable of 'thinking'. It's not 'conscious'. There is no 'personality'. You can't talk to it. It can't relate to you in any way whatsoever. It's all just 'information'. There are no machines that actually 'think'. We won't have those for a long, long time to come -- if at all, ever.
“Has there ever been a randomized trial of parachutes for paratroopers?”
Without even looking, I'd say "yes, there was" -- just not with live human beings, probably human-shaped dummies that weighed the same as their human counterparts. Idiot doesn't know how rigorously the military expects it's contractors to test and prove things before accepting them.
You, Sir, are one of the few people I've ever encountered on the Internet who sounds like they actually understand this subject.
Believing media hype, spreading FUD
Fireman rescues kitten, film at 11
You can't sensationalize a headline like that. It fades into the background noise.
Fireman indicted in string of arson fires causing $100,000,000 in damages, film at 11
That gets peoples attention. This is why people need to learn to IGNORE MEDIA HYPE.
You know, I may not like you very much overall, but at least you're honest, and I can respect that.
..for ownership of the island of Manhattan.
Also: Does anyone actually believe that they don't collect all that information anyway? They just want people to make it easier for them to do so. At least, until things get so bad that they force people to be monitored like this is China.
Why would you even do that? Not smart.
She teaches them to post daily on the class Twitter and Instagram accounts she set up.
Let me translate that for you:
She indoctrinates them to provide free personalized information to marketers, corporations, and governments, and brainwashes them into believing that 'sharing' (i.e. not preserving your very much human RIGHT to privacy) is 'normal' and 'natural' and that 'hiding things' (i.e. 'exercising your right to privacy') is WRONG and BAD.
These kids will grow up, even more so than Millennials, to believe that anyone who doesn't have so-called 'social media' accounts, and doesn't share everything about their day-to-day lives with the entire WORLD, must either be suffering from a mental illness, or is some sort of criminal.
Wonder how far they'll get before Microsoft sics their team of lawyers on them claiming infringement of some sort, sueing them into oblivion, then scooping up the whole project, copyrighting it, and preventing anyone from using it, ever?
Also I'm sure they'll look for any vulnerabilities they can exploit for cyberhacking and cybercrime.