Musk doesn't like Zuck, and Zuck returns the favor. Not surprised Musk taking opportunity to dog-pile on the kid when he's down (his version of 'down' anyways).
I've noticed the cattiness between these two for a couple years. They've been chippy in public regarding diverging views on AI. And probably didn't help that SpaceX blew up Facebook's pet-project satellite - which I thought was totally worth the firework but Faceboy not so thrilled about it if I remember correctly.
Also no. There is no simple solution besides changing our behavior to mitigate man made climate change. Are you trying to pretend that all we need is the right idea and we can keep behaving as we have been?
Tabletop multi-kilowatt proton-boron aneutronic fusion reactor running ~90% conversion would be kind of a silver bullet.
The word 'volcano' doesn't appear in the science paper; researchers discovered something close to a hundred volcanoes under Antarctic ice last year. Nobody has any idea how active they are.
You know, I get the carbon-doom cult focus; its pretty much only game in town with money or attention when it comes to climate-study of any kind (no deep-AI sims or summits on the nitrogen cycle it seems - which is ~80% of atmosphere but whatever).
But to not even mention 'volcano' is kind of behind the cutting edge in awareness of Antarctica, especially its thermal budget regarding ice at this point. At least a paragraph or something, jeesh.
I recall Harvard guys doing data encoding with DNA a few years ago. Same cost/benefit in their technique (don't recall exact specifics beyond the four bases = quaternary number system in their encoding scheme): The information density is vast, but I/O slooow.
Their application ideas were interesting though; like tiny cameras with memory integrated into wall paint - it would archive history of the room. All kinds of stuff one would think of needing tape backup circa 1995 these guys were pretty sure could be future niche for DNA memory. Interesting observation was how tough DNA is; million year old examples abound throughout wide variety of earth environments.
Don't think there's too much merit to this given the "he said/she said" angles to it, and damages being conjecture estimate by plaintiff.
However, the general theme of lawsuits is Tesla's most significant material risk I think - at least in USA.
Tesla does the whole start-up 'move fast break things' ethos; that works for social media platforms or a game. But if a bad defect makes it out into fleet of cars on rolling firmware update...that's an instant class-action in car world; and that's assuming nobody actually gets hurt by the defect, merely inconvenienced. That's not 'the site going down,' that's 'the company going down' kinda problem.
One can tell Jony Ive has nobody that can say 'no' anymore. I think that is reflected in unfortunate old Apple derp-proprietary habits (forcing people from ports they like because 0.1mm thinner, ditching genuinely useful stuff like MagSafe because 0.1mm thinner, ditching Home button because screen access but throw notch on top compromising screen access, etc.) coming back so strong these days.
But margins so high on iPhoneX they make tons-o'-money off the Apple suckerati. Newsflash: Iphone X is an iPhone 8 with different screen and different I/O endpoint on the secure enclave. That's about it. Personally, I'm hoping for iPhone SE refresh so I can get classic chassis with OLED display, nicest silicon, and more memory. If big phone only option, primo Galaxies are a better chassis at this point.
With all that said though, since FaceID is basically a multi-sampling percision LIDAR there's probably some killer apps for the gadget nobody realizes yet (beyond just measuring a face) and won't realize until Apple exposes API for it and peeps get to tinker around. Does anyone know if devs can access that module yet? And if so can they use it outside the secure enclave?
Congressional sources told Reuters the hearing will largely be a fact-finding exercise focusing on the powers of the SEC and CFTC to oversee cryptocurrency exchanges, how the watchdogs can protect investors from volatility and fraud, and the risks posed by cyber criminals intent on stealing digital tokens.
Translation: "We need to figure out how cryptos can't be a real choice vis-a-vis fiat money, because our pals in the 'financial system' need to keep control of your money and skim constantly off your money and have taxpayers pick up their horrible bets with our money. And if you a choice with money that might be a problem so we'll 'fix' that real fast."
Remember it will all be done for our 'safety' etc.
Solar harvesting (wind, solar cells) and battery cars are true goals for the Warmers. CO2 is the reason we HAVE to do this.
That's why solutions to the CO2 gods that don't involve such goals are "scientifically" calibrated out of the Narrative. That's why natural gas has gone from being "clean energy future" when I was a kid into "methane greenhouse doom" once it became widely available.
This is also why Germany, after sinking all that money into solar cells and windmills - and remember this is land of rising carbon footprints, shiny new lignite coal plants, and diesel scandals - is so "progressive" fighting "climate change" in the same Narrative. Not because of any actual impact on CO2 levels, but because Germany spends tons of public money on windmills and solar cells.
Maybe the X is pretty cool with face recognition; but there is nothing new iPhones do that's actually different than old ones.
I mean at this point sure Apple reinvents the wheel (recognizes face for security, instead of finger for security); but the cool fundamental innovation - biosignature on secure enclave via discreet cryptoprocessor - is old hat. Kinda like how Microsoft pointlessly reinvents the control panel every iteration of Windows.
iPhone 5s with 9.x is once again my phone; the 7 Plus from last year is now Netflix terminal for my kid.
If internet is 'net neutral' and 'regulated like a utility' guess where that leads? It leads to getting billed for how much you use like any other utility.
Current ISP model in USA is Grandma pays $100 a month for high-speed cable and uses it for a couple hours of eBay and some Facebookery every week. Meanwhile, next door, Billy Hacker is paying $100 a month too - and he's running a torrent server, a couple crypto miners, and his sad sex life at 4K high quality 24/7.
Who do you think is subsidizing the internet for whom in that scenario? If internet actually is regulated/billed like a utility Grandma is soon getting a deal and Billy Hacker's sex life is going to get a lot worse. Oh, and Grandma thinks its a good idea to regulate the internet to get all the smut off...and she votes a lot more than Billy Hacker.
Careful what you wish for net neutrality peeps. You just might get it.
It is popular to refer to way China does things all centralized as a better way these days, at least by those with a psychological tendency towards centralization, and ultimately the state, as the driving force in society that can Fix Things. Thomas Friedman, a very influential columnist at NY Times, comes to mind as CCCP fanboy that way.
Worth noting this same kind of clique were all agog over Japan's industrial might in the 80's, and were fixated on MITI's heavy hand as the reason the Japanese were so much 'better' at pick-the-subject-at-hand than silly USA stumbling along without Guidance from the sovereign. Same shtick, different country and decade.
...AI's will be helping write new programming languages, ones that increasingly remove human heuristics, to the eventual point the code itself is inscrutable to human eyes entirely. Then, the Digital Permian Event begins!
If one wants to learn programming and doesn't speak English, learning some English would actually go a long ways to learning programming given every language that matters was written in English. An if statement is inscrutable to most to be sure, but its that much more inscrutable to someone who doesn't know what 'if' means when they see it in the source.
The Wikipedia article for the electroweak force consists of a two-paragraph introduction that basically just says what I said above plus some fairly intimidating technical context. The rest of the article is almost entirely gnarly math equations.
What is a good description of electroweak force that avoids 'intimidating technical context and gnarly math equations?' Also note in his equation-less and techno-less 'description' of electroweak force there's no description of what the force is, what it does, or what bosons move it around per the Standard Model.
Best place for an AI decision-engine computer would be in the public sector. Indifference to profit motive, complete objectivity, no biases or '-isms,' scrupulous with funds to the penny, can't be bought, sexual temptation means nothing, it can soak up data from dozens of intelligence networks, sensors, and organizations in real time to make decisions economic, military, etc.
The bureaucracy shouldn't be human, it should be an API that humans control.
Of course if Jack Ma seriously suggested such a thing in CCCP-land, so close to the party Congress, it would be Joy Through Labor in the Gobi desert for him. Which kind of proves my point.
Can't they just call their counterparts at NSA and get whatever they want? Why all the paperwork and redundant court-theater to get what they already have?
Reminds me of app idea I once had that would basically be crowd-sourced stalker. Just take pic of someone on street and upload to StalkerCloud, and StalkerCloud spits out all the possible matches with date and geo stamps.
Autonomous driving has to prove it can deal with more than driving, it also has to be relatively capable of dealing with human beings trying to fool it into doing something else - hacking of a sort. If someone can stand on bridge over the 10 during rush hour, then wave the right poster to trip the right zero-day, that would be a spectacular terrorist attack.
Slashdot Mirror
Musk doesn't like Zuck, and Zuck returns the favor. Not surprised Musk taking opportunity to dog-pile on the kid when he's down (his version of 'down' anyways).
I've noticed the cattiness between these two for a couple years. They've been chippy in public regarding diverging views on AI. And probably didn't help that SpaceX blew up Facebook's pet-project satellite - which I thought was totally worth the firework but Faceboy not so thrilled about it if I remember correctly.
What kinda analytics from the smart toilet paper Amazon'll be selling soon (after they buy a smart TP startup named Wipe for $eleventy billion)?
Ewwww
Also no. There is no simple solution besides changing our behavior to mitigate man made climate change. Are you trying to pretend that all we need is the right idea and we can keep behaving as we have been?
Tabletop multi-kilowatt proton-boron aneutronic fusion reactor running ~90% conversion would be kind of a silver bullet.
Just say'in.
The word 'volcano' doesn't appear in the science paper; researchers discovered something close to a hundred volcanoes under Antarctic ice last year. Nobody has any idea how active they are.
You know, I get the carbon-doom cult focus; its pretty much only game in town with money or attention when it comes to climate-study of any kind (no deep-AI sims or summits on the nitrogen cycle it seems - which is ~80% of atmosphere but whatever).
But to not even mention 'volcano' is kind of behind the cutting edge in awareness of Antarctica, especially its thermal budget regarding ice at this point. At least a paragraph or something, jeesh.
I recall Harvard guys doing data encoding with DNA a few years ago. Same cost/benefit in their technique (don't recall exact specifics beyond the four bases = quaternary number system in their encoding scheme): The information density is vast, but I/O slooow.
Their application ideas were interesting though; like tiny cameras with memory integrated into wall paint - it would archive history of the room. All kinds of stuff one would think of needing tape backup circa 1995 these guys were pretty sure could be future niche for DNA memory. Interesting observation was how tough DNA is; million year old examples abound throughout wide variety of earth environments.
However, the general theme of lawsuits is Tesla's most significant material risk I think - at least in USA.
Tesla does the whole start-up 'move fast break things' ethos; that works for social media platforms or a game. But if a bad defect makes it out into fleet of cars on rolling firmware update...that's an instant class-action in car world; and that's assuming nobody actually gets hurt by the defect, merely inconvenienced. That's not 'the site going down,' that's 'the company going down' kinda problem.
One can tell Jony Ive has nobody that can say 'no' anymore. I think that is reflected in unfortunate old Apple derp-proprietary habits (forcing people from ports they like because 0.1mm thinner, ditching genuinely useful stuff like MagSafe because 0.1mm thinner, ditching Home button because screen access but throw notch on top compromising screen access, etc.) coming back so strong these days.
But margins so high on iPhoneX they make tons-o'-money off the Apple suckerati. Newsflash: Iphone X is an iPhone 8 with different screen and different I/O endpoint on the secure enclave. That's about it. Personally, I'm hoping for iPhone SE refresh so I can get classic chassis with OLED display, nicest silicon, and more memory. If big phone only option, primo Galaxies are a better chassis at this point.
With all that said though, since FaceID is basically a multi-sampling percision LIDAR there's probably some killer apps for the gadget nobody realizes yet (beyond just measuring a face) and won't realize until Apple exposes API for it and peeps get to tinker around. Does anyone know if devs can access that module yet? And if so can they use it outside the secure enclave?
Congressional sources told Reuters the hearing will largely be a fact-finding exercise focusing on the powers of the SEC and CFTC to oversee cryptocurrency exchanges, how the watchdogs can protect investors from volatility and fraud, and the risks posed by cyber criminals intent on stealing digital tokens.
Translation: "We need to figure out how cryptos can't be a real choice vis-a-vis fiat money, because our pals in the 'financial system' need to keep control of your money and skim constantly off your money and have taxpayers pick up their horrible bets with our money. And if you a choice with money that might be a problem so we'll 'fix' that real fast."
Remember it will all be done for our 'safety' etc.
Solar harvesting (wind, solar cells) and battery cars are true goals for the Warmers. CO2 is the reason we HAVE to do this.
That's why solutions to the CO2 gods that don't involve such goals are "scientifically" calibrated out of the Narrative. That's why natural gas has gone from being "clean energy future" when I was a kid into "methane greenhouse doom" once it became widely available.
This is also why Germany, after sinking all that money into solar cells and windmills - and remember this is land of rising carbon footprints, shiny new lignite coal plants, and diesel scandals - is so "progressive" fighting "climate change" in the same Narrative. Not because of any actual impact on CO2 levels, but because Germany spends tons of public money on windmills and solar cells.
Maybe the X is pretty cool with face recognition; but there is nothing new iPhones do that's actually different than old ones. I mean at this point sure Apple reinvents the wheel (recognizes face for security, instead of finger for security); but the cool fundamental innovation - biosignature on secure enclave via discreet cryptoprocessor - is old hat. Kinda like how Microsoft pointlessly reinvents the control panel every iteration of Windows. iPhone 5s with 9.x is once again my phone; the 7 Plus from last year is now Netflix terminal for my kid.
If internet is 'net neutral' and 'regulated like a utility' guess where that leads? It leads to getting billed for how much you use like any other utility. Current ISP model in USA is Grandma pays $100 a month for high-speed cable and uses it for a couple hours of eBay and some Facebookery every week. Meanwhile, next door, Billy Hacker is paying $100 a month too - and he's running a torrent server, a couple crypto miners, and his sad sex life at 4K high quality 24/7. Who do you think is subsidizing the internet for whom in that scenario? If internet actually is regulated/billed like a utility Grandma is soon getting a deal and Billy Hacker's sex life is going to get a lot worse. Oh, and Grandma thinks its a good idea to regulate the internet to get all the smut off...and she votes a lot more than Billy Hacker. Careful what you wish for net neutrality peeps. You just might get it.
It is popular to refer to way China does things all centralized as a better way these days, at least by those with a psychological tendency towards centralization, and ultimately the state, as the driving force in society that can Fix Things. Thomas Friedman, a very influential columnist at NY Times, comes to mind as CCCP fanboy that way.
Worth noting this same kind of clique were all agog over Japan's industrial might in the 80's, and were fixated on MITI's heavy hand as the reason the Japanese were so much 'better' at pick-the-subject-at-hand than silly USA stumbling along without Guidance from the sovereign. Same shtick, different country and decade.
...ITS WORKING!!!
-Lo Pan
...AI's will be helping write new programming languages, ones that increasingly remove human heuristics, to the eventual point the code itself is inscrutable to human eyes entirely. Then, the Digital Permian Event begins!
If one wants to learn programming and doesn't speak English, learning some English would actually go a long ways to learning programming given every language that matters was written in English. An if statement is inscrutable to most to be sure, but its that much more inscrutable to someone who doesn't know what 'if' means when they see it in the source.
The Wikipedia article for the electroweak force consists of a two-paragraph introduction that basically just says what I said above plus some fairly intimidating technical context. The rest of the article is almost entirely gnarly math equations.
What is a good description of electroweak force that avoids 'intimidating technical context and gnarly math equations?' Also note in his equation-less and techno-less 'description' of electroweak force there's no description of what the force is, what it does, or what bosons move it around per the Standard Model.
Best place for an AI decision-engine computer would be in the public sector. Indifference to profit motive, complete objectivity, no biases or '-isms,' scrupulous with funds to the penny, can't be bought, sexual temptation means nothing, it can soak up data from dozens of intelligence networks, sensors, and organizations in real time to make decisions economic, military, etc. The bureaucracy shouldn't be human, it should be an API that humans control.
Of course if Jack Ma seriously suggested such a thing in CCCP-land, so close to the party Congress, it would be Joy Through Labor in the Gobi desert for him. Which kind of proves my point.
Can't they just call their counterparts at NSA and get whatever they want? Why all the paperwork and redundant court-theater to get what they already have?
Reminds me of app idea I once had that would basically be crowd-sourced stalker. Just take pic of someone on street and upload to StalkerCloud, and StalkerCloud spits out all the possible matches with date and geo stamps.
...having a sub-500 credit score can be a good thing.
Of course it does.
...drug lords, kid touchers, and terrorists laundered another couple billion in fiat currency today.
Just like any other day.
Fundamentally, work exists because work = food & shelter.
Machines work for free = cheaper food & shelter./p>
More and smarter machines = ever cheaper food & shelter.
Enough really smart machines = free food & shelter? Maybe. But so far that is the trend.
Autonomous driving has to prove it can deal with more than driving, it also has to be relatively capable of dealing with human beings trying to fool it into doing something else - hacking of a sort. If someone can stand on bridge over the 10 during rush hour, then wave the right poster to trip the right zero-day, that would be a spectacular terrorist attack.
Question: Hey Google, what is this gloop you call Soylent Green? Answer: Sears employees after getting their severance package.