If you mean, who will benefit by purchasing vastly superior products designed and created by AI, or incorporating AI, then that would be all nations, with the rare exception of those economically isolated such as N. Korea.
If you mean who will benefit by selling vastly superior products designed and created by AI or incorporating AI, well that will be the owners and investors in the companies which develop and manufacture those products. Basically, middle and upper classes in first-world nations: U.S, Canada, Europe, East Asia, Australia, New Zealand, Israel. Probably Russia and India as well, though Russia is insanely corrupt and India is still struggling with regulatory inefficiency and structural inequities.
Look at AlphaGo against humans at Go and then consider what AI compared to humans in designing fusion reactors, rechargeable batteries, or even better AI would look like. If AI makes energy too cheap to meter in the first world, then energy also becomes too cheap not to give it away to the third world.
With better manufacturing through AI, necessities get cheaper not only on the domestic markets of companies which improve manufacturing, but on the global market. Whatever the first world has access to, so does the third world with trade.
This is what happens when you try to outsmart the corporate media complex:
Kim Dotcom: I thought of a clever way to make money from copyright violations without violating copyright law myself. Aren't I smart. Media Companies: You are guilty whether you broke the law or not because we bought government. Kim: Oooops.
The other day somebody stole everything in my apartment and replaced it with an exact replica... When my roommate came home I said, "Roommate, someone stole everything in our apartment and replaced it with an exact replica." He looked at me and said, "Do I know you?"
My experience with gab was first that I was like "Yay! No censorship of political opinions! I am there."
Turns out that, while it is not that uncensored speech is inherently bad speech, when only a few forums permit that then they become magnets for those prohibited elsewhere. I am not one of those people who is afraid of exposure to opinions which I oppose, but let me put it this way: There was a limit to how many times I could see some variation or another on "Jews suck!" before I was like, well, I don't really want to waste my time looking at this crap.
What's the cardinal rule of driving at night or snow storms? NEVER outdrive the range of your headlights. That is, your stopping distance abolutely[sic] positively has to be within your range of sight. Anything else is completely irresponsible.
Objects approaching a traveling vehicle from the side can intersect the path of that vehicle nearer than the furtherest projection of the headlight beam. This is a case where your rule fails to protect against night-time collisions. In the linked video the homeless woman with the grocery cart approaches the path of the oncoming Uber car from the side, not from the front.
I once I collided with a raccoon in my rx-7 because, though I was traveling at a safe speed, the raccoon ran in front of my car from the side, a direction which my headlights did not shine.
Or worse, decides because the manufacturer's LGBTQP policies are not strong enough that you need to no longer buy from them and destroy any of their product that you already own. That's what happened to us with Red Hat. Our female CEO banned us from traveling to or even talking on the phone with anyone from North Carolina. We dropped Red Hat and have now hired about 20 new devs to convert everything to Microsoft garbage. I'm updating my resume, because after two years since we did that, we don't even have a basic prototype working.
order prohibiting the use of stepper motors in designs
That has to be an interesting story.
It is, but I have a better one.
So one day I get phone call from the CEO asking to set up a "very important" meeting to show me how to document source code. I'd been a professional software engineer for about twenty years, at that point, so it's not like I didn't already know how to do that. The source code was already heavily documented with inline comments, I always use meaningful variables names for non-abstract, physical parameters and generally favor readability over compactness. Anyway, we sit down in front of the computer and at first I am lectured about how what I am about to told is "the right way" to document code, how important it is to do always do it this way. Then she opens up Microsoft Word and proceeds to a create a nested outline, like the way you were instructed to outline books in grade school. It looks like this
Program Foo
Files in Program Foo
File bar.cpp in Program Foo
Line numbers in File Bar
Line 10
Sets the variable field_size_degrees
Calculates the the field size in units of degrees
Line 11....
Variables in file bar.cpp
field_size_degrees
calculated on line ten....
The program is about 10K lines of C++ and still under development, so of course line numbers embedded in the outline would change when any line is inserted or deleted above.
The CEO had no programming skills at all. Could not wright "Hello World" in any language. Never read code. Though, when I pointed out that this is not the way that programmers typically document source code, I am, in an tone of extreme fury, told I that I am wrong and that she is a "software development expert" because her "CV says so."
So you might wonder, how such a business survived. And the answer is, we had no customers and sold no services. Our only source of revenue was government business grants, about $1 million/year, for which we were first in line because we were a majority woman or minority owned business.
If you are middle class and live in the U.S. about 1/3 or your income is confiscated in taxes. If you also have a kids, house repairs, college bills, medical expenses, its is difficult to make ends meet. Meanwhile, the federal government is squandering money funding CEO ego trips for arrogant women dilettantes. Now, every time someone tells me to support women in the workplace, I silently think that they have no idea what the hell they are talking about.
Women are often psychologically unsuited to be tech leaders. Here are four rules of women in the tech workforce.
1. Men compete by outdoing each other. If Sam builds a rocket which goes to 1,000 feet, then Jim competes with Sam by building a rocket which goes to 2,000 feet. Women compute by undermining each other. If Sally builds a rocket which goest to 1,000 feet, then Jill disses her on Facebook, spreads a rumor that Sally has venereal disease, and flirts with her boyfriend.
2. Men deduce causal relationships and use those to control outcomes. Women assign emotional valances to everything and react to those. If the instrument's Z axis drive motor burns out, Larry measures the weight of the platform and the lead screw pitch, looks up the torque specs of the motor, then calculates that the load exceeded the motor specs. Mary sees that a stepper motor was used to drive the Z axis which makes her feel that stepper motors are "bad" and she issues a company-wide order prohibiting the use of stepper motors in designs. (This, by the way, is a real example)
3. Never, under any circumstances, make placement or promotion decision according to gender. It should have not influence whatsoever. Behavior is not reliably related to gender. Some men behave in a characteristically female mode and some women in a characteristically male mode. There is a plausible argument that had Margaret Hamilton been denied her role in the Apollo program that the United States have many frozen astronaut corpses on the moon.
4. If you follow the guidance in the previous point exactly, hiring always the most qualified candidates with no regard to gender, you will end up with disproportionally more men in tech leadership positions because of the first two points.
Musk does this honest bullshit thing sometimes; What he says is factually correct, but his statements play on human psychology to distract from his true motives and concerns. Here are some examples:
- Launching the roadster into space. Really, he might have been wary of lifting off the first prototype of Falcon Heavy with a full capacity load and wanted to fly with a much lighter test mass. A light test mass would look weak. So he flew the roadster. A car in space! Wow! Everyone was so distracted by a car in space that nobody thought to ask so hey, what's wrong with this thing that you are not flying it at even close to full weight capacity?
- Gwynne Shotwell, President and CEO of SpaceX. Musk is never going to find an equal proportion of highly qualified man and women engineers to staff SpaceX because colleges and universities do not graduate them in equal proportion. So he finds one super-competent woman and gives her the two most prominent jobs in the company to distract for the skewed gender ratio among top engineers.
- Prioritizing people and bicycles over cars in his Boring Co tunnels. Well, someone probably ran the numbers and found something out. Like that you can't run internal combustion engine cars through these things because of the exhaust CO and yet the number of electric cars on the road will not be enough pay for the tunnel until decades from now. So what does Musk say? "Errr, sorry everyone, I was wrong, car plan is not going to work now. Sucks" Nope. Instead that, in the interests of courtesy and fairness, the people and bikes get priority. With no mention whatsoever of any technical or financial flaws with his car skid plan, despite those probably being the determining concerns.
- The electric semi and next-gen roadster reveal were timed to coincide with the worst of the model 3 manufacturing hell. The effect was to distract from the failure to meet announced production rates.
Stuart Brand wrote a book, published back in 1994, about just this kind of thing, How Buildings Learn. (also here)
This, from the Wikipedia summary of the accompanying BBC TV series, is relevant to the Apple UFO:
Brand is highly critical of the entire modernist approach to architecture. He fully rejects the "center out" approach of design, where a single person or group designs a building for others to use, in favor of an evolutionary approach where owners can change a building over time to meet their needs.
So when Apple employees attempt to, as Brand would say, "change a building.. to meet their needs," by sticking Post-its to the glass partitions, management undid that. Apple is all in on center out.
If you look at per-capita rates then China is quite far down the list, way below the US, Australia, Japan and multiple European countries.
The claim that the US is one of the worst per-capita is true.
Per-capita pollution is the wrong way to measure environmental impact because it makes poverty a virtue; We do not want to eliminate production, we want cleaner production.
A better way to measure environmental impact is not pollution per-capita, but pollution per unit of production.
According to David Harsanyi at Reason, our "crumbling infrastructure" is a myth.
One of the great myths of American politics, no matter who is president and no matter who runs Congress, is that our infrastructure is "crumbling." Former President Barack Obama repeatedly warned us about our "crumbling infrastructure." President Donald Trump now tells us that our infrastructure is "crumbling." The next president is going to hatch a giant plan to fix our crumbling infrastructure as well, because most voters want to believe infrastructure is crumbling.
The most extreme example of this sort of thing ever attempted was OTRAG.
John Carmack had some interesting things to say about that at his now-defunct Armadillo Aerospace website, some of which have been preserved at Wikipedia here.
"I have been corresponding with Lutz [Kayser] for a few months now, and I have learned quite a few things. I seriously considered an OTRAG style massive-cluster-of-cheap-modules orbital design back when we had 98% peroxide (assumed to be a biprop with kerosene), and I have always considered it one of the viable routes to significant reduction in orbital launch costs. After really going over the trades and details with Lutz, I am quite convinced that this is the lowest development cost route to significant orbital capability. Eventually, reusable stages will take over, but I actually think that we can make it all the way to orbit on our current budget by following this path. The individual modules are less complicated than our current vehicles, and I am becoming more and more fond of high production methods over hand crafter prototypes."
No! There are two extreme cases. One, where the probability of total system failure is the sum of the probabilities of failure of components (bad), the other where it is the product (good)
1% chance of failure + 1% chance of failure = 2% chance of total failure
1% chance of failure * 1% chance of failure = %0.01 chance of total failure
There here are also intermediate cases, for example when failure of redundant components have some probability greater than 0% and less than 100% of bleeding over into the other components, such as explosive failure of one engine damaging another engine.
The CH-47 Chinook helicopter is an example of the bad, additive case. If one rotor fails, that leads to catastrophic failure. To quote this guy:
the situation... is called a de-sync and it's a catastrophic failure. The forward and aft rotors are linked by a driveshaft that drives the forward transmission and synchronizes the rotors. In a de-sync the intermeshed rotors will collide and the aircraft will tear itself to pieces.
Also, setting aside for a moment the consequences of a de-sync, the flight controls for both rotors are linked so it would be impossible to flatten the pitch to autorotate just the front rotor head. I suppose it would be mathematically possible to keep the rotors in sync and match the rate of deterioration in the rotor speed, but the odds would be extremely low, and the chances of recovering from any altitude beyond a few feet would be near nil.
Representative Devin Nunes, a Republican who represents Fresno... attributes California’s water crisis not to weather, but to interference by the federal government.
“Global warming is nonsense,” Mr. Nunes said. He criticized the federal government for shutting off portions of California’s system of water irrigation and storage, and diverting water into a program for freshwater salmon. “There was plenty of water. This has nothing to do with drought. They can blame global warming all they want, but this is about mathematics and engineering.”
Of Mr. Obama’s proposal to create a $1 billion climate resiliency fund, Mr. Nunes said, “We want water, not welfare.”
So you plug that into an unrelated discussion about the the FBI obtaining a FISA warrant on the basis of a bogus dossier funded by the Hillary campaign, compiled by a foreign spy and sourced from Russians. You make false accusations that Nunes violated house rules.
... the first 2 or 3 FISA warrents on Carter Page, were initiated several months before the Steele dossier was even prepared.
That is a lie.
The memo also leaves out numerous accounts tha[sic] tthe[sic] Steele dossier was intially[sic] commissioned by one of the GOP presidential campaigns prior to the Clinton campaign paying to get their hands on it.
Slashdot Mirror
If you mean, who will benefit by purchasing vastly superior products designed and created by AI, or incorporating AI, then that would be all nations, with the rare exception of those economically isolated such as N. Korea.
If you mean who will benefit by selling vastly superior products designed and created by AI or incorporating AI, well that will be the owners and investors in the companies which develop and manufacture those products. Basically, middle and upper classes in first-world nations: U.S, Canada, Europe, East Asia, Australia, New Zealand, Israel. Probably Russia and India as well, though Russia is insanely corrupt and India is still struggling with regulatory inefficiency and structural inequities.
Look at AlphaGo against humans at Go and then consider what AI compared to humans in designing fusion reactors, rechargeable batteries, or even better AI would look like. If AI makes energy too cheap to meter in the first world, then energy also becomes too cheap not to give it away to the third world.
With better manufacturing through AI, necessities get cheaper not only on the domestic markets of companies which improve manufacturing, but on the global market. Whatever the first world has access to, so does the third world with trade.
This is what happens when you try to outsmart the corporate media complex:
Kim Dotcom: I thought of a clever way to make money from copyright violations without violating copyright law myself. Aren't I smart.
Media Companies: You are guilty whether you broke the law or not because we bought government.
Kim: Oooops.
The other day somebody stole everything in my apartment and replaced it with an exact replica... When my roommate came home I said, "Roommate, someone stole everything in our apartment and replaced it with an exact replica." He looked at me and said, "Do I know you?"
- Steven Wright
Ok, that sounds helpful, thank you.
And just today, Gab TV went online.
My experience with gab was first that I was like "Yay! No censorship of political opinions! I am there."
Turns out that, while it is not that uncensored speech is inherently bad speech, when only a few forums permit that then they become magnets for those prohibited elsewhere. I am not one of those people who is afraid of exposure to opinions which I oppose, but let me put it this way: There was a limit to how many times I could see some variation or another on "Jews suck!" before I was like, well, I don't really want to waste my time looking at this crap.
What's the cardinal rule of driving at night or snow storms? NEVER outdrive the range of your headlights. That is, your stopping distance abolutely[sic] positively has to be within your range of sight. Anything else is completely irresponsible.
Objects approaching a traveling vehicle from the side can intersect the path of that vehicle nearer than the furtherest projection of the headlight beam. This is a case where your rule fails to protect against night-time collisions. In the linked video the homeless woman with the grocery cart approaches the path of the oncoming Uber car from the side, not from the front.
I once I collided with a raccoon in my rx-7 because, though I was traveling at a safe speed, the raccoon ran in front of my car from the side, a direction which my headlights did not shine.
> feel that stepper motors are "bad"
Or worse, decides because the manufacturer's LGBTQP policies are not strong enough that you need to no longer buy from them and destroy any of their product that you already own. That's what happened to us with Red Hat. Our female CEO banned us from traveling to or even talking on the phone with anyone from North Carolina. We dropped Red Hat and have now hired about 20 new devs to convert everything to Microsoft garbage. I'm updating my resume, because after two years since we did that, we don't even have a basic prototype working.
Get the hell out of there.
order prohibiting the use of stepper motors in designs
That has to be an interesting story.
It is, but I have a better one.
So one day I get phone call from the CEO asking to set up a "very important" meeting to show me how to document source code. I'd been a professional software engineer for about twenty years, at that point, so it's not like I didn't already know how to do that. The source code was already heavily documented with inline comments, I always use meaningful variables names for non-abstract, physical parameters and generally favor readability over compactness. Anyway, we sit down in front of the computer and at first I am lectured about how what I am about to told is "the right way" to document code, how important it is to do always do it this way. Then she opens up Microsoft Word and proceeds to a create a nested outline, like the way you were instructed to outline books in grade school. It looks like this
Program Foo .... ....
Files in Program Foo
File bar.cpp in Program Foo
Line numbers in File Bar
Line 10
Sets the variable field_size_degrees
Calculates the the field size in units of degrees
Line 11
Variables in file bar.cpp
field_size_degrees
calculated on line ten
The program is about 10K lines of C++ and still under development, so of course line numbers embedded in the outline would change when any line is inserted or deleted above.
The CEO had no programming skills at all. Could not wright "Hello World" in any language. Never read code. Though, when I pointed out that this is not the way that programmers typically document source code, I am, in an tone of extreme fury, told I that I am wrong and that she is a "software development expert" because her "CV says so."
So you might wonder, how such a business survived. And the answer is, we had no customers and sold no services. Our only source of revenue was government business grants, about $1 million/year, for which we were first in line because we were a majority woman or minority owned business.
If you are middle class and live in the U.S. about 1/3 or your income is confiscated in taxes. If you also have a kids, house repairs, college bills, medical expenses, its is difficult to make ends meet. Meanwhile, the federal government is squandering money funding CEO ego trips for arrogant women dilettantes. Now, every time someone tells me to support women in the workplace, I silently think that they have no idea what the hell they are talking about.
Women are often psychologically unsuited to be tech leaders. Here are four rules of women in the tech workforce.
1. Men compete by outdoing each other. If Sam builds a rocket which goes to 1,000 feet, then Jim competes with Sam by building a rocket which goes to 2,000 feet. Women compute by undermining each other. If Sally builds a rocket which goest to 1,000 feet, then Jill disses her on Facebook, spreads a rumor that Sally has venereal disease, and flirts with her boyfriend.
2. Men deduce causal relationships and use those to control outcomes. Women assign emotional valances to everything and react to those. If the instrument's Z axis drive motor burns out, Larry measures the weight of the platform and the lead screw pitch, looks up the torque specs of the motor, then calculates that the load exceeded the motor specs. Mary sees that a stepper motor was used to drive the Z axis which makes her feel that stepper motors are "bad" and she issues a company-wide order prohibiting the use of stepper motors in designs. (This, by the way, is a real example)
3. Never, under any circumstances, make placement or promotion decision according to gender. It should have not influence whatsoever. Behavior is not reliably related to gender. Some men behave in a characteristically female mode and some women in a characteristically male mode. There is a plausible argument that had Margaret Hamilton been denied her role in the Apollo program that the United States have many frozen astronaut corpses on the moon.
4. If you follow the guidance in the previous point exactly, hiring always the most qualified candidates with no regard to gender, you will end up with disproportionally more men in tech leadership positions because of the first two points.
Why is the US taxpayer funding a war against gorillas?
For the Gorilla Channel.
If he want to optimize for durability and longevity he should use nickel-iron batteries.
It is often used in backup situations where it can be continuously charged and can last for more than 20 years.
Musk does this honest bullshit thing sometimes; What he says is factually correct, but his statements play on human psychology to distract from his true motives and concerns. Here are some examples:
- Launching the roadster into space. Really, he might have been wary of lifting off the first prototype of Falcon Heavy with a full capacity load and wanted to fly with a much lighter test mass. A light test mass would look weak. So he flew the roadster. A car in space! Wow! Everyone was so distracted by a car in space that nobody thought to ask so hey, what's wrong with this thing that you are not flying it at even close to full weight capacity?
- Gwynne Shotwell, President and CEO of SpaceX. Musk is never going to find an equal proportion of highly qualified man and women engineers to staff SpaceX because colleges and universities do not graduate them in equal proportion. So he finds one super-competent woman and gives her the two most prominent jobs in the company to distract for the skewed gender ratio among top engineers.
- Prioritizing people and bicycles over cars in his Boring Co tunnels. Well, someone probably ran the numbers and found something out. Like that you can't run internal combustion engine cars through these things because of the exhaust CO and yet the number of electric cars on the road will not be enough pay for the tunnel until decades from now. So what does Musk say? "Errr, sorry everyone, I was wrong, car plan is not going to work now. Sucks" Nope. Instead that, in the interests of courtesy and fairness, the people and bikes get priority. With no mention whatsoever of any technical or financial flaws with his car skid plan, despite those probably being the determining concerns.
- The electric semi and next-gen roadster reveal were timed to coincide with the worst of the model 3 manufacturing hell. The effect was to distract from the failure to meet announced production rates.
What we need is a self-driving car with a fake wooden driver, so as not to alarm the other humans traveling on the road.
hat tip: horsey horseless.
Stuart Brand wrote a book, published back in 1994, about just this kind of thing, How Buildings Learn. (also here)
This, from the Wikipedia summary of the accompanying BBC TV series, is relevant to the Apple UFO:
Brand is highly critical of the entire modernist approach to architecture. He fully rejects the "center out" approach of design, where a single person or group designs a building for others to use, in favor of an evolutionary approach where owners can change a building over time to meet their needs.
So when Apple employees attempt to, as Brand would say, "change a building.. to meet their needs," by sticking Post-its to the glass partitions, management undid that. Apple is all in on center out.
If you look at per-capita rates then China is quite far down the list, way below the US, Australia, Japan and multiple European countries.
The claim that the US is one of the worst per-capita is true.
Per-capita pollution is the wrong way to measure environmental impact because it makes poverty a virtue; We do not want to eliminate production, we want cleaner production.
A better way to measure environmental impact is not pollution per-capita, but pollution per unit of production.
According to David Harsanyi at Reason, our "crumbling infrastructure" is a myth.
There is also a summary here at Sciences News.
Here is the full archived version of Carmack's blog post about OTRAG, including photos of an injector assembly which he was gifted.
The most extreme example of this sort of thing ever attempted was OTRAG.
John Carmack had some interesting things to say about that at his now-defunct Armadillo Aerospace website, some of which have been preserved at Wikipedia here.
Redundancy is always good
No! There are two extreme cases. One, where the probability of total system failure is the sum of the probabilities of failure of components (bad), the other where it is the product (good)
1% chance of failure + 1% chance of failure = 2% chance of total failure
1% chance of failure * 1% chance of failure = %0.01 chance of total failure
There here are also intermediate cases, for example when failure of redundant components have some probability greater than 0% and less than 100% of bleeding over into the other components, such as explosive failure of one engine damaging another engine.
The CH-47 Chinook helicopter is an example of the bad, additive case. If one rotor fails, that leads to catastrophic failure. To quote this guy:
from the NYT article which you linked:
So you plug that into an unrelated discussion about the the FBI obtaining a FISA warrant on the basis of a bogus dossier funded by the Hillary campaign, compiled by a foreign spy and sourced from Russians. You make false accusations that Nunes violated house rules.
Your arguments are absurd and dishonest.
... the first 2 or 3 FISA warrents on Carter Page, were initiated several months before the Steele dossier was even prepared.
That is a lie.
The memo also leaves out numerous accounts tha[sic] tthe[sic] Steele dossier was intially[sic] commissioned by one of the GOP presidential campaigns prior to the Clinton campaign paying to get their hands on it.
That is also a lie.
"Was spotted taking a stack of cash with the note 'FOR ALL THE COLLUSION' on it from head of the KGB" for all we know.
You are just making shit up, yet rated +5 Informative. Shows how much the lefties around here value facts.
FISA warrants were issued for the investigation well before the Steele dossier was even conceived.
That is a lie.
Seems to all revolve around Andy McCabe
That leaves out Strzok, Page, Comey, Ohr, Rosenstein and Lynch.
Not to mention all of the players outside of the the FBI and Justice Department.