I dont have the burden of proof, b/c it's not my research. The scientists are claiming they **DO**...that means the definition and concept of "understanding" certainly comes into play.
Why did any of the crows drop a stone into the water in the first place? Why did they go for water over sand?
They had free choice to drop in any of them. They dropped stones in multiple containters.
When they dropped and saw they thing get closer they repeated!
It's simple cause/effect and memory...why is this a controversial statement?
Oh yeah, b/c these researchers used the Artificial Intelligence definitions of "understanding"...
these tasks did not test insightful problem solving, but were directed at the birds' understanding of volume displacement
Crows don't "understand" water displacement. They only sense and react. "understanding" requires abstraction.
This is great research so I don't want to seem hypercritical but in their contextualization of the mental processes of the Crow they are projecting what ***humans*** would be thinking when they solve the problem.
Crows see cause/effect. Drop stone, thing gets closer. They sense that the thing is closer so just repeat what they did.
This fits with the observations that the two tasks requiring abstract thinking did not work
they failed two more challenging tasks, one that required understanding of the width of the tube, and one that required understanding of counterintuitive cues for a U-shaped displacement task.
Why is this so important? Am I nitpicking just the language? This goes to the core of computing and our understanding of "intelligence" and especially **Artificial Intelligence**
We spend ****BILLIONS***** trying to make computers "think"....but it's not possible...we're projecting our mental processes on what we observe.
Just because we observe *externally* that the crow is solving a problem the way a human would, doesn't mean *internally* they are doing the actions for the same reasons.
I'd say there's even money that it's essentially a remote control X-Wing fighter.
It's a scaled down version of what was originally a concept for a next generation shuttle. It's/5 scale from the original design (this all comes from wikipedia)
I can't imagine it *not* having some sort of weapon or ability to grab/move anything it wants.
I think it's very important to have these for security reasons. We're to the point where a criminal kingpin could afford to surreptitiously (Russians) put up some sort of ballistic projectile disguised in a different payload or launched independently. Even a crude space weapon can ravage a downtown.
You say "progressives" in the US today are doing these things:
Progressives don't value individual rights. In the progressive bastions that are our public universities, they implement speech codes. Progressives do everything they can to restrict property rights, economic rights, and self-defense rights (even claiming as collective, rights that that have been recognized as individual). They shout down speakers that don't share their fascist ideology at every opportunity.
Which is **line by line** Republican talking points.
These points aren't used to **engage** discussion....they are used to **subvert** discussion.
You take each of those points, one by one, and identify an **actual policy** attached to it...somewhere it is seen happening now in government.
In **every instance** Republicans vote against individual freedom and in favor of corporate enrichment. Democrats are a big tent but they always are the party that supports **policies** that increase individual freedom. Progressives are a 'wing' of the Democrats.
Go down the line of your list...but **you must identify a current policy**
Like this:
You say "progressives do everything they can to restrict....economic rights..."
Let's take economic rights.
Net Neutrality
Bartles...are you *for or against* Net Neutrality?
Progressives and Democrats support Net Neutrality by votes...Republicans always oppose it according to their votes.
Every issue you list, down the line, will bear out in this manner.
Republicans are your enemy. Prove me wrong...list out policies that relate to your list and let's put it to the test.
My question: Do you consider Google in its current incarnation to be a "good company"? I ask in the context of revelations about the level of Gmail snooping, Google bus controversy, Google Glass failure, "only criminals want privacy", Larry Page refusing to donate to charity, Google Maps interface changes, etc. You used to be in security, so applying that experience & your recent public issues, do you "trust" Google?
I think it's good you "foe" ppl you disagree with strongly. I do the same. It helps us to keep from feeding the trolls. Which I am not, but it's your call.
So you can't argue against my logic so you switch the controversy to something that **neither of us can prove and is completely parenthetical**
passing judgment on the BitCoin creators' of intent.
I didn't say the *act* of creating BTC is, in and of itself, *illegal*. That's what you wanted to hear.
I said it was a *scam*...of which there are myriad legal examples of. Ex: selling consumers "insurance" on products that already have a 30 day guarantee by federal trade law.
Scam is different than crime.
But you know that...you're incapable of processing your own error.
You need to learn how to be wrong and not ashamed of yourself, such that you irrationally hold to your ideas as if they are your only connection to reality.
obama has been president for a term and a half. at what point is he responsible for the government? why can't bush blame washington or jackson?
this is a stupid line of thinking
obviously, every person is responsible for **their decisions** in whatever position
Obama does bear the responsibility for ***fixing*** the Bush Trainwreck...or at least doing as much as he can...that is within his decision power...Obama must choose to fix things instead of just kicking the can down the road
look you're making a pointless distinction between things that are not different...and in so doing conflating two things which are completely different into one disctinctionless mass of error.
things that are not different (but you think they are): A financial transaction system made to use for scams and an actual scam. They are the same thing. The whole point of a scam (or magic trick) is to make a system for it. You're a suburbanite white kid so you've probably seen that Magician movie with Batman and Wolverine that features Tesla...same principle.
You're talking like a person who has never seen **how** a scam works.
Everything that involves "scamming" money is a system...even the homeless people you see when you go downtown to see shows or shopping. Those panhandlers have a system.
two things that are different (but you don't think they are): BitTorrent & BitCoin. A distributed file transfer system where multple uploaders send parts of a file simultaneously to **increase download speed and avoid DRM** is not the same as a currency system that is designed to be untrackable & originates from computers lining up to process transactions.
that's all i'm going to type b/c you need to learn how to find this information for yourself
you're understanding of technology is superficial and shows "TED-talk thinking"...thinking & discussing complex interactions using only the simple aspects of interaction
just educate yourself and quit tossing around words/concepts to sound smart
If you want to contribute to the conversation, why don't you point out "why" instead of just randomly firing off troll/counterpoints
How can you try to say Bush is completely clean of any wrongdoing? You can't really claim to have any credibility if you think the Bush administration is behaved legally.
You say it's not a scam, but people *use it to run scams*...it's used nearly exclusively for criminal activity...investing in it is stupid ("to be sure")....and you're "fooling yourself" if you use it...But it's not a "scam"
Then what would be a "scam" by your definition?
"intended to foist some cryptocurrency on the world"??
Is that your standard for determining if something is a "scam"? It has to be like, a James Bond villain-level event or its not a "scam"?
Hey man...tell you what...you're right...nevermind...why don't you let me tell you about these awesome new high tech transportation devices being tested up in Alaska that lets cars drive **right over water**
So, in JaredOfEuropa's comment we see a great example of the **true fanboi** in action in the wild.
See, JaredOfEuropa knows **just enough** about the topic under discussion to articulate points & opinions about mechanisms which he does not understand.
It's the narcissism of the fanboi, that roiling nerd/rage that hides under a disheveled appearance, that is driving JaredOfEuropa's comments, not a desire to understand reality more. It's a desire to **sound right** rather than to **know right** It comes from upbringing when a complex mind is placed under the control of a stupid, inarticulate authoritarian.
JaredOfEuropa knows "just enough to be dangerous" on this topic.
Avoid.
If you're JaredOfEuropa reading this, well, WTF are you doing...google a bit to find out how BTC **really** works then you're welcome to re-join the discussion.
If he really wanted to stop this shit, he could issue an executive order stopping this shit
Bullshit. This is absolutely inaccurate & blows your whole premise. Obama is the head of the Executive Branch but that doesn't mean he has absolute Fiat power over all policies
Obama can't just declassify all classified documents or delete a whole organization by "executive order" for example...he can't just *delete* the Air Force from the Defense budget.
Just because Bush started two illegal wars with "executive order" doesn't mean its right or legal!
You think the CIA & NSA are just, you know, totally cool with Obama and Congress trying to reform them?Look at what the CIA/NSA has done historically, just since the 80s. Take it back to the 50s & the CIA might legitamitly be called the **most evil organization of the 20th Centruty***
The CIA is a front for criminal activity. A *very* good one.
Most of the problems people describe seem to be directly related to its use as a pump and dump, actually.
No. **maybe** we'll see a viable "crypto-currency" but we have not yet.
BTC's main issue is that **whoever** controls a BTC exchange and mining operation can manipulate the currency at will, especially at the pinch points like when BTC values decrease by half at intervals. It's not just that someone could game the system, its that there is absolutely nothing preventing them, systemically and externally.
BTC has **built in** feedback loops, from a system science perspective. Areas where problems cannot be corrected if they arise given certain conditions.
The system doesn't have a fix for certain problems **by design** because...and everyone just needs to accept this: BITCOIN IS A SCAM
I think it's ridiculous, and like another pointed out, shows a flaw in capitalism.
It *should* be illegal. IMHO it's an anti-trust issue. Workers are vendors of their labor, and the owners of the capital are colluding, like a 'trust', to monopolize & unnaturally control the scarcity of that capital.
We'd still see situations like this poor woman who appears to have Borderline Personality Disorder: http://valleywag.gawker.com/gl...
However, there's something about the design of Glass, or rather the **lack** of design, that makes the wearer look off-puttingly non-human. It's like the Bluetooth in-ear headset ^10...and only a few steps from actual "Borg"
Glass looks like dental corrective headgear, and it turns out having a smartphone strapped to your face doesnt add much functionality for all the drawbacks.
Slashdot Mirror
I dont have the burden of proof, b/c it's not my research. The scientists are claiming they **DO**...that means the definition and concept of "understanding" certainly comes into play.
They had free choice to drop in any of them. They dropped stones in multiple containters.
When they dropped and saw they thing get closer they repeated!
It's simple cause/effect and memory...why is this a controversial statement?
Oh yeah, b/c these researchers used the Artificial Intelligence definitions of "understanding"...
Crows don't "understand" water displacement. They only sense and react. "understanding" requires abstraction.
This is great research so I don't want to seem hypercritical but in their contextualization of the mental processes of the Crow they are projecting what ***humans*** would be thinking when they solve the problem.
Crows see cause/effect. Drop stone, thing gets closer. They sense that the thing is closer so just repeat what they did.
This fits with the observations that the two tasks requiring abstract thinking did not work
Why is this so important? Am I nitpicking just the language? This goes to the core of computing and our understanding of "intelligence" and especially **Artificial Intelligence**
We spend ****BILLIONS***** trying to make computers "think"....but it's not possible...we're projecting our mental processes on what we observe.
Just because we observe *externally* that the crow is solving a problem the way a human would, doesn't mean *internally* they are doing the actions for the same reasons.
I'd say there's even money that it's essentially a remote control X-Wing fighter.
It's a scaled down version of what was originally a concept for a next generation shuttle. It's /5 scale from the original design (this all comes from wikipedia)
I can't imagine it *not* having some sort of weapon or ability to grab/move anything it wants.
I think it's very important to have these for security reasons. We're to the point where a criminal kingpin could afford to surreptitiously (Russians) put up some sort of ballistic projectile disguised in a different payload or launched independently. Even a crude space weapon can ravage a downtown.
These drones rock IMHO.
Kicking ass!!!
Srsly I love these space drones. Should have had them 20 years ago.
That is all.
You've devolved into attempting to make glib retorts instead of *engaging in the discussion*
you've been proven wrong, and no sass or attitude on your part will change that
"pinheads"...that gave it away!
You're a Bill O'Reilly wannabe! No *wonder* you have no ability to talk about actual policies!
"net neutrality" could easily be a law in the House/Senate that could be voted on....but the GOP in the House won't let anything through, obviously
I love how you say this:
is there any law that is not "authoritarian" in your mind?
is 'net neutrality' more or less authoritarian than, say, censoring books as they did under Stalin?
Bartles you need to put up or shut up.
Let's get specific.
You say "progressives" in the US today are doing these things:
Which is **line by line** Republican talking points.
These points aren't used to **engage** discussion....they are used to **subvert** discussion.
You take each of those points, one by one, and identify an **actual policy** attached to it...somewhere it is seen happening now in government.
In **every instance** Republicans vote against individual freedom and in favor of corporate enrichment. Democrats are a big tent but they always are the party that supports **policies** that increase individual freedom. Progressives are a 'wing' of the Democrats.
Go down the line of your list...but **you must identify a current policy**
Like this:
You say "progressives do everything they can to restrict....economic rights..."
Let's take economic rights.
Net Neutrality
Bartles...are you *for or against* Net Neutrality?
Progressives and Democrats support Net Neutrality by votes...Republicans always oppose it according to their votes.
Every issue you list, down the line, will bear out in this manner.
Republicans are your enemy. Prove me wrong...list out policies that relate to your list and let's put it to the test.
Mr. McAfee, thanks for taking questions!
My question: Do you consider Google in its current incarnation to be a "good company"? I ask in the context of revelations about the level of Gmail snooping, Google bus controversy, Google Glass failure, "only criminals want privacy", Larry Page refusing to donate to charity, Google Maps interface changes, etc. You used to be in security, so applying that experience & your recent public issues, do you "trust" Google?
You admitted that your definition of Libertarian is completely biased...
Then do the same thing with 'Progressive'
**progressive** is only used in terms of a Democracy that strongly favors individual rights and does not put capitalism above human needs
That's absolutely completely different than Totalitarianism
Progressive = free speech
Totalitarian = controlled speech
big difference
your problem is that the truth of what Progressives are doing in America causes you so much cognitive dissonance you have to pretend it doesn't exist
you're confirming the GOP co-opting of the term "libertarian"
the axis are as follows
Libertarian --- Authoritarian
Libertarians advocate for *individual freedom* while Authoritarians advocate for *individual conformity*
"right" and "left" in **American politics** equates to "conservative" and "liberal"
exactly my thoughts as well.
all "code" is symbols arranged to communicated **instructions** to a machine
it's all instructions...the variation is the way the instructions are delivered
knowing this, and having some experience coding, elegant code will be understandable to even novices once the basic "language differences" are learned
Bartles you're a troll and your comparison is ridiculous. Educate yourself and stop soiling /. with your GOP-talking points.
Lenin was a "left-wing totalitarian"
You need to understand the difference between *civil rights* and *macro-econimic policy*
Obama is a "progressive" which means a libertarian-leaning "left"
You have alot to learn before you can make a contribution to this discussion but you will be welcome when that time comes.
I think it's good you "foe" ppl you disagree with strongly. I do the same. It helps us to keep from feeding the trolls. Which I am not, but it's your call.
So you can't argue against my logic so you switch the controversy to something that **neither of us can prove and is completely parenthetical**
I didn't say the *act* of creating BTC is, in and of itself, *illegal*. That's what you wanted to hear.
I said it was a *scam*...of which there are myriad legal examples of. Ex: selling consumers "insurance" on products that already have a 30 day guarantee by federal trade law.
Scam is different than crime.
But you know that...you're incapable of processing your own error.
You need to learn how to be wrong and not ashamed of yourself, such that you irrationally hold to your ideas as if they are your only connection to reality.
this is a stupid line of thinking
obviously, every person is responsible for **their decisions** in whatever position
Obama does bear the responsibility for ***fixing*** the Bush Trainwreck...or at least doing as much as he can...that is within his decision power...Obama must choose to fix things instead of just kicking the can down the road
look you're making a pointless distinction between things that are not different...and in so doing conflating two things which are completely different into one disctinctionless mass of error.
things that are not different (but you think they are): A financial transaction system made to use for scams and an actual scam. They are the same thing. The whole point of a scam (or magic trick) is to make a system for it. You're a suburbanite white kid so you've probably seen that Magician movie with Batman and Wolverine that features Tesla...same principle.
You're talking like a person who has never seen **how** a scam works.
Everything that involves "scamming" money is a system...even the homeless people you see when you go downtown to see shows or shopping. Those panhandlers have a system.
two things that are different (but you don't think they are): BitTorrent & BitCoin. A distributed file transfer system where multple uploaders send parts of a file simultaneously to **increase download speed and avoid DRM** is not the same as a currency system that is designed to be untrackable & originates from computers lining up to process transactions.
that's all i'm going to type b/c you need to learn how to find this information for yourself
you're understanding of technology is superficial and shows "TED-talk thinking"...thinking & discussing complex interactions using only the simple aspects of interaction
just educate yourself and quit tossing around words/concepts to sound smart
If you want to contribute to the conversation, why don't you point out "why" instead of just randomly firing off troll/counterpoints
How can you try to say Bush is completely clean of any wrongdoing? You can't really claim to have any credibility if you think the Bush administration is behaved legally.
Yeah, that's why "executive order" was in quotations...Bush is responsible of course...
The wars were started by criminals who wanted to enrich themselves via the oil, heroin, govt contract fraud.
Bush/Cheney did **whatever their evil minds could imagine**
You say it's not a scam, but people *use it to run scams*...it's used nearly exclusively for criminal activity...investing in it is stupid ("to be sure")....and you're "fooling yourself" if you use it...But it's not a "scam"
Then what would be a "scam" by your definition?
"intended to foist some cryptocurrency on the world"??
Is that your standard for determining if something is a "scam"? It has to be like, a James Bond villain-level event or its not a "scam"?
Hey man...tell you what...you're right...nevermind...why don't you let me tell you about these awesome new high tech transportation devices being tested up in Alaska that lets cars drive **right over water**
So, in JaredOfEuropa's comment we see a great example of the **true fanboi** in action in the wild.
See, JaredOfEuropa knows **just enough** about the topic under discussion to articulate points & opinions about mechanisms which he does not understand.
It's the narcissism of the fanboi, that roiling nerd/rage that hides under a disheveled appearance, that is driving JaredOfEuropa's comments, not a desire to understand reality more. It's a desire to **sound right** rather than to **know right** It comes from upbringing when a complex mind is placed under the control of a stupid, inarticulate authoritarian.
JaredOfEuropa knows "just enough to be dangerous" on this topic.
Avoid.
If you're JaredOfEuropa reading this, well, WTF are you doing...google a bit to find out how BTC **really** works then you're welcome to re-join the discussion.
Bullshit. This is absolutely inaccurate & blows your whole premise. Obama is the head of the Executive Branch but that doesn't mean he has absolute Fiat power over all policies
Obama can't just declassify all classified documents or delete a whole organization by "executive order" for example...he can't just *delete* the Air Force from the Defense budget.
Just because Bush started two illegal wars with "executive order" doesn't mean its right or legal!
You think the CIA & NSA are just, you know, totally cool with Obama and Congress trying to reform them?Look at what the CIA/NSA has done historically, just since the 80s. Take it back to the 50s & the CIA might legitamitly be called the **most evil organization of the 20th Centruty***
The CIA is a front for criminal activity. A *very* good one.
Bush & Republicans are responsible for absolutely everything you listed.
Republicans refuse to let any reform of the Patriot Act pass through Congress.
Bush II originated virtually all of the policies Snowden's info reveals.
Obama has done *nothing* but try to reform as much as GOP obstructionists will allow.
My facts are checkable. Obama is *not* doing this.
No. **maybe** we'll see a viable "crypto-currency" but we have not yet.
BTC's main issue is that **whoever** controls a BTC exchange and mining operation can manipulate the currency at will, especially at the pinch points like when BTC values decrease by half at intervals. It's not just that someone could game the system, its that there is absolutely nothing preventing them, systemically and externally.
BTC has **built in** feedback loops, from a system science perspective. Areas where problems cannot be corrected if they arise given certain conditions.
The system doesn't have a fix for certain problems **by design** because...and everyone just needs to accept this: BITCOIN IS A SCAM
This is a ridiculous tangent.
By stenvar's logic a restaurant customer is the "owner" of the product of their hunger and they are selling the access to it...it's backwards.
This is about twisting logic to support a fallacious conclusion.
curse all GOP trolls!
Is it illegal to make these "agreements"?
I think it's ridiculous, and like another pointed out, shows a flaw in capitalism.
It *should* be illegal. IMHO it's an anti-trust issue. Workers are vendors of their labor, and the owners of the capital are colluding, like a 'trust', to monopolize & unnaturally control the scarcity of that capital.
I can see it. It's about the "uncanny valley"
We'd still see situations like this poor woman who appears to have Borderline Personality Disorder: http://valleywag.gawker.com/gl...
However, there's something about the design of Glass, or rather the **lack** of design, that makes the wearer look off-puttingly non-human. It's like the Bluetooth in-ear headset ^10...and only a few steps from actual "Borg"
Glass looks like dental corrective headgear, and it turns out having a smartphone strapped to your face doesnt add much functionality for all the drawbacks.