Since you brought up religion, you should read some of the arguments philosophers and theologians have invented in order to support the idea. They're very sophisticated. Solipsism in particular, which is what the OP seems to be heading into, has been well explored. If you're honest though, all those arguments rely on one of two basic theses: "we can never know because magic" or "we can never know because we can never know anything!" Both are... unproductive.
Your posts are pretty much content free. You haven't even defined what you mean by "experience." What you consider experience is just memories of the past. Your TI-85 has those, and they're much more reliable than your own.
You're still using a lot of words to basically say "it's magic" (whatever you choose "it" to be). Maybe it is. Until someone shows some evidence that it is, science proceeds based on the assumption it's not.
Recurrent ANNs don't have to be trained to have feedback. It's built right in. The original scientists are probably talking about special kinds of feedback between intermediate levels, which the brain does seem to use in some cases (not all). That kind of thing was also tried in the past, but it's extremely difficult to train.
How do you know you have experiences? Your memory could very well be an illusion. You could simply exist as a fleeting quirk in an infinite universe of random arrangements that think it's sentient.
If we're going to get all mystical, we might as well not pull punches.
"Strong AI are the ones hypothesizing a relationship and capability of a thing - the brain- here. The burden falls squarely on you, not me. Prove it."
People actually trying to build AI ARE trying to prove it, by making one. You're sitting in your armchair saying "it's impossible because magic!"
If you want to get down to it, your position is that there is something quintessentially different about intelligence that we cannot model. That's an extraordinary claim, with absolutely no evidence backing it up. On the other hand, the idea that intelligence is something complicated but based on ordinary principles is not extraordinary at all.
Perhaps you need better laws. None of the examples you give are illegal where I live. If by "forcing priority" you mean alternating right of way on a merge, that's not only legal, it's required by law.
Doesn't seem high. It's pretty standard in Canada, except in provinces where speed limits are 10% higher. There the limit is routinely exceeded by only about 10%. Yes, that means everyone goes the same speed, regardless of what the actual limit is.
He's hated for buying the rights to drugs from scumbag pharma companies who were selling those drugs cheap, in some cases below cost, and raising the price thousands of percent.
Pharma companies are just like any others. Sometimes they do bad things, and sometimes they do okay things. This guy only seems to do bad things.
It seems highly unlikely that the empire could have conquered any reasonable part of the galaxy in the 25 years they were in power. A bunch of the core worlds (some of which were still resisting like Mon Calamari, Corellia, and Alderaan), sure, but not everything. Even the Old Republic didn't rule the whole galaxy: there were lots of unknown regions.
It's not quite that simple. Cow digestive systems can make use of plant material that we can't digest at all. Industrial cattle operations tend to feed them grains that we can at least partially digest, but it's quite possible to arrange a situation where a cow is raised on nothing human digestible at all. Some animals are often fed scraps and waste that we could, but won't eat.
It would be interesting to see where the optimal point actually lies. Natural herbivores, like bison on the plains of North America, grazing on wild land would be more "environmentally friendly" than replanting that land for crops. So the ideal diet is probably weighted heavily towards plants but, at least in certain areas, probably contains at some meat.
3D animation uses source files that describe 3D objects and how they can move. I wouldn't be surprised if modern industrial 2D animation, such as you'd use for animated TV shows, uses a similar approach, just with 2D figures instead of 3D. The software to do the animation, at least for 3D, is pretty standard, and easy to come by. Some of the big ones are even open source. Sure you can make a from-scratch copy of Woody or Flutteryshy, but having the source files would make it a lot easier.
That's the great thing about pirates, you don't have to hire them. Netflix just needs to hire someone to search torrent sites and download their catalog.
Sure, but it's awfully hard to protect. If they just spew the original vector drawings around the Internets, you could use them to make those ponies do whatever you want!
It appears that in New Zealand you can get married at a government office by a government official, or anywhere else by a "registered celebrant." There are lots of independent ones, who are certified by the government. There are also ones who are affiliated with religions. It's my understanding that the only advantage to being an official religious organization is that you can certify your own celebrants. Regardless of what kind of celebrant you use, you need to have a marriage license, issued by the government.
You know that all of the first Christians started as Jews, right? Christianity is basically a Jewish cult that believes Yaweh sent a chunk of himself down to Earth in the form of a child in order to grow up and tell the Jews to be nicer to each other.
They're performing marriages, not building churches and imposing tithes. Being married by a representative of the flying spaghetti monster is a pretty big satirical slap in the face for people who go on about the "sanctity" of marriage and the religious rules regarding it.
Pretty timely, I'd say, considering there are places in the world where religions think it's their job to determine who can and can't be married. I bet the church of the FSM is only too happy to perform gay marriages.
I imagine quite a few people will see that video, around the world. It's essentially free to call anywhere in the US now, from anywhere. He might have to change the numbers just because of the harassment.
Besides, this seems like a definite case where punitive damages are in order. The dealership screwed up massively, and should be punished for it.
Remote control airplanes or rockets over half a pound were never really "family fun." A few enthusiasts built them, most of whom were part of an effectively self-regulating community.
The first amendment of the US constitution only mentions "freedom of speech." It's just as ambiguous as anything else about what freedom of speech actually means. Even in the US, freedom of speech is restricted, in ways that are very similar to elsewhere, including Germany. The US supreme court has spend a good deal of time picking and choosing what speech is protected and what isn't.
Slashdot Mirror
Everything real happens in real time. There isn't much choice.
Since you brought up religion, you should read some of the arguments philosophers and theologians have invented in order to support the idea. They're very sophisticated. Solipsism in particular, which is what the OP seems to be heading into, has been well explored. If you're honest though, all those arguments rely on one of two basic theses: "we can never know because magic" or "we can never know because we can never know anything!" Both are... unproductive.
Your posts are pretty much content free. You haven't even defined what you mean by "experience." What you consider experience is just memories of the past. Your TI-85 has those, and they're much more reliable than your own.
You're still using a lot of words to basically say "it's magic" (whatever you choose "it" to be). Maybe it is. Until someone shows some evidence that it is, science proceeds based on the assumption it's not.
Recurrent ANNs don't have to be trained to have feedback. It's built right in. The original scientists are probably talking about special kinds of feedback between intermediate levels, which the brain does seem to use in some cases (not all). That kind of thing was also tried in the past, but it's extremely difficult to train.
The article messed up their description.
You post a link to an article about a scientific paper warning about the dangers of amateurs doing fMRI analysis and somehow think that's evidence?
How do you know you have experiences? Your memory could very well be an illusion. You could simply exist as a fleeting quirk in an infinite universe of random arrangements that think it's sentient.
If we're going to get all mystical, we might as well not pull punches.
"Strong AI are the ones hypothesizing a relationship and capability of a thing - the brain- here. The burden falls squarely on you, not me. Prove it."
People actually trying to build AI ARE trying to prove it, by making one. You're sitting in your armchair saying "it's impossible because magic!"
If you want to get down to it, your position is that there is something quintessentially different about intelligence that we cannot model. That's an extraordinary claim, with absolutely no evidence backing it up. On the other hand, the idea that intelligence is something complicated but based on ordinary principles is not extraordinary at all.
Perhaps you need better laws. None of the examples you give are illegal where I live. If by "forcing priority" you mean alternating right of way on a merge, that's not only legal, it's required by law.
Doesn't seem high. It's pretty standard in Canada, except in provinces where speed limits are 10% higher. There the limit is routinely exceeded by only about 10%. Yes, that means everyone goes the same speed, regardless of what the actual limit is.
He's hated for buying the rights to drugs from scumbag pharma companies who were selling those drugs cheap, in some cases below cost, and raising the price thousands of percent.
Pharma companies are just like any others. Sometimes they do bad things, and sometimes they do okay things. This guy only seems to do bad things.
It seems highly unlikely that the empire could have conquered any reasonable part of the galaxy in the 25 years they were in power. A bunch of the core worlds (some of which were still resisting like Mon Calamari, Corellia, and Alderaan), sure, but not everything. Even the Old Republic didn't rule the whole galaxy: there were lots of unknown regions.
It's standard in many places where month-to-month leases basically don't happen. Who wants to move and still have to pay for eight months of a lease?
It's not quite that simple. Cow digestive systems can make use of plant material that we can't digest at all. Industrial cattle operations tend to feed them grains that we can at least partially digest, but it's quite possible to arrange a situation where a cow is raised on nothing human digestible at all. Some animals are often fed scraps and waste that we could, but won't eat.
It would be interesting to see where the optimal point actually lies. Natural herbivores, like bison on the plains of North America, grazing on wild land would be more "environmentally friendly" than replanting that land for crops. So the ideal diet is probably weighted heavily towards plants but, at least in certain areas, probably contains at some meat.
3D animation uses source files that describe 3D objects and how they can move. I wouldn't be surprised if modern industrial 2D animation, such as you'd use for animated TV shows, uses a similar approach, just with 2D figures instead of 3D. The software to do the animation, at least for 3D, is pretty standard, and easy to come by. Some of the big ones are even open source. Sure you can make a from-scratch copy of Woody or Flutteryshy, but having the source files would make it a lot easier.
That's the great thing about pirates, you don't have to hire them. Netflix just needs to hire someone to search torrent sites and download their catalog.
If they're going to save space then they don't have much choice but to drop the bit rate.
Sure, but it's awfully hard to protect. If they just spew the original vector drawings around the Internets, you could use them to make those ponies do whatever you want!
It appears that in New Zealand you can get married at a government office by a government official, or anywhere else by a "registered celebrant." There are lots of independent ones, who are certified by the government. There are also ones who are affiliated with religions. It's my understanding that the only advantage to being an official religious organization is that you can certify your own celebrants. Regardless of what kind of celebrant you use, you need to have a marriage license, issued by the government.
I'd love to get married in front of a real god. Or just meet one. Do they have e-mail addresses? How do you make an appointment?
You know that all of the first Christians started as Jews, right? Christianity is basically a Jewish cult that believes Yaweh sent a chunk of himself down to Earth in the form of a child in order to grow up and tell the Jews to be nicer to each other.
They're performing marriages, not building churches and imposing tithes. Being married by a representative of the flying spaghetti monster is a pretty big satirical slap in the face for people who go on about the "sanctity" of marriage and the religious rules regarding it.
Pretty timely, I'd say, considering there are places in the world where religions think it's their job to determine who can and can't be married. I bet the church of the FSM is only too happy to perform gay marriages.
I imagine quite a few people will see that video, around the world. It's essentially free to call anywhere in the US now, from anywhere. He might have to change the numbers just because of the harassment.
Besides, this seems like a definite case where punitive damages are in order. The dealership screwed up massively, and should be punished for it.
Remote control airplanes or rockets over half a pound were never really "family fun." A few enthusiasts built them, most of whom were part of an effectively self-regulating community.
The first amendment of the US constitution only mentions "freedom of speech." It's just as ambiguous as anything else about what freedom of speech actually means. Even in the US, freedom of speech is restricted, in ways that are very similar to elsewhere, including Germany. The US supreme court has spend a good deal of time picking and choosing what speech is protected and what isn't.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Yup. That one isn't just inefficient, it's gloriously so!