If you have to hire a sysadmin to administer it, the cloud solution looks a lot better. I work for a very very small company and we do all our servers in the cloud (Amazon, Heroku, MLab) because hiring one full time position plus renting out COLO space (we have no suitable physical location) plus power and bandwidth would be much more expensive than the few hundred bucks a month we spend on virtual servers. So as usual the answer is it depends.
Did they just program in an artificial limit, or what? 64 bit processors can inherently address far more memory than that so why are the laptop ones crippled?
You're making the assumption that the AI correctly interprets the situation in the first place, of course.
Not really, I explicitly called out that that will be the main issue, and that humans have the same problem.
It's going to be twenty years before it understands the world as well as a human.
They don't need to do that to be able to drive more safely than an average driver.
For example, the driver will start changing lanes and there will be a beep, well it's pretty obvious then that you should stay in your current lane and the human won't have trouble reacting.
That technology is great, and it will get more common and improve safety. But it won't improve safety nearly as much as high quality automated cars.
That doesn't seem likely. If you could get a high end computer for the same price as a low end, why would anyone buy the low end? If there isn't enough demand for low end computers they'll just disappear, not rise in price.
If the purpose is to get the cars out of the way, what good does that do? By the time the driver sees the ticket usually the sweeper will be long gone. If there's a regular posted schedule of when parking is not allowed due to street sweeping then maybe it would work to get those people to not park there next time.
Manual cars will be just as safe. There is nothing preventing manual cars from talking with one another and warning the driver.
And then the driver has to see the warning, understand the warning, correctly decide what to do about the warning, and then do it. Meanwhile during this process the car continues to move. One advantage of automated cars are that this all happens almost instantly (the main variable is how correct the decision is, and that's also a significant variable with a human driver), and it happens reliably, or it will eventually.
Unless there's a law that says otherwise, a private business can tell you to leave their property any time they want. So for instance there are laws that say they can't kick you out for being black, but if they want to tell you to leave because they don't like how you smell (and have you escorted out by police if you refuse) they can. And if there's no law saying otherwise they can kick you out because they don't like how much you're winning.
Depending on how poor the 90% are, they may decide it's time to literally storm the gates. I would guess it wouldn't take a long period of widespread food insecurity before you had mobs storming the homes of the wealthy and stealing food and dragging the occupants' dead bodies through the streets.
On the other hand if their biggest problem is they can't afford the cable package with Bravo any more, probably nothing will change. The wealthy would be well served by keeping the poor rich enough to be mostly satisfied with their lives.
So you're using the definition of AI as "whatever a computer is not capable of doing yet". If you showed Siri to someone from 1987, once you convinced them it was a computer and not a person they would definitely consider it AI. But now we don't think of it as AI because we're used to it.
That activity is specifically reserved for a member of law enforcement.
How do you figure that? The 4th amendment certainly doesn't say anything about what non-governmental actors can and cannot do, so you must be getting it from somewhere else.
For what it's worth I've have pretty good experience with their phone support. Actually the only problem I've had with them with support is that during chat with an agent, I was considering one of their offers but hadn't accepted it (she was totally unable to provide a channel listing) but she took the signup far enough through the process that I had some hardware delivered to my house the next day. So I had to drive to the store but they took it back no problem.
It makes the net not neutral - some parties are advantaged and some disadvantaged. This doesn't have to be via traffic shaping to be a neutrality issue.
Yes, but if someone who doesn't know much about computers deletes something, then they DON'T knowingly have it on their computer. They think it's gone.
I thought we were talking about giving one's computer to someone to fix. That's certainly what I was talking about. And if you're trying to suggest that it's common sense to know that deleting a file makes it no more gone than putting something in your trash can does, that's exactly the claim I was disputing.
It's not common sense to know that if you delete something from a computer it can still be recovered. It's something that some people are aware of, and some aren't.
That is a bit disturbing as there probably won't be a way to disable that without voiding the warranty. And possibly ruining the device unless you really know what you're doing.
I'm guessing that he basically can't be fired for doing a poor job because he's a federal employee, and he knows it and his bosses know it and he knows they know it. So his boss tells him to knock it off, and he says "OK Bob" and keeps on doing the bare minimum to not get fired. But that's just a guess.
It would be cool if they slapped an RFID tag on every package, and every vehicle had a scanner that automatically updated the database when a package was put on or taken off.
You can take it even further than that. If government were a business, they'd defund almost everything in addition to raising taxes. Law enforcement and courts would still get money, probably the military, and a few other programs here and there, but all entitlements, any kind of social safety net, all regulatory bodies, and all foreign aid would be canned.
Slashdot Mirror
If you have to hire a sysadmin to administer it, the cloud solution looks a lot better. I work for a very very small company and we do all our servers in the cloud (Amazon, Heroku, MLab) because hiring one full time position plus renting out COLO space (we have no suitable physical location) plus power and bandwidth would be much more expensive than the few hundred bucks a month we spend on virtual servers. So as usual the answer is it depends.
Did they just program in an artificial limit, or what? 64 bit processors can inherently address far more memory than that so why are the laptop ones crippled?
You're making the assumption that the AI correctly interprets the situation in the first place, of course.
Not really, I explicitly called out that that will be the main issue, and that humans have the same problem.
It's going to be twenty years before it understands the world as well as a human.
They don't need to do that to be able to drive more safely than an average driver.
For example, the driver will start changing lanes and there will be a beep, well it's pretty obvious then that you should stay in your current lane and the human won't have trouble reacting.
That technology is great, and it will get more common and improve safety. But it won't improve safety nearly as much as high quality automated cars.
That doesn't seem likely. If you could get a high end computer for the same price as a low end, why would anyone buy the low end? If there isn't enough demand for low end computers they'll just disappear, not rise in price.
If the purpose is to get the cars out of the way, what good does that do? By the time the driver sees the ticket usually the sweeper will be long gone. If there's a regular posted schedule of when parking is not allowed due to street sweeping then maybe it would work to get those people to not park there next time.
Manual cars will be just as safe. There is nothing preventing manual cars from talking with one another and warning the driver.
And then the driver has to see the warning, understand the warning, correctly decide what to do about the warning, and then do it. Meanwhile during this process the car continues to move. One advantage of automated cars are that this all happens almost instantly (the main variable is how correct the decision is, and that's also a significant variable with a human driver), and it happens reliably, or it will eventually.
Unless there's a law that says otherwise, a private business can tell you to leave their property any time they want. So for instance there are laws that say they can't kick you out for being black, but if they want to tell you to leave because they don't like how you smell (and have you escorted out by police if you refuse) they can. And if there's no law saying otherwise they can kick you out because they don't like how much you're winning.
Depending on how poor the 90% are, they may decide it's time to literally storm the gates. I would guess it wouldn't take a long period of widespread food insecurity before you had mobs storming the homes of the wealthy and stealing food and dragging the occupants' dead bodies through the streets.
On the other hand if their biggest problem is they can't afford the cable package with Bravo any more, probably nothing will change. The wealthy would be well served by keeping the poor rich enough to be mostly satisfied with their lives.
So you're using the definition of AI as "whatever a computer is not capable of doing yet". If you showed Siri to someone from 1987, once you convinced them it was a computer and not a person they would definitely consider it AI. But now we don't think of it as AI because we're used to it.
That activity is specifically reserved for a member of law enforcement.
How do you figure that? The 4th amendment certainly doesn't say anything about what non-governmental actors can and cannot do, so you must be getting it from somewhere else.
For what it's worth I've have pretty good experience with their phone support. Actually the only problem I've had with them with support is that during chat with an agent, I was considering one of their offers but hadn't accepted it (she was totally unable to provide a channel listing) but she took the signup far enough through the process that I had some hardware delivered to my house the next day. So I had to drive to the store but they took it back no problem.
It makes the net not neutral - some parties are advantaged and some disadvantaged. This doesn't have to be via traffic shaping to be a neutrality issue.
Yes, but if someone who doesn't know much about computers deletes something, then they DON'T knowingly have it on their computer. They think it's gone.
I thought we were talking about giving one's computer to someone to fix. That's certainly what I was talking about. And if you're trying to suggest that it's common sense to know that deleting a file makes it no more gone than putting something in your trash can does, that's exactly the claim I was disputing.
It's not a "field", it's common sense.
It's not common sense to know that if you delete something from a computer it can still be recovered. It's something that some people are aware of, and some aren't.
Quite right, it could still report quite a bit of information. At least it wouldn't have access to your home network though.
Well personally I want a TV tuner and speakers with my TV, so that wouldn't work for me. Maybe there are other models with those included though.
So what do you do if you have processes that must live longer than "for[sic] weeks"?
That wasn't an error; he didn't mean to type "four".
Are they designed to only generate power at a specific RPM or something? It seems like stronger wind = faster spinning = more electricity.
That is a bit disturbing as there probably won't be a way to disable that without voiding the warranty. And possibly ruining the device unless you really know what you're doing.
Wouldn't wind farms produce more power during a storm? Or do they have to be shut down?
It will probably get harder and harder to find a TV without these "smart" features. If you don't want them, just don't give the TV your wifi password.
I'm guessing that he basically can't be fired for doing a poor job because he's a federal employee, and he knows it and his bosses know it and he knows they know it. So his boss tells him to knock it off, and he says "OK Bob" and keeps on doing the bare minimum to not get fired. But that's just a guess.
It would be cool if they slapped an RFID tag on every package, and every vehicle had a scanner that automatically updated the database when a package was put on or taken off.
You can take it even further than that. If government were a business, they'd defund almost everything in addition to raising taxes. Law enforcement and courts would still get money, probably the military, and a few other programs here and there, but all entitlements, any kind of social safety net, all regulatory bodies, and all foreign aid would be canned.