Possibility 1: It does mean the designers in which case some machines may get promoted to AI shortly after their designers die. Possibility 2: It means anyone with access to the design in which case if the AI has capabilities beyond ours then one 'AI' may be able to explain the creative process of another in sufficient detail to preclude any of them being classed as AI. This test appears to assume human limitations. While we may one day understand enough neuroscience to explain human creativity in a hand-wavy fashion I doubt we'll ever get to the point where a human can explain another human's creative process in detail.
Another thought. Would adding a genuine random element make this test rather easy to pass? While a designer might be able to provide an explanation for a given creative work they could never guarantee it was the correct explanation. If the requirement is that nobody can provide a plausible explanation for the creative work then humans might not pass the test.
Unless I've misread the article it really is non-toxic even to cancer cells. It doesn't kill cancer cells it just stops them from behaving like cancer cells. As such it prevents cancer from spreading further but does nothing to "cure" it.
I think you'll find he's making a simple empirical statement. It's impossible to find a country with a majority Muslim population where you have a reasonable degree of freedom. Trying to make a fundamentalist/moderate distinction is irrelevant. Anywhere Muslims are in the majority the extremists have too much power.
IANAL either but I believe a license is a unilateral grant of rights. No agreement from the recipient is necessary since they are not giving anything up. A license agreement on the other hand is a contract you have to agree to in order to receive a license. Neither of the GPL licenses has an agreement associated with it as they are formulated as a bunch of permissions to do things normally forbidden by copyright.
My understanding is that we are more closely related (ie split off later) to chimps than chimps are to other great apes which would make our common ancestor an ape unless one goes in for special pleading. Not a currently living ape but an ape nonetheless.
The grocery stores allow you to get around the bootstrapping problem. Otherwise no one would buy the cars until infrastructure was in place and no one would build the infrastructure until there were cars to buy the fuel.
No, wrong. In Marxist theory the state will "wither away" as part of the transition from socialism to communism. In practice this never happened but that doesn't make it sensible to compare the failures of capitalism to communism when what they really have in common is failure to achieve their goals.
It's not enough that there be some anthropogenic effect it would need to be a significant one. If we have little ability to alter the climate then we might be better running our industrial economies full bore to help find ways to live with climate change rather than trying to reduce an insignificant contribution. That said I think the anthropogenic contribution to climate change is significant and the evidence presented to the contrary in the article isn't convincing.
I suspect a lot of support contracts are about demonstrating that a problem isn't the PHB's fault. If the huge software company that made the software can't solve the problem then it can't be the PHB's fault.
While the problem is real (having to scroll down past quoted text) the solution adopted seems to me to be wrong and in the wrong place. It would surely be simpler to just have your mail reader skip the attribution line plus any initial quoted/blank lines. That way people who want to see the context can (by disabling the feature or scrolling back) while those who do not don't have to. That said I don't know of any Mail reader with this feature built in although there are some where it wouldn't be hard to add.
Possibly they are bringing something to Debian. The RPM package format has features which DEB does not and vice versa. Current integration usually involves either using alien to convert the packages thereby losing the package format specific features or maintaing 2 seperate databases and losing proper dependency resolution as a result.
Slashdot Mirror
Possibility 1: It does mean the designers in which case some machines may get promoted to AI shortly after their designers die.
Possibility 2: It means anyone with access to the design in which case if the AI has capabilities beyond ours then one 'AI' may be able to explain the creative process of another in sufficient detail to preclude any of them being classed as AI. This test appears to assume human limitations. While we may one day understand enough neuroscience to explain human creativity in a hand-wavy fashion I doubt we'll ever get to the point where a human can explain another human's creative process in detail.
Another thought. Would adding a genuine random element make this test rather easy to pass? While a designer might be able to provide an explanation for a given creative work they could never guarantee it was the correct explanation. If the requirement is that nobody can provide a plausible explanation for the creative work then humans might not pass the test.
Just install Firefox and you will.
Yes.
You are forgetting people born in Newfoundland before 1949 and that americans get the words native and aboriginal mixed up.
Unless I've misread the article it really is non-toxic even to cancer cells. It doesn't kill cancer cells
it just stops them from behaving like cancer cells. As such it prevents cancer from spreading further but does nothing to "cure" it.
Yeah, we prefer our youth pre-corrupted.
I think you'll find he's making a simple empirical statement. It's impossible to find a country with a majority Muslim population where you have a reasonable degree of freedom. Trying to make a fundamentalist/moderate distinction is irrelevant. Anywhere Muslims are in the majority the extremists have too much power.
My cat gets annoyed when I try to chargemy mobile from it.
No, but SCO does.
IANAL either but I believe a license is a unilateral grant of rights. No agreement from the recipient is necessary since they are not giving anything up. A license agreement on the other hand is a contract you have to agree to in order to receive a license. Neither of the GPL licenses has an agreement associated with it as they are formulated as a bunch of permissions to do things normally forbidden by copyright.
There are 11 types of people in the world, those who can count in binary, and those who can't.
My understanding is that we are more closely related (ie split off later) to chimps than chimps are to other
great apes which would make our common ancestor an ape unless one goes in for special pleading. Not a currently living ape but an ape nonetheless.
The TV license is per household not per television.
Why? Is there some reason to believe a roof made out of solar panels couldn't perform the normal functions of
a roof?
The grocery stores allow you to get around the bootstrapping problem. Otherwise no one would buy the cars until infrastructure was in place and no one would build the infrastructure until there were cars to buy the fuel.
Your testosterone levels have probably also declined from when you were a teenager.
Could you begthe question anymore blatantly?
Bring back the bang path!
No, wrong. In Marxist theory the state will "wither away" as part of the transition from socialism to communism. In practice this never happened but that doesn't make it sensible to compare the failures of capitalism to communism when what they really have in common is failure to achieve their goals.
It's not enough that there be some anthropogenic effect it would need to be a significant one. If we have little ability to alter the climate then we might be better running our industrial economies full bore to help find ways to live with climate change rather than trying to reduce an insignificant contribution. That said I think the anthropogenic contribution to climate change is significant and the evidence presented to the contrary in the article isn't convincing.
I suspect a lot of support contracts are about demonstrating that a problem isn't the PHB's fault.
If the huge software company that made the software can't solve the problem then it can't be
the PHB's fault.
According to thepiece you reference that's $20 thousand a year. Not million.
$20K a year probably wouldn't fund much in the way of fusion research.
While the problem is real (having to scroll down past quoted text) the solution adopted seems to me to be wrong and in the wrong place. It would surely be simpler to just have your mail reader skip the attribution line plus any initial quoted/blank lines. That way people who want to see the context can (by disabling the feature or scrolling back) while those who do not don't have to. That said I don't know of any Mail reader with this feature built in although there are some where it wouldn't be hard to add.
when William Goldman mutilated Morgenstern's classic.
"Good bits" version indeed.
Possibly they are bringing something to Debian.
The RPM package format has features which DEB does not and vice versa. Current integration usually involves either using alien to convert the packages thereby losing the package format specific features or maintaing 2 seperate databases and losing proper dependency resolution as a result.