I find it funny that some people can get their submissions accepted and on the frontpage, even if it's a repeat story... while others can't get their stories accepted once.
So who was rejected in favor of this repeat story?
Re:There're a lot of reasons why Kurzweil is wrong
on
Downloading The Mind
·
· Score: 1
Someone mentioned before, but your body is more than just a bunch of neurons floating in fluid. Your mind, your person, your sanity rely on constant bodily feedback.
It could ofcourse be replaced by uploading the mind into a robot that could provide the brain with signals from different sensors.
Bah, I'm just rambling. Short end to a long story: Kurzweil's ideas are fun to read and worth the time spent if you have time to kill, but are highly unlikely. Copying humans into computers is a much bigger problem than just raw clock speed, which is what he boils it down to.
I would say that it should be possible to use a computer with an architecture that we have today, only we need it to be fast enough to run the brain emulator at a satisfying speed:)
I do not agree that the only way to achieve strong AI is to copy our brain. Sure we will learn a lot from its structure, but intelligence doesn't have to be like human intelligence. Our brain and our intelligence is a product of evolution. Our brains are the way they are much because the environment and the world in which we live. Our brain is just one of many if not infinite number of ways to achieve intelligence. That is what I think.
Imagine sharing your minds on a filesharing network. Or have minds running in a distributed network, functioning as one huge mind. Or, why not downloadíng someones mind, select a small portion of it and download it to your own brain. Is it possible to make a programming language for the brain?:-)
Not doing so doesn't make them bad.
Allrighty then.
I guess opressing, starving and killing the people doesn't make them bad, either. They have basically no civil liberties. They are extremely poor and starving because free trade and capitalism is a big no-no.
Just remember it was the bloody imperialists from the West that divided the country
Well, if it weren't for the North Koreans getting help from China and pushing the border back south again, the whole country would probably have been a liberal democracy. Communism is NEVER good in ANY way.
I have to say that considering geocities stupid transfer limits, to slashdot a geocities page is like stealing candy from a child.
Seriously, what were you thinking? Posting a link to a geocities page?
I disagree on the pseudocode part. It has never proven to be useful to me; the only times I've ever written pseudocode is when it's a requirement for the lab assignment.
Pseudocode is perhaps the most unnecessary part of programming ever.
Now, flowcharts are ok and sometimes useful. Not often, but it happens.
What you really should do, though, is to make some class diagrams. That's all you need to do (except step #1: Jotting down all the functions and abilities the software will have).
Will there be any bible thumpers in here saying things like this, soon?:
Read the bible! It says nothing about any rings, so, there aren't any. You liberal logical freethinking skeptical scientists always try to impose communism on us religious zealots:( There are no rings!
The more we learn about the universe, the more we see it all has an intelligent design, leading to a higher power (God).
Considering intelligence being a product of evolution, I find that statement funny and a bit tragic.
Those of you who say "prove God" can whine all you want about how you can't see "this invisible being" but remember---prior to the discovery of other invisible realities such as viruses, we couldn't see them either. That doesn't mean they didn't exist just because our naked eyes couldn't see them.
Still no proof.
Get back to me with a real debate, liberals, when scientists have determined all of what our brains can do, and cannot do, and the case is closed.
Do you think all atheists are liberals? That's like saying "if you have reasonable and good religious views, you are likely to have excellent political views". Actually, I like that:-) Thanks!
It doesn't prove that God exists. It does, however, prove that you think you can use scientific data to prove old sagas, and you use any scientific data as you see fit.
It started out Chaos (light and matter all jumbled together) but ended up as Order (light and matter divided just as the Bible litterally says it happened, with both entities taking on incomprehensible levels of order and complexity).
So you see one (1) tiny connection between scientific finds and a myth. A connection made after some very liberal*) thinking, where you exclude the misses, counts the hits and much more.
Without God, this outcome is fundamentally impossible according to the Entropy (the 2nd law of Thermodynamics).
Ah. Isn't it wonderful how science is useful to debunk scientific thinking and skepticism? Just wonderful.
I'm studying computer science right now, and, well I'm not running a company, but I have started to work now and then as a freelance in webdesign. It's very small scale as of now, but it might be more. Personally, I couldn't do more than that, like running a company. I think it would take up too much of my time (i *could* do better at college...)
Slashdot Mirror
So who was rejected in favor of this repeat story?
It could ofcourse be replaced by uploading the mind into a robot that could provide the brain with signals from different sensors.
Bah, I'm just rambling. Short end to a long story: Kurzweil's ideas are fun to read and worth the time spent if you have time to kill, but are highly unlikely. Copying humans into computers is a much bigger problem than just raw clock speed, which is what he boils it down to.
I would say that it should be possible to use a computer with an architecture that we have today, only we need it to be fast enough to run the brain emulator at a satisfying speed :)
I do not agree that the only way to achieve strong AI is to copy our brain. Sure we will learn a lot from its structure, but intelligence doesn't have to be like human intelligence. Our brain and our intelligence is a product of evolution. Our brains are the way they are much because the environment and the world in which we live. Our brain is just one of many if not infinite number of ways to achieve intelligence. That is what I think.
Imagine sharing your minds on a filesharing network. Or have minds running in a distributed network, functioning as one huge mind. Or, why not downloadíng someones mind, select a small portion of it and download it to your own brain. Is it possible to make a programming language for the brain? :-)
Not doing so doesn't make them bad. Allrighty then. I guess opressing, starving and killing the people doesn't make them bad, either. They have basically no civil liberties. They are extremely poor and starving because free trade and capitalism is a big no-no. Just remember it was the bloody imperialists from the West that divided the country Well, if it weren't for the North Koreans getting help from China and pushing the border back south again, the whole country would probably have been a liberal democracy. Communism is NEVER good in ANY way.
When was the LOC not "31337"? :)
I have to say that considering geocities stupid transfer limits, to slashdot a geocities page is like stealing candy from a child. Seriously, what were you thinking? Posting a link to a geocities page?
People say, "in a democratic society, you get what you deserve." Too bad you get what others deserve, too.
Freedom is not a consequence of democracy.
Democracy is not a requirement for freedom.
Pour some liquid nitrogen in your mouth and breath out. It works and apparently is not dangerous if you do it right...
Fylking Post! Äntligen!
Yes Linus was in way over his head. No, wait... he wasn't.
There's nothing wrong with reinventing stuff. It helps you improve your skills, and it is a great way to really learn how stuff works.
I disagree on the pseudocode part. It has never proven to be useful to me; the only times I've ever written pseudocode is when it's a requirement for the lab assignment.
Pseudocode is perhaps the most unnecessary part of programming ever.
Now, flowcharts are ok and sometimes useful. Not often, but it happens.
What you really should do, though, is to make some class diagrams. That's all you need to do (except step #1: Jotting down all the functions and abilities the software will have).
They still wont get the funds for the Pluto mission, I'm sure :(
Read the bible! It says nothing about any rings, so, there aren't any. You liberal logical freethinking skeptical scientists always try to impose communism on us religious zealots :( There are no rings!
The more we learn about the universe, the more we see it all has an intelligent design, leading to a higher power (God). Considering intelligence being a product of evolution, I find that statement funny and a bit tragic. Those of you who say "prove God" can whine all you want about how you can't see "this invisible being" but remember---prior to the discovery of other invisible realities such as viruses, we couldn't see them either. That doesn't mean they didn't exist just because our naked eyes couldn't see them. Still no proof. Get back to me with a real debate, liberals, when scientists have determined all of what our brains can do, and cannot do, and the case is closed. Do you think all atheists are liberals? That's like saying "if you have reasonable and good religious views, you are likely to have excellent political views". Actually, I like that :-) Thanks!
This proves God exists
It doesn't prove that God exists. It does, however, prove that you think you can use scientific data to prove old sagas, and you use any scientific data as you see fit.
It started out Chaos (light and matter all jumbled together) but ended up as Order (light and matter divided just as the Bible litterally says it happened, with both entities taking on incomprehensible levels of order and complexity).
So you see one (1) tiny connection between scientific finds and a myth. A connection made after some very liberal*) thinking, where you exclude the misses, counts the hits and much more.
Without God, this outcome is fundamentally impossible according to the Entropy (the 2nd law of Thermodynamics).
Ah. Isn't it wonderful how science is useful to debunk scientific thinking and skepticism?
Just wonderful.
*) No, not politically.
How the heck is this funny? It's informative. The original post, now THAT was funny.
I would build my own interplanetary spaceship! Damn that would be great. Oh, and I would also buy a harem ;)
I'm studying computer science right now, and, well I'm not running a company, but I have started to work now and then as a freelance in webdesign. It's very small scale as of now, but it might be more. Personally, I couldn't do more than that, like running a company. I think it would take up too much of my time (i *could* do better at college...)