The next AI shock would be in games that the players do not have full knowledge of the game board.
Once that happens, realistic machine intelligence will be one step away. All that would be needed is to hook up a computer with external sensors and give it a target that it must survive.
Reality is like a board game where the whole state of it is unknown and the computer, just like humans, will have to speculate, love and fear.
The developer that programmed E.T. should have denied the initial offer. It wasn't a sane business plan. He should have negotiated for something better.
Insane business plans like this is what gives the job and industry a bad name.
Here is the solution to this problem: basic income for all, fixed prices for all the products needed for a healthy and confortable life, creation of money without interest rate, and birth control.
The cost value assigned to a product is fictitious, and it only represents the will and ambition of its seller to increase their wealth. The so called cost of a product is nothing more than the sum of all the ambitions of all the sellers that created all the intermediate products that were necessary for that product's creation.
Therefore, in order to fix the various social problems we face, including the one of AI removing the need to work, we must fix the prices of products so as that they include a standard amount of profit.
Then we can give a basic income to all, which covers the basic needs for the fixed prices defined above.
People will still be able to get rich, by the quantities of the products they sell, not by manipulating the prices of products.
The next step is to eliminate interest rate when money is created. When a banker pushes a button to create money, he assigns interest rate to it. This leads to money devaluation over time and increased value of wealth. It is a big source of misery, because the money was created out of thin air and the banker shall have no profits from it. Banks shall only be allowed profit on lending existing money.
Finally, a worldwide policy of birth control should be implemented in order to stabilize the world population.
If one finds a piece of work interesting and wants to work with it, I see no reason why the intellectual property owner shouldn't be compensated. After all, the onwer has created value that has long last appeal.
I was a fan of the original Star Wars, they are tremendously well done space opera movies, but their time has passed. Lightsabers, the Millenium Falcon, the stupid Storm Troopers, the death star/planet, the masked bad guy, etc all seen before. The latest movie, although suberbly executed, was not fresh at all. It was a rehash of all the things we have seen in the past.
I hope they take those 7 months and update the Star Wars Universe, at last.
Please mention a good reason why copyright must expire.
There isn't actually one, beyond freeloading. I.e. the only reason the/. crowd wants it abolished is because they want their free stuff.
An expiring copyright system completely undermines the law of supply and demand. Having an expiring copyright or no copyright at all will destroy the market, and then you will have no works to demand for free.
USA could effectively print its Space Program...just print a trillion dollars, and make it available to NASA, to create the most amazing spaceship yet built, which will carry humans to every corner of the Solar system.
Not only will there be a worldwide economy boost, and a huge one in the US, but in the end you will have an actual spaceship.
And this program will accelerate all sciences and education in US, due to the tremendous demand for scientists and science-aware personnel.
It may be that the correlation exists due to the time the electrons are fired. I.e. when two electrons are fired at the same time, then there spins might be corellated.
By same time, I mean the same light cone, as defined by GR.
If particles are fired in different time cones and then we find out they are not correlated, then it means that correlation is somehow linked to the frame of reference.
Anothet possible explanation is that entangling two photons creates some gravity waves that travel through the connected wires backwards to the electrons, affecting their spin.
Which is very strong evidence that our universe is a simulation, running on a computer.
And the fact that reality isn't there until observed, is also a strong evidence of the universe being a simulation: the computer that runs it has limited resources, and so it optimizes rendering performance by not rendering what runs isolated and does not cause effects in its surroundings.
Just like Physics cannot predict the weather in the long term, because the weather is a chaotic system, Economics cannot predict the state of the market, not because it does not have theorems or its theorems are not correct, but because there are too many variables and the outcome cannot be predicted.
The Bell's theorem is based on the assumption that if there are local variables that are hidden, the result measured spins of the particles would be linearly correlated to the angles these particles are created from.
I do not see how this assumption is valid though. Particles are not billiard balls. Particles may have properties that force their spin into specific correlations. It is stupid to accept that local variables would mean linear correlation.
In the discussion on Artificial Intelligence, we totally forget that the human behavior is driven by emotions and instinct and not by intelligence.
People are bad not because they are highly clever but because they enjoy being bad.
Without emotions/instincts, a machine cannot be bad or good. It might be exceptionally clever though, combining facts, extrapolating and discovering new facts and solving problems much better than humans.
Science has not proved and cannot prove that Quantum Entanglement is a real phenomenon, because it cannot be measured: as soon as one measures the particles, the entanglement is destroyed.
Furthermore, science has not proved that quantum entanglement is particles linked or particles created symmetrically. For all we know, entangled particles may be born in symmetrical state and not be linked at all.
Thirdly, we haven't even proved that a single photon is a wave. We have shown that a stream of light particles acts as a wave, through the double slit experiment, but not an individual photon.
We also have not proved that the interference pattern we are seeing in the double slit experiment is not due to spacetime ripples that create certain paths for photons to travel to instead of photons being waves.
In the double slit experiment, if the slits are turned sideways or become circular or rectangular, the interference pattern on the projector changes accordingly.
However, if the slits are enlarged, the interference pattern ceases.
This means that what actually happens is that there is a collision of photons with the slits, when the slits are small enough. When the slits are enlarged, there is no collision, and therefore no interference pattern.
When we put a detector between the electron/photon gun and the slits, the electron/photon emitted by the gun is absorbed by the detector and reemmited from the other side of the detector in a straight line, because the detector and the slits form a straight geodesic line, and thus the emitted electron/photon goes straight through the slit and does not collide with the slit walls.
I bet that if the detector is placed right where the opening hole of the electron/photon gun is, and the slits are moved slowly away from the detector, the interference pattern will reemerge, showing that there is no wave function to collapse, and thus proving that QM is the best error mankind ever did.
...we wouldn't have gotten Space Battleship Yamato, one of the most epic stories ever written.
If one wants to understand the Japanese mentality, they can start with Space Battleship Yamato. The mixture of violence, romance, war, and the fact that the heros of the show would rather die than surrender to aliens, are some important aspects of the Japanese culture.
Sega failed for the same reason the Amiga died: they both failed to catch the 3d boat at home.
Sega was the king of 3d in the arcades, with sprite-based and vector-based graphics.
However, on the home front, they totally missed the boat. The first console that could play a decent version of Outrun was the Sega Saturn, whereas the PCs of the time and the PS were used and promoted for playing 3d games.
I was saying almost exactly what you just said but no one listens. Almost everyone thinks D is better than C++. In reality, D is far worse than C++, with twice the inconsistencies and gotchas.
What C++ needs to really make D obsolete is: a) concepts, b) modules, c) put all of C's unsafe operators inside unsafe blocks. Then it will really shine.
SystemD takes the Framework approach: it provides a set of features and a way to use them. The user of SystemD cannot escape that.
On the other hand, SysV init takes the Library approach: it gives you the tools that do a specific job, but organizing them and putting them together is a job for the user.
In that light, SystemD is actually anti-Unix, because the Unix way of doing things is the Library approach, i.e. a set of tools that one can use in whatever form they need.
Now that I've said the above, the real question is the following: is Init served better by the Framework or the Library approach?
Slashdot Mirror
Since the system gives you the ability to cancel orders, I don't see what the guy did as illegal.
It is within the rules of the game, so it is legal 100%.
The next AI shock would be in games that the players do not have full knowledge of the game board.
Once that happens, realistic machine intelligence will be one step away. All that would be needed is to hook up a computer with external sensors and give it a target that it must survive.
Reality is like a board game where the whole state of it is unknown and the computer, just like humans, will have to speculate, love and fear.
The system is completely flawed, but there's no alternative.
Yes, there is. The alternative is to give people the freedom to choose.
When the make a choice and fuck things up, the next free choice is going to be carefully considered.
Hand holding humanity will never solve the problem and never let humanity grow up.
The developer that programmed E.T. should have denied the initial offer. It wasn't a sane business plan. He should have negotiated for something better.
Insane business plans like this is what gives the job and industry a bad name.
Here is the solution to this problem: basic income for all, fixed prices for all the products needed for a healthy and confortable life, creation of money without interest rate, and birth control.
The cost value assigned to a product is fictitious, and it only represents the will and ambition of its seller to increase their wealth. The so called cost of a product is nothing more than the sum of all the ambitions of all the sellers that created all the intermediate products that were necessary for that product's creation.
Therefore, in order to fix the various social problems we face, including the one of AI removing the need to work, we must fix the prices of products so as that they include a standard amount of profit.
Then we can give a basic income to all, which covers the basic needs for the fixed prices defined above.
People will still be able to get rich, by the quantities of the products they sell, not by manipulating the prices of products.
The next step is to eliminate interest rate when money is created. When a banker pushes a button to create money, he assigns interest rate to it. This leads to money devaluation over time and increased value of wealth. It is a big source of misery, because the money was created out of thin air and the banker shall have no profits from it. Banks shall only be allowed profit on lending existing money.
Finally, a worldwide policy of birth control should be implemented in order to stabilize the world population.
Copyright should be perpetual.
If one finds a piece of work interesting and wants to work with it, I see no reason why the intellectual property owner shouldn't be compensated. After all, the onwer has created value that has long last appeal.
I was a fan of the original Star Wars, they are tremendously well done space opera movies, but their time has passed. Lightsabers, the Millenium Falcon, the stupid Storm Troopers, the death star/planet, the masked bad guy, etc all seen before. The latest movie, although suberbly executed, was not fresh at all. It was a rehash of all the things we have seen in the past.
I hope they take those 7 months and update the Star Wars Universe, at last.
Please mention a good reason why copyright must expire.
There isn't actually one, beyond freeloading. I.e. the only reason the /. crowd wants it abolished is because they want their free stuff.
An expiring copyright system completely undermines the law of supply and demand. Having an expiring copyright or no copyright at all will destroy the market, and then you will have no works to demand for free.
USA could effectively print its Space Program...just print a trillion dollars, and make it available to NASA, to create the most amazing spaceship yet built, which will carry humans to every corner of the Solar system.
Not only will there be a worldwide economy boost, and a huge one in the US, but in the end you will have an actual spaceship.
And this program will accelerate all sciences and education in US, due to the tremendous demand for scientists and science-aware personnel.
"God does not exist" can easily be proven:
One can not be omnipresent and omnipotent at the same time.
If he is omnipresent, then there is no room for creating anything, thus he is not omnipotent.
If he is omnipotent, then he can create things, but he is not omnipresent, because he wasn't occupying the space its creation did.
One can also not extend his own space to create something, because in that case he is not omnipresent in respect to the space he was in.
Therefore, there is no God.
However, this does not mean there are no creators of this universe, but they certainly aren't Gods in the biblical sense.
If not, then here is your experiment flaw.
It may be that the correlation exists due to the time the electrons are fired. I.e. when two electrons are fired at the same time, then there spins might be corellated.
By same time, I mean the same light cone, as defined by GR.
If particles are fired in different time cones and then we find out they are not correlated, then it means that correlation is somehow linked to the frame of reference.
Anothet possible explanation is that entangling two photons creates some gravity waves that travel through the connected wires backwards to the electrons, affecting their spin.
Which is very strong evidence that our universe is a simulation, running on a computer.
And the fact that reality isn't there until observed, is also a strong evidence of the universe being a simulation: the computer that runs it has limited resources, and so it optimizes rendering performance by not rendering what runs isolated and does not cause effects in its surroundings.
There is absolutely no evidence whatsoever.
Just like Physics cannot predict the weather in the long term, because the weather is a chaotic system, Economics cannot predict the state of the market, not because it does not have theorems or its theorems are not correct, but because there are too many variables and the outcome cannot be predicted.
That's why no one can touch Deluxe Paint: RGBA image editing at its finest.
The Bell's theorem is based on the assumption that if there are local variables that are hidden, the result measured spins of the particles would be linearly correlated to the angles these particles are created from.
I do not see how this assumption is valid though. Particles are not billiard balls. Particles may have properties that force their spin into specific correlations. It is stupid to accept that local variables would mean linear correlation.
Really, there is nothing else to say.
In the discussion on Artificial Intelligence, we totally forget that the human behavior is driven by emotions and instinct and not by intelligence.
People are bad not because they are highly clever but because they enjoy being bad.
Without emotions/instincts, a machine cannot be bad or good. It might be exceptionally clever though, combining facts, extrapolating and discovering new facts and solving problems much better than humans.
Greek here as well.
We are indeed lazy, and we simply are unaware of that.
We think that spending a day in the office is what productivity is about.
Number one rule amongst us greeks is this: if nobody is watching, then don't do the work.
It is no coincidence that the word we use for work also means slavery. We equate work with slavery in our minds.
And that is why there is no real progress in Greece the last few decades.
Science has not proved and cannot prove that Quantum Entanglement is a real phenomenon, because it cannot be measured: as soon as one measures the particles, the entanglement is destroyed.
Furthermore, science has not proved that quantum entanglement is particles linked or particles created symmetrically. For all we know, entangled particles may be born in symmetrical state and not be linked at all.
Thirdly, we haven't even proved that a single photon is a wave. We have shown that a stream of light particles acts as a wave, through the double slit experiment, but not an individual photon.
We also have not proved that the interference pattern we are seeing in the double slit experiment is not due to spacetime ripples that create certain paths for photons to travel to instead of photons being waves.
In the double slit experiment, if the slits are turned sideways or become circular or rectangular, the interference pattern on the projector changes accordingly.
However, if the slits are enlarged, the interference pattern ceases.
This means that what actually happens is that there is a collision of photons with the slits, when the slits are small enough. When the slits are enlarged, there is no collision, and therefore no interference pattern.
When we put a detector between the electron/photon gun and the slits, the electron/photon emitted by the gun is absorbed by the detector and reemmited from the other side of the detector in a straight line, because the detector and the slits form a straight geodesic line, and thus the emitted electron/photon goes straight through the slit and does not collide with the slit walls.
I bet that if the detector is placed right where the opening hole of the electron/photon gun is, and the slits are moved slowly away from the detector, the interference pattern will reemerge, showing that there is no wave function to collapse, and thus proving that QM is the best error mankind ever did.
...we wouldn't have gotten Space Battleship Yamato, one of the most epic stories ever written.
If one wants to understand the Japanese mentality, they can start with Space Battleship Yamato. The mixture of violence, romance, war, and the fact that the heros of the show would rather die than surrender to aliens, are some important aspects of the Japanese culture.
Sega failed for the same reason the Amiga died: they both failed to catch the 3d boat at home.
Sega was the king of 3d in the arcades, with sprite-based and vector-based graphics.
However, on the home front, they totally missed the boat. The first console that could play a decent version of Outrun was the Sega Saturn, whereas the PCs of the time and the PS were used and promoted for playing 3d games.
Amen brother.
I was saying almost exactly what you just said but no one listens. Almost everyone thinks D is better than C++. In reality, D is far worse than C++, with twice the inconsistencies and gotchas.
What C++ needs to really make D obsolete is: a) concepts, b) modules, c) put all of C's unsafe operators inside unsafe blocks. Then it will really shine.
SystemD takes the Framework approach: it provides a set of features and a way to use them. The user of SystemD cannot escape that.
On the other hand, SysV init takes the Library approach: it gives you the tools that do a specific job, but organizing them and putting them together is a job for the user.
In that light, SystemD is actually anti-Unix, because the Unix way of doing things is the Library approach, i.e. a set of tools that one can use in whatever form they need.
Now that I've said the above, the real question is the following: is Init served better by the Framework or the Library approach?
Why is that, in 2015, we need installers?
In 1985, on the Amiga, applications where installed by ...copying them. There was not any installation, you simply copied things via drag-n-drop.