This is one that has come up and been eating away at my mind ever since I started a project [That I can't give too many details on], we're developing a new type of AI that actually thinks.. It originally started as a project where the computer learns whatever language you speak and can speak back naturally (Language acquisition in humans is an extremely fascinating topic for research), but it blossomed into much more when we decided to begin to develop it into a much larger platform, what is now the current scope of the project. The ethical dilemma is one that makes some scoff and some others think that we have large egos, but this tugs at us night and day; exactly where is the line drawn between artificial life and true life? We are not simply building a reactionary mechanism as seen in games today, but actual minds, we're more or less reverse-engineering the human brain; not coding what it thinks, but rather/why/ it thinks that way.. It is in an environment where there will be many interacting, and we are actually worried about some things... Where the line is drawn of what is what.. Where we actually have to decide what consciousness is and risk bestowing it to our own creations. Most would think that a fabulous accomplishment, but those creatures can and will die; if not by their own doing, what happens during a power blackout where the computer system is shut off? Where is it decided what true life is? When you feel pain, it's just an electrical impulse and your brain saying 'bad'.. It is the exact same with them.... I'm probably rambling by now, but I'm sure you get the idea.. I just hope someone gets to read this since it is so far down in the comments, I'd gladly continue a conversation in this thread or in E-Mail
This is my first post on Slashdot [Yay!], but I have to use it to do something that most people probably won't like, defend Microsoft. Yes, I loathe the general instability of their products and the outrageous prices, but Microsoft is a company. A company in a capatilist system. Why do we punish them for doing their job? People say they need to cripple a successful company in order to let lesser ones compete, but what companies are they helping? What OS is there that the general public [People on the AOL level of understanding] will want? I know Linux is great, but it is not something for the general public in its current flavor. Most end users won't understand what compile even means. My point in general, I guess, is that Microsoft does have a product for the general public, yet everyone sees having a good foothold on a market as a tyrannical thing. If people don't want to use Windows' Media Player, they don't have to. I use WinAmp, and it works perfectly. I don't worry one bit about WMP, I see no reason that Microsoft should be forced to rip away the Media Player for one, which would most likely lead to many more holes in the code which could cause even more errors when visiting web pages with any kind of audio or movies or even inserting a CD
Slashdot Mirror
Because, as we all know, infrastructure and technological development/deployment requires no management, creativity, or strategic planning whatsoever.
I'm sure they can make one based on the P-P-P-Powerbook - http://www.zug.com/pranks/powerbook/
This is one that has come up and been eating away at my mind ever since I started a project [That I can't give too many details on], we're developing a new type of AI that actually thinks.. It originally started as a project where the computer learns whatever language you speak and can speak back naturally (Language acquisition in humans is an extremely fascinating topic for research), but it blossomed into much more when we decided to begin to develop it into a much larger platform, what is now the current scope of the project. The ethical dilemma is one that makes some scoff and some others think that we have large egos, but this tugs at us night and day; exactly where is the line drawn between artificial life and true life? We are not simply building a reactionary mechanism as seen in games today, but actual minds, we're more or less reverse-engineering the human brain; not coding what it thinks, but rather /why/ it thinks that way.. It is in an environment where there will be many interacting, and we are actually worried about some things... Where the line is drawn of what is what.. Where we actually have to decide what consciousness is and risk bestowing it to our own creations. Most would think that a fabulous accomplishment, but those creatures can and will die; if not by their own doing, what happens during a power blackout where the computer system is shut off? Where is it decided what true life is? When you feel pain, it's just an electrical impulse and your brain saying 'bad'.. It is the exact same with them.... I'm probably rambling by now, but I'm sure you get the idea.. I just hope someone gets to read this since it is so far down in the comments, I'd gladly continue a conversation in this thread or in E-Mail
Well, it's down when you're dropping all those bombs, and maybe some troops attack while laying on a street louge? ^.^
This is my first post on Slashdot [Yay!], but I have to use it to do something that most people probably won't like, defend Microsoft. Yes, I loathe the general instability of their products and the outrageous prices, but Microsoft is a company. A company in a capatilist system. Why do we punish them for doing their job? People say they need to cripple a successful company in order to let lesser ones compete, but what companies are they helping? What OS is there that the general public [People on the AOL level of understanding] will want? I know Linux is great, but it is not something for the general public in its current flavor. Most end users won't understand what compile even means. My point in general, I guess, is that Microsoft does have a product for the general public, yet everyone sees having a good foothold on a market as a tyrannical thing. If people don't want to use Windows' Media Player, they don't have to. I use WinAmp, and it works perfectly. I don't worry one bit about WMP, I see no reason that Microsoft should be forced to rip away the Media Player for one, which would most likely lead to many more holes in the code which could cause even more errors when visiting web pages with any kind of audio or movies or even inserting a CD
- Phocks