A page which was served by unencrypted HTTP but which posts its form data to an https url is secure.
It just doesn't look secure to non-technical users.
Of course if the site then sends the form data back up unencrypted (e.g. after server side value validation fails) that is then insecure, but no one with a brain sends the password value back up anyway.
Yes you CAN write computer code that learns something, concludes something, and does something that you don't understand. You program general-representation data structures (such as bayesian-weighted nodes and links, simple-neuron-based networks, generalization-specialization lattices, logic representations including higher-order logic, whatever you fancy...) And then you program general learning and model building and testing algorithms, and general inference algorithms. In short, you program at the meta-level. And then you unleash your general symbolic/mathematical representation structures, and your general information-processing algorithms, on inputs that you yourself don't have access to (such as Google's hosted image and video collection, or the web's corpus of text, in total)
You as programmer have no specific idea how that will go. Your software and representation will CLEARLY learn stuff you don't know.
I grant that our knowledge of how to make the general representation structures and the general learning and inference algorithms is still fairly preliminary and weak. But there is no inherent stumbling block. It will just take more research about the meta-level techniques of efficient general representation and learning. It is not a dead end. Some are working toward increased generality. Some are working on algorithms for the important general sub-domain of spatiotemporal event sequence learning. Some are working toward continuous training/learning rather than bounded supervised training sessions. Some are working on combining general learning with a statistical knowledge (concept-relation) graph gleaned from a large subset of all human published or internet-hosted writing. Only an extreme pessimist with an agenda, holding on to a "human uniqueness" false belief, would say that significant progress is not being made on intelligent and learning algorithms and data structures these days.
I also want to stress that whether or not something "wakes up" to experiencing the qualia of consciousness is a very interesting question, but what most people, including you, seem to fail to grasp, is that that question is orthogonal to the question of whether one can create a general-domain model-building learner, and general-domain recognition and inference algorithms. It is also orthogonal to the question of whether one can create a general-principled attention-focussing mechanism that prioritizes learning and inference and sensor attention, as needed commonly for time-sensitive, context-sensitive processing. An attention-focussing mechanism that for example relies on, for example, pseudo-emotion-tagging of representations of situation-aspects which have bearing on something's (e.g. the reasoner's and/or its allies) interests or survival. As well as relying on meta-level heuristics designed to prune unproductive inference paths etc.
All of this is just a matter of more research time and more trial and error with the details of these general principles.
Musk is a generalist, a systematist. He has proven the ability to learn several new domains to a level equivalent to the best specialist experts in those fields.
Hawking's mind ably synthesizes concepts from different fields together successfully, such as combining black holes (cosmology/relativity) with quantum theory, and figuring out a way in which the two relate. There's no reason to suppose he can't also extrapolate well in other more mundane domains.
Have you any idea how much better voice-recognition AI (backed by Google's knowledge graph) is at parsing and giving a decent answer to a good majority of questions now than such technology was even a decade ago?
Or Google/Apple/Facebook's picture content recognition algorithms?
The advance has been lightning fast.
This stuff is going to keep advancing, rapidly. That's what you're ignoring.
Talking to google on my phone is way more useful than talking to your dog, by the way.
A few other things you're missing:
1) Thinking (abduction, induction, bayesian model-updating and predictions/recognition, etc etc) is quite possible to be quite advanced without self-awareness. The two are fairly separate applications. Something can be really really smart, and creative even, without having to be self-aware.
2) The behaviour associated with self-awareness is clearly attainable by simple extensions of the current machine-learning technology. We just need to learn the programming/data-modelling techniques to turn the deep-learning and predicting algorithms on a representation of the computer/robot-as-agent-in-the-world, and have it learn about its relation to things out there that it is learning about. Whether the thing would have the qualia-feeling of self-awareness is entirely beside the point. It could function/behave exactly as if it was self aware, because it would be self-knowledgeable, self-learning etc.
Screw that. Uncomfortable, hot, dirty, ineffective. Not happening.
Do not work on software for a company that puts you in an open plan office. Period. It shows profound misunderstanding by the powers that be of the nature of the work you do, and your basic requirements for being able to do it effectively and with high quality.
That lack of understanding telegraphs that you will be ineffectively managed on many other aspects of your work too.
yeah, if you ignore that his narrow victory was clearly pushed over the top by the illegal interference in the election by the head of the FBI, who was using as ammunition against the Democrat contender a set of emails related to emails which were originally made public by illegal hacking of Democrat computer systems by agents of a foreign power.
Other than that, he was elected totally legally, and no one had a right to be properly pissed off at a stolen election and subversion of democracy.
Oh wait, first, what is the percentage of VCs that are female, and roughly, why is that?
Not suggesting female VCs would or should decide differently.
Frankly, using gender of the proponent as a criterion is just f'ing dumb. It should be about drive, dogged determination, intelligence, team synergy, idea quality, progress so far, roadmap credibility...
He's going well underground. He's not going through your (or city's) property.
Why the hell would you care?
Or could it be that you are just one of those whose gut instinct is to ban anything new, because it is, goddamit, new! and bound to be terribly dangerous.
Any truly competent lawyer should be able to demonstrate that they are badly designed from a human factors and effective communication perspective, as evidenced by the fact that they are almost always unread yet clicked on by almost everybody. It's not an effective contract, since there was no effective communication about it.
-Place phone in plastic bag. -Duct-tape phone to $400 drone. -Place drone near border crossing maybe a few miles away. -Cross border. -Drive a few miles. -Fly drone with phone across border. -Proceed on merry way.
It's not even wrong (to quote a famous scientist about a really ill-formed idea).
At this point with multi-core computers, the GUI and mouse etc should be on a completely separate core that is managed somewhat separately than all of the others.
More specifically, why are OSes not designed, and computing hardware not designed, so that the GUI cannot be slowed down by other slow processes, process switching, or I/O / virtual memory thrashing.
The most brain-dead design-avoidable situation in the computing universe is where my computer is thrashing due to some resource over-use, and the UI is inoperable so I can't fix the problem e.g. by killing processes/programs. DOH!
The UI and user input devices should be a completely separate set of processes and memory than the rest of application processing. It should operate as a service, through data pipelines, to the rest of the applications. It should be completely separate, in terms of resource management. Or failing that, certain aspects of GUI, such as program kill controls, should be highly prioritized over pretty much everything else.
Again, slow and over-used everything else should not slow the UI and user input processes. This is basic.
Is that the new "unit" whose cognitive ability needs to be assessed is "you + your smartphone" (i.e. the cyborg)
Research question should be "what is the cognitive ability, and accessible knowledge set, of "person+phone" vs of "person alone".
This is analogous to assessing the effectiveness of a US infantry soldier. Do we assess them unequiped in their underwear, even if undistracted? Or do we assess them when dressed in armor, night-vision helmet, weapons, gps, and radio/satphone capable of calling in massive precision air support.
2 can be hard for some people to eye the alignment accurately, and with 4 you run out of line length too often, unless you extend your program line arbitrarily like a moron.
Also it is harder for the tab mafia to convert your 3-spaced code into tab graffiti.
Slashdot Mirror
A page which was served by unencrypted HTTP but which posts its form data to an https url is secure.
It just doesn't look secure to non-technical users.
Of course if the site then sends the form data back up unencrypted (e.g. after server side value validation fails) that is then insecure, but no one with a brain sends the password value back up anyway.
Warrior promoting Unjust Society (or is that, Warrior for Unequal Statuses).
Yes you CAN write computer code that learns something, concludes something, and does something that you don't understand. You program general-representation data structures (such as bayesian-weighted nodes and links, simple-neuron-based networks, generalization-specialization lattices, logic representations including higher-order logic, whatever you fancy...) And then you program general learning and model building and testing algorithms, and general inference algorithms. In short, you program at the meta-level. And then you unleash your general symbolic/mathematical representation structures, and your general information-processing algorithms, on inputs that you yourself don't have access to (such as Google's hosted image and video collection, or the web's corpus of text, in total)
You as programmer have no specific idea how that will go. Your software and representation will CLEARLY learn stuff you don't know.
I grant that our knowledge of how to make the general representation structures and the general learning and inference algorithms is still fairly preliminary and weak. But there is no inherent stumbling block. It will just take more research about the meta-level techniques of efficient general representation and learning. It is not a dead end. Some are working toward increased generality. Some are working on algorithms for the important general sub-domain of spatiotemporal event sequence learning. Some are working toward continuous training/learning rather than bounded supervised training sessions. Some are working on combining general learning with a statistical knowledge (concept-relation) graph gleaned from a large subset of all human published or internet-hosted writing. Only an extreme pessimist with an agenda, holding on to a "human uniqueness" false belief, would say that significant progress is not being made on intelligent and learning algorithms and data structures these days.
I also want to stress that whether or not something "wakes up" to experiencing the qualia of consciousness is a very interesting question, but what most people, including you, seem to fail to grasp, is that that question is orthogonal to the question of whether one can create a general-domain model-building learner, and general-domain recognition and inference algorithms. It is also orthogonal to the question of whether one can create a general-principled attention-focussing mechanism that prioritizes learning and inference and sensor attention, as needed commonly for time-sensitive, context-sensitive processing. An attention-focussing mechanism that for example relies on, for example, pseudo-emotion-tagging of representations of situation-aspects which have bearing on something's (e.g. the reasoner's and/or its allies) interests or survival. As well as relying on meta-level heuristics designed to prune unproductive inference paths etc.
All of this is just a matter of more research time and more trial and error with the details of these general principles.
Musk is a generalist, a systematist. He has proven the ability to learn several new domains to a level equivalent to the best specialist experts in those fields.
Hawking's mind ably synthesizes concepts from different fields together successfully, such as combining black holes (cosmology/relativity) with quantum theory, and figuring out a way in which the two relate. There's no reason to suppose he can't also extrapolate well in other more mundane domains.
Have you any idea how much better voice-recognition AI (backed by Google's knowledge graph) is at parsing and giving a decent answer to a good majority of questions now than such technology was even a decade ago?
Or Google/Apple/Facebook's picture content recognition algorithms?
The advance has been lightning fast.
This stuff is going to keep advancing, rapidly. That's what you're ignoring.
Talking to google on my phone is way more useful than talking to your dog, by the way.
A few other things you're missing:
1) Thinking (abduction, induction, bayesian model-updating and predictions/recognition, etc etc) is quite possible to be quite advanced without self-awareness. The two are fairly separate applications. Something can be really really smart, and creative even, without having to be self-aware.
2) The behaviour associated with self-awareness is clearly attainable by simple extensions of the current machine-learning technology. We just need to learn the programming/data-modelling techniques to turn the deep-learning and predicting algorithms on a representation of the computer/robot-as-agent-in-the-world, and have it learn about its relation to things out there that it is learning about. Whether the thing would have the qualia-feeling of self-awareness is entirely beside the point. It could function/behave exactly as if it was self aware, because it would be self-knowledgeable, self-learning etc.
we (our brains) do pretty much the same thing. So your point doesn't really go anywhere.
There are these amazing new things called meeting rooms...
With big white boards all around.
every work day.
Screw that. Uncomfortable, hot, dirty, ineffective. Not happening.
Do not work on software for a company that puts you in an open plan office. Period.
It shows profound misunderstanding by the powers that be of the nature of the work you do,
and your basic requirements for being able to do it effectively and with high quality.
That lack of understanding telegraphs that you will be ineffectively managed on many other aspects of your work too.
Which the vast majority of users will use to hang themselves right after they shoot themselves in the foot.
yeah, if you ignore that his narrow victory was clearly pushed over the top by the illegal interference in the election by the head of the FBI, who was using as ammunition against the Democrat contender a set of emails related to emails which were originally made public by illegal hacking of Democrat computer systems by agents of a foreign power.
Other than that, he was elected totally legally, and no one had a right to be properly pissed off at a stolen election and subversion of democracy.
Oh wait, first, what is the percentage of VCs that are female, and roughly, why is that?
Not suggesting female VCs would or should decide differently.
Frankly, using gender of the proponent as a criterion is just f'ing dumb.
It should be about drive, dogged determination, intelligence, team synergy, idea quality, progress so far, roadmap credibility...
He's going well underground. He's not going through your (or city's) property.
Why the hell would you care?
Or could it be that you are just one of those whose gut instinct is to ban anything new, because it is, goddamit, new! and bound to be terribly dangerous.
Stop being such a whiner.
He's got well-developed shoulder and bicep muscles, which will be useful for shovelling the shit.
Sounds like a Trolley Problem http://imgur.com/gallery/pKEMa
Any truly competent lawyer should be able to demonstrate that they are badly designed from a human factors and effective communication perspective, as evidenced by the fact that they are almost always unread yet clicked on by almost everybody. It's not an effective contract, since there was no effective communication about it.
"... it definitely DOES prove intent." Or curiosity.
-Place phone in plastic bag.
-Duct-tape phone to $400 drone.
-Place drone near border crossing maybe a few miles away.
-Cross border.
-Drive a few miles.
-Fly drone with phone across border.
-Proceed on merry way.
It's not even wrong (to quote a famous scientist about a really ill-formed idea).
At this point with multi-core computers, the GUI and mouse etc should be on a completely separate core that is managed somewhat separately than all of the others.
More specifically, why are OSes not designed, and computing hardware not designed, so that the GUI cannot be slowed down by other slow processes, process switching, or I/O / virtual memory thrashing.
The most brain-dead design-avoidable situation in the computing universe is where my computer is thrashing due to some resource over-use, and the UI is inoperable so I can't fix the problem e.g. by killing processes/programs. DOH!
The UI and user input devices should be a completely separate set of processes and memory than the rest of application processing. It should operate as a service, through data pipelines, to the rest of the applications. It should be completely separate, in terms of resource management. Or failing that, certain aspects of GUI, such as program kill controls, should be highly prioritized over pretty much everything else.
Again, slow and over-used everything else should not slow the UI and user input processes. This is basic.
Make shit up about solar panels which are stealing their jobs.
Stop Fidgeting !!!
Like your mother told you.
I would like to invite you to be a valuable and ongoing member of our technology development team. Also, I would like to subscribe to your newsletter.
Is that the new "unit" whose cognitive ability needs to be assessed is "you + your smartphone" (i.e. the cyborg)
Research question should be "what is the cognitive ability, and accessible knowledge set, of "person+phone" vs of "person alone".
This is analogous to assessing the effectiveness of a US infantry soldier.
Do we assess them unequiped in their underwear, even if undistracted?
Or do we assess them when dressed in armor, night-vision helmet, weapons, gps, and radio/satphone capable of calling in massive precision air support.
Further to this, there's one thing I'm sure of, on these legal matters:
The US government has the right to kiss my ass.
2 can be hard for some people to eye the alignment accurately, and with 4 you run out of line length too often, unless you extend your program line arbitrarily like a moron.
Also it is harder for the tab mafia to convert your 3-spaced code into tab graffiti.
3 spaces - the choice of champions.