But once we figure that out- and we will- we will be at the next great step forward.
Might take some time though. It seems that the arguments brought forward by TAUBE (1961 !, Computers and Common Sense, the Myth of Thinking Machines) against the feasibility of machine translation still hold and apply to the problem in focus.
Typing "What is the capital of France?" won't get you better results than typing "capital of France."... Most of what we do is at the word and phrase level; we're not concentrating on the sentence. We think it's important to get the right results rather than change the interface.
This misses situations like searching for "That sf-short-story were the crew of the visiting spaceship is given a dog as a present" in which googling failed, at least for me, or, more technically, when you have absolutely no idea about what the relevant terms within the outcome might be. In short, if you have a real question.
'social impact' may be superior to 'wealth-creation'
Quite unclear, for sure, since trying to increase the benefit of all also creates 'wealth'.
I wanted to rule out 'creation of wealth in a hand of a few' (a high gini-coefficient). If you target the latter, you, IMHO, end up with an inflexible, vulnerable system with a low stability.
On a very broad scale, thus necessarily fuzzy, a ranking of systems according to the probability that they include 'social impact' in evaluations might be: 'communism (as instantiated henceforth)' — tree-like flow of power by (normative) rules; 'capitalism' — tree-like flow of power materialized as money (underlying rules are normative as well, but this is hidden better); 'anarchy'— networked (complete-graph as a model) flow of information useful to create local optima according to local needs.
Targeting social impact in the first place also again transforms technological/scientific development into a human endeavour, as opposed to a technical/material one if you only look at ROI.
objective proof
There is no such thing outside maths, all science being empirical and the humanities not having switched to empirics too may be rated normative, IMHO.
But you may probably collect evidence by looking at existing systems, their ability to sustain equilibrium (which is one of the targets I rate important) as well as the underlying causes. The most obvious system is 'earth' (yes, there are subsystems that follow power(disambiguation: exp) laws, but the interconnectedness seems to be impressive. Here (/.), the Internet comes to mind (which, in a second stage, probably was designed with 'social impact' in mind (think 'global village'), with consequences like FOSS, p2p, on a smaller scale, 'instant mobs', consumer action... . In contrast, you may look at 'optimized agriculture', highly vulnerable and not sustainable (e.g. GM-crops). Just examples.
I might point out that your call for 'objective proof', to me, is just an indicator that some 'human' aspects (of evolution), i.e. intuition and intention besides thinking, have been lost somewhere on the track.
Hopefully, this makes my perceptions (intentionally avoiding 'thoughts') a little more transparent.
Technology is valuable when it works, not when it's complex.
Maybe this is correlated with design objectives targetting 'social impact' (even if only unintentionally) while trying to optimize broad distribution of benefit instead of 'wealth-creation'.
Maybe the difference is whether technology is to support convergence towards trees vs. complete graphs.
TFA: "Tovey said his collaboration with Seeley demonstrated that the communication provides a "beautiful" feedback loop to prevent one flower patch from being abandoned while another is depleted."
Not that they seem to have ways to resolve aspects of the tragedy of the commons, no...
people have spent the past 30 years creating algorithms for single core machines
Presumably mostly because demand was controlled from the realm of thought (bean-counters if you like it cynical). Maybe things will have to change if devices are required to be self–aware (intelligent bombs, maybe?).
This could also be used for 'Voice of God' pranks.
You may augment search space by terms like 'subsonic', 'subliminal', 'government', 'corporation' etc. and come to the conclusion that the tinfoil hat needs some 'sonic layers'.
Mr. Gates: 'Software innovation, like almost every other kind of innovation, requires the ability to collaborate and share ideas with other people, and to sit down and talk with customers and get their feedback and understand their needs.'
Quote: "The European Commission has added its voice to the debate about the use of open source software. A report funded by the Commission concludes that the software could offer considerable savings to organisations with little effect on their business."
I should also mention that, at least back in Windows 98, someone actually wrote some software which removes IE from the browser, which proves Microsoft was lying (and you believed them, you idiot) about Windows being so tied to IE.
I can just THINK faster for a brief period of time.
It could also be that you think less, thus defocusing attention while taking in a wider stream/array of data/(perceptions) — presumably not only processed by the brain (ecm, signaltransduction, tensegrity (INGBER)), commonly mistaken?/exclusively categorized for/as subconscious processing — leading to a perception of 'stretched time' when the brain compares results of monitoring overall activity to accumulated stored averages.
TFA: Human evolution has been moving at breakneck speed in the past several thousand years, far from plodding along as some scientists had thought, researchers said on Monday. (emphasis mine)
And how is this an advantage if the system has emerged to only comfortably allow for a moderate change rate?
Slashdot Mirror
But once we figure that out- and we will- we will be at the next great step forward.
Might take some time though. It seems that the arguments brought forward by TAUBE (1961 !, Computers and Common Sense, the Myth of Thinking Machines) against the feasibility of machine translation still hold and apply to the problem in focus.
CC.
Typing "What is the capital of France?" won't get you better results than typing "capital of France." ... Most of what we do is at the word and phrase level; we're not concentrating on the sentence. We think it's important to get the right results rather than change the interface.
This misses situations like searching for "That sf-short-story were the crew of the visiting spaceship is given a dog as a present" in which googling failed, at least for me, or, more technically, when you have absolutely no idea about what the relevant terms within the outcome might be. In short, if you have a real question.
CC.
'social impact' may be superior to 'wealth-creation'
... . In contrast, you may look at 'optimized agriculture', highly vulnerable and not sustainable (e.g. GM-crops). Just examples.
Quite unclear, for sure, since trying to increase the benefit of all also creates 'wealth'.
I wanted to rule out 'creation of wealth in a hand of a few' (a high gini-coefficient). If you target the latter, you, IMHO, end up with an inflexible, vulnerable system with a low stability.
On a very broad scale, thus necessarily fuzzy, a ranking of systems according to the probability that they include 'social impact' in evaluations might be:
'communism (as instantiated henceforth)' — tree-like flow of power by (normative) rules;
'capitalism' — tree-like flow of power materialized as money (underlying rules are normative as well, but this is hidden better);
'anarchy'— networked (complete-graph as a model) flow of information useful to create local optima according to local needs.
Targeting social impact in the first place also again transforms technological/scientific development into a human endeavour, as opposed to a technical/material one if you only look at ROI.
objective proof
There is no such thing outside maths, all science being empirical and the humanities not having switched to empirics too may be rated normative, IMHO.
But you may probably collect evidence by looking at existing systems, their ability to sustain equilibrium (which is one of the targets I rate important) as well as the underlying causes. The most obvious system is 'earth' (yes, there are subsystems that follow power(disambiguation: exp) laws, but the interconnectedness seems to be impressive. Here (/.), the Internet comes to mind (which, in a second stage, probably was designed with 'social impact' in mind (think 'global village'), with consequences like FOSS, p2p, on a smaller scale, 'instant mobs', consumer action
I might point out that your call for 'objective proof', to me, is just an indicator that some 'human' aspects (of evolution), i.e. intuition and intention besides thinking, have been lost somewhere on the track.
Hopefully, this makes my perceptions (intentionally avoiding 'thoughts') a little more transparent.
CC.
Technology is valuable when it works, not when it's complex.
Maybe this is correlated with design objectives targetting 'social impact' (even if only unintentionally) while trying to optimize broad distribution of benefit instead of 'wealth-creation'.
Maybe the difference is whether technology is to support convergence towards trees vs. complete graphs.
CC.
Funny how the word changes from "features" to "skills" when the machine becomes humanoid.
This might change back again here once 'gender' applies to robots.
CC.
Probably it is not a question of this or that. I was thinking of a mesh of sensors.
There is a proper discussion here.
CC.
TFA: "Tovey said his collaboration with Seeley demonstrated that the communication provides a "beautiful" feedback loop to prevent one flower patch from being abandoned while another is depleted."
...
Not that they seem to have ways to resolve aspects of the tragedy of the commons, no
"Honey-bee mating optimization (HBMO) algorithm for optimal reservoir operation" ( link)
They help to improve otherways too.
CC.
Honestly, though, aside from a BBC article about a tsunami fund hacking probe that doesn't mention user agents there's little to corroborate this.
And this assessment might apply to this very case as well. Tough time if journalism is to reach beyond the first (or second) boing.
CC.
Best. Post. Since long :)
people have spent the past 30 years creating algorithms for single core machines
Presumably mostly because demand was controlled from the realm of thought (bean-counters if you like it cynical). Maybe things will have to change if devices are required to be self–aware (intelligent bombs, maybe?).
CC.
I don't see any other networks crying out for it
Networked embedded systems that interoperate and adapt to their environments?
http://www.ist-runes.org/
CC.
Regional registry IPv4 address exhaustion in... 1442 Days, 07 Hours, 42 Minutes, 42 Seconds. ( http://penrose.uk6x.com/ )
So there is plenty time for someone to wake up, wanting it yesterday.
CC.
This could also be used for 'Voice of God' pranks.
You may augment search space by terms like 'subsonic', 'subliminal', 'government', 'corporation' etc. and come to the conclusion that the tinfoil hat needs some 'sonic layers'.
CC.
Thus, I'm not so certain that it's limited to those who have fragile psyches.
:(
As things go, you would be 'not stable' by definition if you can not cope with what is/will be rated 'normal'
CC.
... I could imagine that this advancement of the 'art of advertising' could do some harm to people that are not so stable.
CC.
Does THC increase or diminish food intake?
CC.
Mr. Gates: 'Software innovation, like almost every other kind of innovation, requires the ability to collaborate and share ideas with other people, and to sit down and talk with customers and get their feedback and understand their needs.'
Big news, given that the concept of 'customer satisfaction' has been embraced since decades, even by not exceptionally innovative companies (e.g. GM). Microsoft fails both in IT and 'customer satisfaction' (a related comment: Microsoft falls below the average in customer satisfaction survey).
CC.
Not original thoughts, though:
The Robbers Cave Experiment, Muzafer and Carolyn Sherif, 1954
And I am sure one could trace it further, that experiment, however, is a 'classic'.
CC.
Men won't date overweight women
Might be different some other place, e.g. More than 90% of Tongans are overweight, making the South Sea islanders the world's fattest nation.
CC.
I can't help thinking that we are seeing a tide starting to turn in mainland Europe
:)
Yes: "Open source gets European boost"
Quote: "The European Commission has added its voice to the debate about the use of open source software. A report funded by the Commission concludes that the software could offer considerable savings to organisations with little effect on their business."
It is viral
CC.
I should also mention that, at least back in Windows 98, someone actually wrote some software which removes IE from the browser, which proves Microsoft was lying (and you believed them, you idiot) about Windows being so tied to IE.
You must be working at Microsoft.
CC.
I can just THINK faster for a brief period of time.
It could also be that you think less, thus defocusing attention while taking in a wider stream/array of data/(perceptions) — presumably not only processed by the brain (ecm, signaltransduction, tensegrity (INGBER)), commonly mistaken?/exclusively categorized for/as subconscious processing — leading to a perception of 'stretched time' when the brain compares results of monitoring overall activity to accumulated stored averages.
CC.
but very little in the way of actionable information
Now what do you expect?
They set up something to get an estimate on expected revenue (hit rate) by topic and choose the most promising outcome.
CC.
They still have twenty two more letters before they can get from AMD to WMD.
Perhaps those who think of invasion as a solution to problems are more backward looking.
CC.
I wonder how we can actually evolve into an energy-based being... hmmm...
We already are. If you instead think of 'longevity', YMMV.
CC.
TFA: Human evolution has been moving at breakneck speed in the past several thousand years, far from plodding along as some scientists had thought, researchers said on Monday. (emphasis mine)
And how is this an advantage if the system has emerged to only comfortably allow for a moderate change rate?
CC.