Nope, time has still not come yet. Something like the "philantropic enterprise" cannot exist in a world where the general ruleset is not yet tweaked to promote ideas along these lines but puts emphasis on competition.
But I appreciate that - with the emergence of networks of sorts - the situation might change. But it takes an awful time...
This was hanging in the Programming Office where I once worked. The word was it dated from the late 70's. That you and I identify with it today says something.
There seems to be resistance with regard to learning. Identify area of expertise (which|what) and degree of those in charge. Hmmm,...
How about taking all that money and being the leader among big companies with loads of money by showing that being big and powerful does not need to turn you into a monster.
As much as I like your idea - with/after the IPO there is 'shareholder's value'. Thus, there is a good chance they will turn into Big Brother (caching the Internet helps a lot for cashing the Internet).
Pigeons and doves are not separate things -- they're the same. In English, we have both words since we get the first from French and the second from Dutch. In American English, at least, we tend to use dove for the smaller species such as the ringneck dove (Streptopelia roseogrisea) while we reserve the word pigeon for the larger ones like the Bandtail (Columba fasciata). Biologically, however, they are all in the same family.
Could supply you literally with a framework to build on. Not overly expensive either, though all the (aluminium) elements add up... MB Building Kit System
If we really want something done, we've got to find ways to make sure these people and/or companies can't make money doing it...
What about something along the lines of feeding fake data back - I remember to have read an article/comment on that, but cannot remember how I found it & not in the mood to look for it again.
The key point is/was to boost processing cost on the noise side.
I agree with Mr. Chernin that there is a "rash of stealing that currently - and seriously - threatens us". There is stealing of historic consumer rights, of the rights of scientists to conduct their research and disseminate their results, and of the rights of the public to be warned when a product is weak or broken.
loc. cit.:Piracy and Other Evil Acts by Barbara Simons,
Co-chair, U.S. Public Policy Committee, Association for Computing Machinery (ACM) and Past President, ACM
Lazy as I am, I find what I would like to express conveniently pre-packaged into a paragraph from the source already quoted: "I find the extensive use of the word "piracy" (1) in discussing copyright infringement objectionable, since piracy is associated primarily with violent acts such as theft, rape, and murder. Speakers who eschew the technically correct word "infringement" in favor of loaded words such as pirates, stealing, and looting make the problem of copyright infringement sound much more dramatic and dangerous than it is.
Sure their software is basically crappy, but
they have managed to write an OS that works
with an unbelievable amount of different kinds
of hardware. If in doubt, check the list of
supported hardware in Linux or BSD.
Agreed. A friend of mine always reminds me of that when I have a driver problem.
That's not the point though, my point is that
M$ is at least charging those corporate sob's
for their work,...
Paying ? If so, then I of course I have to agree. My point here is that (and I observed the beginnings of OSS), initially no one thought of a situation when big organisations utilize OSS for profiting on related services while having comparatively low cost of development. The problem, IMHO, is that OSS is tailored to what I would call a balanced networked cellular economy (inter-cell-relations dependent on a distance metric), but not for a hierarchical one (in short: global companies in top layer,...).
Gates has said that when he has finished running M$, he will do philanthropy full-time.
Hmm, with a little visionary power you might conjure up a cleverly designed social engineering scheme, roughly...
0. Diagnose a social movement that has to be dealt with
1. Create an enemy: M$
2. Channel the movement: RH
3. Conquer: IBM (while taking care of distraction: SCO)
4.... erm... profit here
The argument seems to me more a matter of quasi-religious philosophy than of computer science or biology.
I disagree, though I think that the dichotomy in focus might be more a continuum.
There may be different ethical (or moral, if you like that better) implications depending on whether you assume that your AI is equipped with 'consciousness' or not. On top, there is the issue of explaining the systems you build.
Besides CS or informatics and biology psychology also would come in handy, though I agree that the latter discipline tends to miss the target.
... but to say definitively that "true" machine intelligence is or is not possible is a statement of faith. Anyone who says otherwise is forming a belief based on other pre-existing beliefs which have very little to do with science.
Arguing about what "true" intelligence (be it machine intelligence or some other kind) is, as I believe, indeed meta-science. However, any science is built on and heavily depends on pre-existing belief-systems, starting from the selection of topics/theories that are considered worth to be researched (by researchers and by those who fund). If you think that this is not a valid point, there still is the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis(quote: "Central to the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis is the idea of linguistic relativity--that distinctions of meaning between related terms in a language are often arbitrary and particular to that language. Sapir and Whorf took this one step further by arguing that a person's world view is largely determined by the vocabulary and syntax available in his or her language (linguistic determinism). Whorf in fact called his version of the theory the Principle of Linguistic Relativity."). Yes, I take language as a belief system, though a quite elaborate one.
This then enters the loop again, e.g.: Which representation language does my AI use on what level and what effect does that have with regard to observable behaviour?
To my knowledge, cockroaches are easy to get close to and step on.
I have empirical evidence which is different from that. A good trick, though, is to have a 'honeypot' shoe on the floor where they will hide and then...
"Creating strong AI software is a very exciting and challenging problem, and it inspires us and our students to work on this bold effort," said noted artificial intelligence expert professor Milind Tambe of the University of California, Los Angeles, who has worked with Rajan."
def.
The two main varieties of AI are called "strong" and "weak". Strong AI argues that it is possible that one day a computer will be invented which can be called a mind in the fullest sense of the word. In other words, it can think, reason, imagine, etc., and do all the things that we currently associate with the human brain. Weak AI, on the other hand, argues that computers can only appear to think and are not actually conscious in the same way as human brains are.
Slashdot Mirror
..., e.g. Olympics ???
...+
Not that I drink a lot of any CSD, but
CC.
Nope, time has still not come yet. Something like the "philantropic enterprise" cannot exist in a world where the general ruleset is not yet tweaked to promote ideas along these lines but puts emphasis on competition.
...
But I appreciate that - with the emergence of networks of sorts - the situation might change. But it takes an awful time
CC.
This was hanging in the Programming Office where I once worked. The word was it dated from the late 70's. That you and I identify with it today says something.
...
There seems to be resistance with regard to learning. Identify area of expertise (which|what) and degree of those in charge. Hmmm,
CC.
Pattern Recognition, Yep, that's it - add some AI and get singularly muted.
CC.
How about taking all that money and being the leader among big companies with loads of money by showing that being big and powerful does not need to turn you into a monster.
As much as I like your idea - with/after the IPO there is 'shareholder's value'. Thus, there is a good chance they will turn into Big Brother (caching the Internet helps a lot for cashing the Internet).
CC.
Pigeons and doves are not separate things -- they're the same. In English, we have both words since we get the first from French and the second from Dutch. In American English, at least, we tend to use dove for the smaller species such as the ringneck dove (Streptopelia roseogrisea) while we reserve the word pigeon for the larger ones like the Bandtail (Columba fasciata). Biologically, however, they are all in the same family.
loc. cit.
CC.
Yes, there are different norms in a global society.
CC.
They still do diary research for local stations.
http://www.nielsenmedia.com/whatratingsmean/
CC.
Could supply you literally with a framework to build on. Not overly expensive either, though all the (aluminium) elements add up ...
MB Building Kit System
CC.
Interesting coincidence that the influence of Scandinavian descent was heavily involved :)
CC.
Und nach der Rechtschreibreform ist es noch schlimmer geworden - es regieren Inkonsistenz und Irrsinn :)
CC.
trans.: It became even worse after the "Spelling Reform" - inconsistency and chaos rule
If you're an asshole online, you're an asshole; you're just more able to or more motivated to hide it when you're not offline.
:)
Freudian slip ??? Unable to even think 'o_f_f_l_i_n_e' ???
CC.
And wouldn't THAT be about 1000x cooler than this story?
Yes. Respect.
CC.
If we really want something done, we've got to find ways to make sure these people and/or companies can't make money doing it...
What about something along the lines of feeding fake data back - I remember to have read an article/comment on that, but cannot remember how I found it & not in the mood to look for it again.
The key point is/was to boost processing cost on the noise side.
CC.
And still morally wrong and illegal to steal.
I agree with Mr. Chernin that there is a "rash of stealing that currently - and seriously - threatens us". There is stealing of historic consumer rights, of the rights of scientists to conduct their research and disseminate their results, and of the rights of the public to be warned when a product is weak or broken.
loc. cit.:Piracy and Other Evil Acts by Barbara Simons, Co-chair, U.S. Public Policy Committee, Association for Computing Machinery (ACM) and Past President, ACM
Lazy as I am, I find what I would like to express conveniently pre-packaged into a paragraph from the source already quoted: "I find the extensive use of the word "piracy" (1) in discussing copyright infringement objectionable, since piracy is associated primarily with violent acts such as theft, rape, and murder. Speakers who eschew the technically correct word "infringement" in favor of loaded words such as pirates, stealing, and looting make the problem of copyright infringement sound much more dramatic and dangerous than it is.
CC.
Sure their software is basically crappy, but they have managed to write an OS that works with an unbelievable amount of different kinds of hardware. If in doubt, check the list of supported hardware in Linux or BSD.
...).
:)
Agreed. A friend of mine always reminds me of that when I have a driver problem.
That's not the point though, my point is that M$ is at least charging those corporate sob's for their work,...
Paying ? If so, then I of course I have to agree. My point here is that (and I observed the beginnings of OSS), initially no one thought of a situation when big organisations utilize OSS for profiting on related services while having comparatively low cost of development. The problem, IMHO, is that OSS is tailored to what I would call a balanced networked cellular economy (inter-cell-relations dependent on a distance metric), but not for a hierarchical one (in short: global companies in top layer,
Gates has said that when he has finished running M$, he will do philanthropy full-time.
I shall apply to help him
CC.
Hmm, with a little visionary power you might conjure up a cleverly designed social engineering scheme, roughly ...
... erm ... profit here
0. Diagnose a social movement that has to be dealt with
1. Create an enemy: M$
2. Channel the movement: RH
3. Conquer: IBM (while taking care of distraction: SCO)
4.
CC.
I think this once was a buzzword used in IBM advertising.
....
International Business
I have recently heard they are strongly connected to OSS. Somehow, they still do what they once advertised.
So at least, one can infer that OSS is good for IBM.
CC.
The argument seems to me more a matter of quasi-religious philosophy than of computer science or biology.
... but to say definitively that "true" machine intelligence is or is not possible is a statement of faith. Anyone who says otherwise is forming a belief based on other pre-existing beliefs which have very little to do with science.
:)
I disagree, though I think that the dichotomy in focus might be more a continuum.
There may be different ethical (or moral, if you like that better) implications depending on whether you assume that your AI is equipped with 'consciousness' or not. On top, there is the issue of explaining the systems you build.
Besides CS or informatics and biology psychology also would come in handy, though I agree that the latter discipline tends to miss the target.
Arguing about what "true" intelligence (be it machine intelligence or some other kind) is, as I believe, indeed meta-science. However, any science is built on and heavily depends on pre-existing belief-systems, starting from the selection of topics/theories that are considered worth to be researched (by researchers and by those who fund). If you think that this is not a valid point, there still is the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis(quote: "Central to the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis is the idea of linguistic relativity--that distinctions of meaning between related terms in a language are often arbitrary and particular to that language. Sapir and Whorf took this one step further by arguing that a person's world view is largely determined by the vocabulary and syntax available in his or her language (linguistic determinism). Whorf in fact called his version of the theory the Principle of Linguistic Relativity."). Yes, I take language as a belief system, though a quite elaborate one.
This then enters the loop again, e.g.: Which representation language does my AI use on what level and what effect does that have with regard to observable behaviour?
Still room for plenty yet to come phds there
CC.
To my knowledge, cockroaches are easy to get close to and step on.
...
I have empirical evidence which is different from that. A good trick, though, is to have a 'honeypot' shoe on the floor where they will hide and then
CC.
"Creating strong AI software is a very exciting and challenging problem, and it inspires us and our students to work on this bold effort," said noted artificial intelligence expert professor Milind Tambe of the University of California, Los Angeles, who has worked with Rajan."
I very much doubt that they are talking about strong AI there. ( Arguments for Strong AI).
I rather believe he is more on the weak side.
But, well, he is a noted expert.
CC.
def. The two main varieties of AI are called "strong" and "weak". Strong AI argues that it is possible that one day a computer will be invented which can be called a mind in the fullest sense of the word. In other words, it can think, reason, imagine, etc., and do all the things that we currently associate with the human brain. Weak AI, on the other hand, argues that computers can only appear to think and are not actually conscious in the same way as human brains are.
loc. cit.
... why does /. work without 2D/3D transitions and all (not to mention any palette issues) ?
Must have to do with some art of deviance; - or genius for the more faint of heart.
CC.
Any cure how to convert back from a zombie to a wage slave other than kill -1 and hoping for a decent restart ?
CC.
There's a rather old technology for doing a spawn/merge ...
:)
The drawback is that this technology is both lossy and prone to error.
CC.
we are close to being able to record our entire lives on a single 3.5" optical disc ...
Obviously, we now need a technology to either spawn or backup our lives.
CC.