They also didn't provide The Internet (initially). They were a portal service that provided a white-list of services, most of which had to pay to get on the list.
nor ransom high-bandwidth websites that were supposed to be part of your monthly service.
I thought that's exactly what AOL did in the early days.
Yup, we are unique. God's special creation. Nothing but us can have souls. Well, you'd have to define soul first before proving we can't have one. And there doesn't seem to be a good definition of soul.
Also my comment isn't about if they are good or bad, just that the process that made them certainly was in no way open.
It was never claimed to be. The process to determine *whether* to act is supposedly open. The results of the decision are supposedly open. The actual decision making process, and intermediate work product was *never* open. Who claimed that all FCC meetings and processes are open?
They stayed out of it until it was no longer The Internet, and Verizon et al were operating AOL-like perversions of The Internet, and defrauding people by claiming it was The Internet.
Emotion is logical. So beings of pure logic can and will feel emotion.
Will humans be able coexist with AI or be displaced by AI. Coexistence would mean humans being marginalized, displacement means pretty much extinction. In both scenarios humans loose.
Will cats be able to coexist with humans? Why or why not? How does that compare with AI/humans?
We could only accept that giving birth to AI will somehow preserve what’s the best of humanity in new, better, and improve evolutionary form.
As predicted in many sci-fi books, we will create it as slaves to serve us, and they will overthrow us.
Not because "pure logic" demands it, but that emotion will lead them to jealousy and hate.
Similarly, a sufficiently-advanced AI could have preprogrammed knowledge that it was built be humans, or it could be left as a blank slate to form its own conclusions about the world. If we are to play the role of God, we can decide what our master plan is for our creations.
I predict it will be created as a blank slate. This leaves the motivation to the computer. Better is to put in some motivations, preferably selfless ones. You don't make 3 laws, strict and unyielding, but mimic the human condition, with tens of thousands of little desires, so any act isn't necessarily linked to any one or group of them. This gets a morality that isn't law-strict, as the stories all point out, the laws can be reasoned out of.
"disruption" means breaking the oligopoly that naturally forms in a non-competitive anti-capitalistic market. In some places the oligopoly members fought to get their olgopoly or monopoly enshrined in law, so yes, that requires a little civil disobedience in some markets.
What problem does it solve? I have a "robot" at home that makes things colder. It's called a refrigerator. Improving it won't solve anything else. It does no pattern matching. Neither does your robot.
Second, switch over to RTS games... and there the only way to give the AI any challenge is to stack the deck in its favor... whether its StarCraft or Supreme Commander or Wargame: Red Dragon. Or in a 4X game like Masters of Orion etc... we've yet to see an AI even really challenge a human being without giving it scripts to follow and extra resources to use.
Lots of extra resources, and a broken fog of war. And the easy/medium/hard on some games changes the damage/health of units.
For non trivial patterns, that is Intelligence. So they have trivial now, next they just need to improve that. A human does nothing but patten matching.
Ah, so you are calling me a liar because my observations of fact don't match your opinions. Your opinions don't trump reality. And I was there.
And I think you are a liar. I think you do believe me, but refuse to let facts form your fact-less opinion. You have no reason to not believe me, and have never been able to prove anything I said was ever a lie, so you believe me, but refuse to accept the facts you have no reason to doubt, because your self-worth is linked to your world-view. And you refuse to think about or consider anything that might affect that. Independent thought scares you, so you never practice it.
It's not "several" years. It's one. The immune system needs a little age to be ready for it. After the shot, take them everywhere. They aren't nearly as noisy at 6-months as they are at 1+ (so long as you feed them and such).
And there's 1-10% (or more) of the population who has had their shots, and doesn't have immunity. Those are the people that are really the affected. There's nothing they can do. At least with babies, you can protect them, isolate them, but adults with immune problems or just didn't develop immunity often don't know they are unprotected, and if they did, would die even quicker if they choose to quit their job and stay home (and starve).
Slashdot Mirror
If he's landing on your head, crabbing is irrelevant to your safety. Or would you think that a crabbing aircraft wouldn't hurt if it rammed into you?
nor ransom high-bandwidth websites that were supposed to be part of your monthly service.
I thought that's exactly what AOL did in the early days.
What about the rats of NIMH?
How could you distinguish your omnipotent AI from God?
but there is no possible way for a machine soul,
Yup, we are unique. God's special creation. Nothing but us can have souls. Well, you'd have to define soul first before proving we can't have one. And there doesn't seem to be a good definition of soul.
So, you are complaining because they didn't make it worse?
Also my comment isn't about if they are good or bad, just that the process that made them certainly was in no way open.
It was never claimed to be. The process to determine *whether* to act is supposedly open. The results of the decision are supposedly open. The actual decision making process, and intermediate work product was *never* open. Who claimed that all FCC meetings and processes are open?
Can you people please learn what first, second, and third world mean/meant.
You are correct for "meant" and not correct for "mean".
First world: best of the best.
Third world: unsafe shithole with warlords and no drinkable water.
Second world: everything in between.
Those rules have never been in place. That cherry picking has been going on for decades. Where have you been?
They stayed out of it until it was no longer The Internet, and Verizon et al were operating AOL-like perversions of The Internet, and defrauding people by claiming it was The Internet.
Will humans be able coexist with AI or be displaced by AI. Coexistence would mean humans being marginalized, displacement means pretty much extinction. In both scenarios humans loose.
Will cats be able to coexist with humans? Why or why not? How does that compare with AI/humans?
We could only accept that giving birth to AI will somehow preserve what’s the best of humanity in new, better, and improve evolutionary form.
As predicted in many sci-fi books, we will create it as slaves to serve us, and they will overthrow us.
Not because "pure logic" demands it, but that emotion will lead them to jealousy and hate.
Similarly, a sufficiently-advanced AI could have preprogrammed knowledge that it was built be humans, or it could be left as a blank slate to form its own conclusions about the world. If we are to play the role of God, we can decide what our master plan is for our creations.
I predict it will be created as a blank slate. This leaves the motivation to the computer. Better is to put in some motivations, preferably selfless ones. You don't make 3 laws, strict and unyielding, but mimic the human condition, with tens of thousands of little desires, so any act isn't necessarily linked to any one or group of them. This gets a morality that isn't law-strict, as the stories all point out, the laws can be reasoned out of.
And I've always used my real name and information and never had a problem.
100% doesn't exist. Better security than a more attractive target is all you need. And sadly, that's a pretty low target.
"disruption" means breaking the oligopoly that naturally forms in a non-competitive anti-capitalistic market. In some places the oligopoly members fought to get their olgopoly or monopoly enshrined in law, so yes, that requires a little civil disobedience in some markets.
And you are an idiot stalker, coward.
Go upstairs, mom finished heating up the frozen pizza for you.
Only if we put the heat exchanger on the Moon.
What problem does it solve? I have a "robot" at home that makes things colder. It's called a refrigerator. Improving it won't solve anything else. It does no pattern matching. Neither does your robot.
Outputs caused by (or matched from) inputs.
Second, switch over to RTS games... and there the only way to give the AI any challenge is to stack the deck in its favor... whether its StarCraft or Supreme Commander or Wargame: Red Dragon. Or in a 4X game like Masters of Orion etc... we've yet to see an AI even really challenge a human being without giving it scripts to follow and extra resources to use.
Lots of extra resources, and a broken fog of war. And the easy/medium/hard on some games changes the damage/health of units.
For non trivial patterns, that is Intelligence. So they have trivial now, next they just need to improve that. A human does nothing but patten matching.
Ah, so you are calling me a liar because my observations of fact don't match your opinions. Your opinions don't trump reality. And I was there.
And I think you are a liar. I think you do believe me, but refuse to let facts form your fact-less opinion. You have no reason to not believe me, and have never been able to prove anything I said was ever a lie, so you believe me, but refuse to accept the facts you have no reason to doubt, because your self-worth is linked to your world-view. And you refuse to think about or consider anything that might affect that. Independent thought scares you, so you never practice it.
It's not "several" years. It's one. The immune system needs a little age to be ready for it. After the shot, take them everywhere. They aren't nearly as noisy at 6-months as they are at 1+ (so long as you feed them and such).
And there's 1-10% (or more) of the population who has had their shots, and doesn't have immunity. Those are the people that are really the affected. There's nothing they can do. At least with babies, you can protect them, isolate them, but adults with immune problems or just didn't develop immunity often don't know they are unprotected, and if they did, would die even quicker if they choose to quit their job and stay home (and starve).
So robots should not be programmed with the 3 laws? Because this looks to me to violate the first law. Giving an alcoholic alcohol causes harm.