I dunno, a medallion system for advertizers might be a pretty good idea. After all, if there were fewer ads then each ad would be that much more salient, so there would be little loss in advertizement power but the victims^H consumers would have more time to themselves.
At some point, the trolls will collect enough tolls that we'll finally have to do something about the ridiculous patents that are granted.
Remember, the trolls are legally in the right, which makes it not a problem with bad ethics on the part of the trolls, but bad ethics on the part of our legal system or patent system.
Whether or not it's "law" he has no right to privacy when my life is on the line.
I guess doctors, policemen, soldiers, researchers, engineers, have no right to privacy. And also you -- after all, if anything happens to you it's a good chance you were involved so you have no right to privacy either.
Back when I worked in a shop I DID have a camera on me all day and that was just for something as trivial as shoplifting, never mind having responsibility for a few hundred tons of freight/passengers barrelling down the lines upwards of 60 mph.
Sure, with bad drivers people could get killed, but shoplifters cost money.
...when we replaced the scientific method with scientific consensus?
The scientific consensus is not part of science, it is so laymen know what the "default" position on a question is. So, for example, if you need to make an important policy decision that depends on a scientific question, then you want to get the scientific consensus on that question from the relevant group of scientists. The alternative is to base decisions on political rhetoric or the opinions of random celebrities.
Black holes have massive gravitational and magnetic fields which do some rather violent things to matter that is near, but not in, the black hole. So while some stuff falls in, other stuff gets heated hot enough to emit x-rays, and some particles get ejected at tremendous speeds.
Am I mistaken, or if you switch off the ability for them to be female, after a single generation, they'll be extinct anyway. So why not just kill them all and be done with it?
It's less toxic to us and the environment, to use genetics rather than pesticide. It's also potentially more reliable, and potentially cheaper, and extremely targeted. If it's heritable, then your pest control can increase in numbers so you need much less. And males can find females at quite a range.
In any case, lets grant that whole description of how to build an intelligence can be described in 800mb, just for the sake of argument. So what? How do you 'execute' this program? Even granting that you have an unlimited hardware and power budget, how do you do this?
Of course, if any of Asimov's robots actually followed his Three Laws of Robotics as he states them, then the robots would only ever use the First Law, and would take over the world to force everyone to exercise, eat health food, live in a sterile environment, and not breed.
I bet I could get you the code for a human level intelligence, about 800 MB uncompressed, and require only hardware almost everyone has access to. proof
The main reason AI might kill us all is that it is not anthropomorphic. In particular, it has a high probability of not feeling pity, not feeling empathy, not seeking clarification (even if the easiest path to fulfilling a request involves the incidental extermination of humanity), and on top of all that not being limited to human intelligence.
For example, if you asked a human to learn how to play chess, you would not expect that the first thing he'd do is kill you because the thing most likely to interfere with his objective of learning chess is that you might tell him to do something else instead. Worse, by the time a program is advanced enough to understand human morality or language, it might already be too late.
You only get one wish, you have to make that wish in machine language, it is very complicated to add a clause to the wish that prevents extermination of humanity, and a large proportion of wishes that could be made would result in a planet covered in solar panels and computer factories. At least theoretically you can wish for infinite wishes, but you have to make that wish in machine language.
Slashdot Mirror
This is why you always sanitize user input.
I'm a pedestrian, I have right of way.
Are there caves in the canyons? (not sure we can rely on the water/limestone cavemaking system we use on Earth, to work on Mars too)
Corporations will continue to make boatloads of money, artists will continue to sell their work for a song.
How to die on Mars:
1) Go to Mars
2) Wait
No one has yet figured out step 1.
PS: You should go to Mars! It's a real paradise -- there's no crime, no disease, no oppression, no pain, and no death. And no taxes, either.
Is Commil's patent "ridiculous"?
At first glance, it seems like a list of obvious features.
legal != ethical
The real problem is when something profitable and unethical is legally protected.
I dunno, a medallion system for advertizers might be a pretty good idea. After all, if there were fewer ads then each ad would be that much more salient, so there would be little loss in advertizement power but the victims^H consumers would have more time to themselves.
At some point, the trolls will collect enough tolls that we'll finally have to do something about the ridiculous patents that are granted.
Remember, the trolls are legally in the right, which makes it not a problem with bad ethics on the part of the trolls, but bad ethics on the part of our legal system or patent system.
Can't we just ban stupidity instead?
Whether or not it's "law" he has no right to privacy when my life is on the line.
I guess doctors, policemen, soldiers, researchers, engineers, have no right to privacy. And also you -- after all, if anything happens to you it's a good chance you were involved so you have no right to privacy either.
Back when I worked in a shop I DID have a camera on me all day and that was just for something as trivial as shoplifting, never mind having responsibility for a few hundred tons of freight/passengers barrelling down the lines upwards of 60 mph.
Sure, with bad drivers people could get killed, but shoplifters cost money.
Ironically, despite having less money after getting hacked, they might find that they really do have the budget for a little security.
...when we replaced the scientific method with scientific consensus?
The scientific consensus is not part of science, it is so laymen know what the "default" position on a question is. So, for example, if you need to make an important policy decision that depends on a scientific question, then you want to get the scientific consensus on that question from the relevant group of scientists. The alternative is to base decisions on political rhetoric or the opinions of random celebrities.
Black holes have massive gravitational and magnetic fields which do some rather violent things to matter that is near, but not in, the black hole. So while some stuff falls in, other stuff gets heated hot enough to emit x-rays, and some particles get ejected at tremendous speeds.
And as a bonus, giving the government the right to filter your content at the ISP level comes with a free promise not to abuse that power.
Am I mistaken, or if you switch off the ability for them to be female, after a single generation, they'll be extinct anyway. So why not just kill them all and be done with it?
It's less toxic to us and the environment, to use genetics rather than pesticide. It's also potentially more reliable, and potentially cheaper, and extremely targeted. If it's heritable, then your pest control can increase in numbers so you need much less. And males can find females at quite a range.
If you can't take the pressure, you shouldn't be a cop.
The last page, as in the page after the customer has already paid? Who gives a shit how fast it loads?
Yeah, who gives a crap about the user experience of those who have demonstrated they are paying customers?
In any case, lets grant that whole description of how to build an intelligence can be described in 800mb, just for the sake of argument. So what? How do you 'execute' this program? Even granting that you have an unlimited hardware and power budget, how do you do this?
I've heard it's fucking easy.
Of course, if any of Asimov's robots actually followed his Three Laws of Robotics as he states them, then the robots would only ever use the First Law, and would take over the world to force everyone to exercise, eat health food, live in a sterile environment, and not breed.
I bet I could get you the code for a human level intelligence, about 800 MB uncompressed, and require only hardware almost everyone has access to. proof
Doesn't really matter though, biologically - the "mother" provides the egg and the "father" provides his sperm to fertilize it,
At least for a few more years before stem cell research allows us to make sperm or eggs from whoever.
But what is the Nash equilibrium in the game of not wearing a seatbelt vs resources spent on increasing seatbelt use?
The main reason AI might kill us all is that it is not anthropomorphic. In particular, it has a high probability of not feeling pity, not feeling empathy, not seeking clarification (even if the easiest path to fulfilling a request involves the incidental extermination of humanity), and on top of all that not being limited to human intelligence.
For example, if you asked a human to learn how to play chess, you would not expect that the first thing he'd do is kill you because the thing most likely to interfere with his objective of learning chess is that you might tell him to do something else instead. Worse, by the time a program is advanced enough to understand human morality or language, it might already be too late.
You only get one wish, you have to make that wish in machine language, it is very complicated to add a clause to the wish that prevents extermination of humanity, and a large proportion of wishes that could be made would result in a planet covered in solar panels and computer factories. At least theoretically you can wish for infinite wishes, but you have to make that wish in machine language.