pride.
i'm a developer of software, and I don't allow myself to test my own code beyond a certain point because i'll be too proud of my accomplishments to accept mistakes or failures.
I've found a refinment of this, which actually works exceptionally well at finding good games. you find somone who is an absolutely ravenous fan of the game and then seeing how often they spell words such as "u" or make immature arguments about other games. A 0 out of 5 randomly sampled people tends to indicate a game worth playing, assuming one tolerates the genre in the first place.
then you are not self-aware either. you have your programming, and it includes the capacity to learn.
what is happening here is a robot is able to recognize that it's own actions are occuring in front of it.
even though it's a simple binary true that recognition is no minor thing.
is it good enough? of course not, but that's true of a lot of first generation ideas.
"Would you rather have an android with very little real-world experience or another human being fighting side-by-side with you?"
with me or for me?
a sufficiently callibrated AI could easily be better at making moral descisions from a philisophical point of veiw rather than an emotionally sensitive one like people. something programmed to not shoot children(assuming the capiticy to determine children) would never shoot children.
and I'd also much rather have AI fighting for me for my own moral delimas because a robot without emotions would literally have nothing to fear from death, and nothing important to it to lose.
i've seen that website before and i decided to run a few calculations on it. now while you might think that that is a miniscule mean temperature change in the atmosphere, when one multiplies that 0.001227436 C by the ~725(depends on exact density, doesn't vary much) joules needed to raise the temperature of mixed air by one degree centigrade and the 5.1*10^18 kilograms of air in the lower atmosphere one gets the net energy "loss"(this being entropic and useless energy that we don't want, and can do almost nothing with) of 4538444610000000000 joules that's 4538444610 gigajoules
for comparison that's about the same as a gigaton nuclear bomb(heat and blast)
Slashdot Mirror
TV companies recomend you don't skip commercials with Tivo.
How's that different from slashdot?
pride. i'm a developer of software, and I don't allow myself to test my own code beyond a certain point because i'll be too proud of my accomplishments to accept mistakes or failures.
now that you've gone and said that, i went and tested it... WITH A GUEST ACCOUNT. and suprise! doesn't work.
I've found a refinment of this, which actually works exceptionally well at finding good games. you find somone who is an absolutely ravenous fan of the game and then seeing how often they spell words such as "u" or make immature arguments about other games. A 0 out of 5 randomly sampled people tends to indicate a game worth playing, assuming one tolerates the genre in the first place.
then you are not self-aware either. you have your programming, and it includes the capacity to learn. what is happening here is a robot is able to recognize that it's own actions are occuring in front of it. even though it's a simple binary true that recognition is no minor thing. is it good enough? of course not, but that's true of a lot of first generation ideas.
I know this is a mostly christian country, but the devil isn't REAL is he?
"Would you rather have an android with very little real-world experience or another human being fighting side-by-side with you?"
with me or for me?
a sufficiently callibrated AI could easily be better at making moral descisions from a philisophical point of veiw rather than an emotionally sensitive one like people. something programmed to not shoot children(assuming the capiticy to determine children) would never shoot children.
and I'd also much rather have AI fighting for me for my own moral delimas because a robot without emotions would literally have nothing to fear from death, and nothing important to it to lose.
i've seen that website before and i decided to run a few calculations on it. now while you might think that that is a miniscule mean temperature change in the atmosphere, when one multiplies that 0.001227436 C by the ~725(depends on exact density, doesn't vary much) joules needed to raise the temperature of mixed air by one degree centigrade and the 5.1*10^18 kilograms of air in the lower atmosphere one gets the net energy "loss"(this being entropic and useless energy that we don't want, and can do almost nothing with) of 4538444610000000000 joules
that's 4538444610 gigajoules
for comparison that's about the same as a gigaton nuclear bomb(heat and blast)