Well, yeah, AI will always be a moving goalpost, because there's always the possibility of something better. That doesn't mean that it won't revolutionize things.
In quantum mechanics, fundamental particles are indistinguishable from particles of the same type. An electron is an electron, whether it belongs to me or you. The concept of indistinguishability goes much farther than simply stating that we don't have any way of telling them apart. Fundamentally, it is flawed to think of them as separate entities. If you swap two of my electrons with two of your electrons, physically, you have done nothing at all. It's a no-op. The indistinguishability is responsible for some strange behaviors in quantum objects known as Bose-Einstein condensates, not to mention keeping everything from collapsing into a black hole.
This is because the fundamental object is not a particle, but rather, the field. There is one electron field of which the electrons are just excited states. If you know about semiconductors, then you know about holes, which are quasiparticles. They aren't fundamental objects. A hole moves when an electron moves to fill the hole, opening up a "new" hole where the electron used to be. It is a completely meaningless question whether this is the "same" hole.
The point is that your body is made up of a bunch of these electrons and protons and neutrons. If a Star Trek transporter could exist, it doesn't matter if your body is recreated out of "new" particles, since all particles are the same. Likewise, it is a completely meaningless question whether you are the same person as before. "You" are a particular pattern of excitations in the fields.
A lot of philosophical questions were asked before humans had any understanding of modern physics, and are meaningless. The problem is that people don't have an intuitive grasp of quantum mechanics, and therefore make assumptions on reality which are incorrect.
It's kind of a problem, since the energy production of the Earth is finite, and pollution affects everyone. If a rich person goes to an impoverished village during a drought and buys up all the grain, and burns it, actually, it is many people's concern.
Libertarianism is great and all when there are infinite resources.
It's not fair in of itself, but it helps to balance out other unfairness in the economic system. If we removed the other unfairness, then we wouldn't need a progressive income tax. Right now, the rich have overwhelmingly dominant influence in policy and also make vast amounts of passive income through rent seeking.
As an aside, I think ALL larger roads should be toll roads, where the users are the ones who pay.
Yeah, but this would be terrible without some sort of standardized fast-pay system. And with a fast-pay system, there will be a lot of people hacking it to evade payment. Secondly, roads are geographic monopolies. If someone decides to overcharge you, you are shit out of luck. Sure, you can go around, but that would suck.
Charging for what people use makes sense when the cost of compliance is relatively small. Otherwise, you are better off with a socialized cost.
Hey, if you were going to donate your body to science anyways, why not? It could be a treasure trove for the future anthropologists if they have perfectly fossilized brains from the early 21st century to look at. Depending on how far along neuroscience has come along, they might even be able to read some of your thoughts. It's unlikely that anyone would bother to try to revive you though.
Just because it's unlikely to work doesn't automatically make it a scam. If they make an honest effort, and inform people of the real prospects, then it is no scam.
What's the point? You (the person being "backed up") is still dead. There might someday be a copy of you, but you, the you alive right now, the one reading this, is dead. You won't wake up in the future. You won't come back. You will be dead.
You are using a very particular definition of you which everyone might not agree with. If* this company can actually copy your mind, this is the ship of Theseus paradox. I would argue that what's more important is the pattern formed by all the particles that make up your body, not the particles themselves. After all, your cells are constantly exchanging particles with the environment, and you aren't the same particles as you were a second ago.
Moreover, if** a technology can recreate you at the quantum state level, it is you. Quantum mechanics has a phenomenon known as indistinguishable particles which says that particles of the same type (say, two electrons or two protons) do not have independent identities. Loosely speaking, they are vibrations of the same field. To claim that this bump in the field used to belong to me, and that bump in the field belongs to my clone is silly since all the bumps are the same. Note that it is not possible to clone the state of something at quantum level without destroying the state of the original, so in this case, the clone would be more true to the original than the "original", if this kind of thing were possible.
I think you overstate the danger. Just because the AI can make decisions that seem undesirable to most humans doesn't mean it has the power to do anything with the decisions. The AI only has the power to do what we grant it, and we can take away that power. It may eventually be an extinction level threat, but probably not in my lifetime. At the moment, the danger is minimal compared to benefits. Since the power of AI will grow fairly gradually, we will have many opportunities to evaluate the danger and decide if we want to slow down or stop. I don't think AI will patiently wait until having enough power before going full renegade, simply because there will be many stages of development where AI intelligence is no match for humans.
The versions where the platforms and backgrounds all look like different random sprites. It's not a matter of prior knowledge: they made the background tiles look different in different places. The original game wasn't like that. I don't see how that's a fair comparison at all.
Well, just look at the DoD's track record. Is DoD making the US safer? Is the DoD making the world a better place? Even if we eliminated the military, no country would be in a position to invade US. (We can thank the second amendment for that.) I'm not saying we should eliminate the military completely, but just making a point.
I can't seem to find stats on the percentage of female pedophiles. But I'd argue that the number is likely under reported because the boys don't care/complain.
You gotta look at the whole cost-benefit, not just the cost. Cars are one of the costliest things in society in terms of mortality, pollution, and rage. But they also provide the big benefit of getting you around. The cost of guns is a lot of gun deaths. What is the benefit of guns? Resisting oppressive government? How big is that benefit, really? Are we at a point where we really need that?
You don't have to go on vacation every year. This is more of a once per lifetime thing. Having $50000 doesn't make you ultra rich. Having $50000000000 makes you ultra rich.
Look on my Works, ye Mighty, and despair! Nothing beside remains. Round the decay Of that colossal Wreck, boundless and bare The lone and level sands stretch far away."
Nothing but a vanity project for someone who wants to be immortal.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, yeah, AI will always be a moving goalpost, because there's always the possibility of something better. That doesn't mean that it won't revolutionize things.
Ah, but since Jevons paradox tells us that by increasing energy efficiency, we increase the demand for energy, surely cryptocurrency is a great boon for the climate by having absolutely terrible energy efficiency.
In quantum mechanics, fundamental particles are indistinguishable from particles of the same type. An electron is an electron, whether it belongs to me or you. The concept of indistinguishability goes much farther than simply stating that we don't have any way of telling them apart. Fundamentally, it is flawed to think of them as separate entities. If you swap two of my electrons with two of your electrons, physically, you have done nothing at all. It's a no-op. The indistinguishability is responsible for some strange behaviors in quantum objects known as Bose-Einstein condensates, not to mention keeping everything from collapsing into a black hole.
This is because the fundamental object is not a particle, but rather, the field. There is one electron field of which the electrons are just excited states. If you know about semiconductors, then you know about holes, which are quasiparticles. They aren't fundamental objects. A hole moves when an electron moves to fill the hole, opening up a "new" hole where the electron used to be. It is a completely meaningless question whether this is the "same" hole.
The point is that your body is made up of a bunch of these electrons and protons and neutrons. If a Star Trek transporter could exist, it doesn't matter if your body is recreated out of "new" particles, since all particles are the same. Likewise, it is a completely meaningless question whether you are the same person as before. "You" are a particular pattern of excitations in the fields.
A lot of philosophical questions were asked before humans had any understanding of modern physics, and are meaningless. The problem is that people don't have an intuitive grasp of quantum mechanics, and therefore make assumptions on reality which are incorrect.
I don't think of Marissa Mayer and Carly Fiorina as tech leaders.
It's kind of a problem, since the energy production of the Earth is finite, and pollution affects everyone. If a rich person goes to an impoverished village during a drought and buys up all the grain, and burns it, actually, it is many people's concern.
Libertarianism is great and all when there are infinite resources.
Where's your source that the woman was jaywalking?
A citizen pays a lot more taxes per Wh consumed than a cryptominer.
Maybe it shouldn't be this way.
It's not fair in of itself, but it helps to balance out other unfairness in the economic system. If we removed the other unfairness, then we wouldn't need a progressive income tax. Right now, the rich have overwhelmingly dominant influence in policy and also make vast amounts of passive income through rent seeking.
As an aside, I think ALL larger roads should be toll roads, where the users are the ones who pay.
Yeah, but this would be terrible without some sort of standardized fast-pay system. And with a fast-pay system, there will be a lot of people hacking it to evade payment. Secondly, roads are geographic monopolies. If someone decides to overcharge you, you are shit out of luck. Sure, you can go around, but that would suck.
Charging for what people use makes sense when the cost of compliance is relatively small. Otherwise, you are better off with a socialized cost.
Obviously, since the water tastes like plastic, there must be plastic in the water.
Honestly, the investors bear some responsibility for buying into the venture. I know I'm blaming the victims of scams here, but caveat emptor.
That's not really all that unique (cf. Blackwater or xe or whatever they call themselves nowadays).
Hey, if you were going to donate your body to science anyways, why not? It could be a treasure trove for the future anthropologists if they have perfectly fossilized brains from the early 21st century to look at. Depending on how far along neuroscience has come along, they might even be able to read some of your thoughts. It's unlikely that anyone would bother to try to revive you though.
Just because it's unlikely to work doesn't automatically make it a scam. If they make an honest effort, and inform people of the real prospects, then it is no scam.
Hmm, "Think Like a Dinosaur" (1995) by James Patrick Kelly borrowed this concept.
What's the point? You (the person being "backed up") is still dead. There might someday be a copy of you, but you, the you alive right now, the one reading this, is dead. You won't wake up in the future. You won't come back. You will be dead.
You are using a very particular definition of you which everyone might not agree with. If* this company can actually copy your mind, this is the ship of Theseus paradox. I would argue that what's more important is the pattern formed by all the particles that make up your body, not the particles themselves. After all, your cells are constantly exchanging particles with the environment, and you aren't the same particles as you were a second ago.
Moreover, if** a technology can recreate you at the quantum state level, it is you. Quantum mechanics has a phenomenon known as indistinguishable particles which says that particles of the same type (say, two electrons or two protons) do not have independent identities. Loosely speaking, they are vibrations of the same field. To claim that this bump in the field used to belong to me, and that bump in the field belongs to my clone is silly since all the bumps are the same. Note that it is not possible to clone the state of something at quantum level without destroying the state of the original, so in this case, the clone would be more true to the original than the "original", if this kind of thing were possible.
*very unlikely if
**astronomically unlikely if
Actually, Trump is a puppet placed by the AI to sow distrust for human rule. Trump doesn't know this, of course.
I think you overstate the danger. Just because the AI can make decisions that seem undesirable to most humans doesn't mean it has the power to do anything with the decisions. The AI only has the power to do what we grant it, and we can take away that power. It may eventually be an extinction level threat, but probably not in my lifetime. At the moment, the danger is minimal compared to benefits. Since the power of AI will grow fairly gradually, we will have many opportunities to evaluate the danger and decide if we want to slow down or stop. I don't think AI will patiently wait until having enough power before going full renegade, simply because there will be many stages of development where AI intelligence is no match for humans.
The versions where the platforms and backgrounds all look like different random sprites. It's not a matter of prior knowledge: they made the background tiles look different in different places. The original game wasn't like that. I don't see how that's a fair comparison at all.
Well, just look at the DoD's track record. Is DoD making the US safer? Is the DoD making the world a better place? Even if we eliminated the military, no country would be in a position to invade US. (We can thank the second amendment for that.) I'm not saying we should eliminate the military completely, but just making a point.
I can't seem to find stats on the percentage of female pedophiles. But I'd argue that the number is likely under reported because the boys don't care/complain.
They may not complain, but they do boast.
You gotta look at the whole cost-benefit, not just the cost.
Cars are one of the costliest things in society in terms of mortality, pollution, and rage. But they also provide the big benefit of getting you around.
The cost of guns is a lot of gun deaths. What is the benefit of guns? Resisting oppressive government? How big is that benefit, really? Are we at a point where we really need that?
Well, when the status quo is insane, and doing something about it is also insane, expect insanity.
You don't have to go on vacation every year. This is more of a once per lifetime thing. Having $50000 doesn't make you ultra rich. Having $50000000000 makes you ultra rich.
Look on my Works, ye Mighty, and despair!
Nothing beside remains. Round the decay
Of that colossal Wreck, boundless and bare
The lone and level sands stretch far away."
Nothing but a vanity project for someone who wants to be immortal.