You have a good point, but until we create AI, how are we to talk about it? "Did you read the article on DARPA contracting two scientists to create intelligence?"
In that context, intelligence may mean information on the enemy (and create it as in make it up;)). It's a bit of a stretch, but AI is a term everyone immediately knows what you mean. Simple intelligence could mean lots of things.
This comment isn't Informative. It's either mistaken or a liar. That or he's in a country that is actively blocked. UK and Australia can access the site just fine.
Is little Timmy having problems with history? Just turn on the AI tutor and feed it the history module for Year 8, now it can help little Timmy. How is this different from current computer program tutors? Current ones have a finite way of describing something. If the AI tutor monitors what Timmy does on the computer (but doesn't store this in a format easily read by anyone else) it can learn what interests Timmy has and use that information to teach Timmy in terms he'll understand. It can try 10 different re-wordings, and if Timmy doesn't get it, perhaps a re-wording in terms of Doom would help.
Heh, don't worry. I had the same reaction;) But instead of posting, I first thought "wait a minute. WHY do I think this is silly?" and couldn't come up with any logical reasons.
but if you're really that worried about it just add Google to your friggin "robots.txt" and 'the bad Google will go away, little Joey'.
Sorry for not responding to this earlier, I forgot. So you're saying it's my duty as a copyright holder to look for copyright infringers* and ask them to desist? Or to implement methods to stop people from infringing on my copyright in the first place?
I know book authors (dead-tree ones) don't have to implement methods to stop people from infringing on their copyright. It's assumed people won't, and when people do, then they are ordered to stop.
So why is it assumed Google is allowed to infringe on my copyright unless I specify otherwise? It's situations like this that cause companies to invest time and effort in DRM:(
* Let's assume for the sake of this discussion Google is infringing on my copyright by caching my site. Given America's new Draconian copyright laws I wouldn't be surprised;)
Cable and satellite companies will require their own proprietary DVRs to consumers that want them. TIVO will be toast because it will not even be given a chance to compete.
And I would vote with my wallet and NOT support such companies. If there were any shows I desperately HAD to have, I'd either ask my friend to tape it (last I checked that wasn't something you could be sued for if you kept it offline) or buy their season DVD (possibly off ebay).
What's next? Cable companies requiring you to use their proprietary videos? Televisions? I hope people wouldn't put up with that, yet they seem happy to put up with this.
I just hope I don't have to tell my nephews and neices about how back in the old days any television worked with any channel.
Sounds a lot like my DVD-RW or my VCR. Why do people get so excited about Tivo again? Is not fast forwarding commercials worth $300 ($100 for VCR and $100 for blank videos = $500, the cost of a Tivo. I'm being very generous with the cost of VCRs and videos;))? As a society have we become THAT lazy?
I understand that legislators (and especially politicians) generally like to be seen to be "doing something about the problem"
Their shareholders constituents demand no less. Unfortunately in a capitalist society, their constituents are often those that bribe them the most offer the most profit. It's more profitable to lie your way into power and then use your position to profit.
All of those that do otherwise often can't afford the big ad-campaigns.
Slashdot Mirror
Wait, slashdot doesn't look like that for you all the time? Here I was thinking slashdot had a very strange UI.
Didn't they tell you? We have to use the postal service to get those speeds. Sure we might get a lot of bandwidth, but the latency is shit.
Why is this a Troll? Our roos are quite intelligent, shown by the fact they can read at all.
Michael... is that you?
You have a good point, but until we create AI, how are we to talk about it? "Did you read the article on DARPA contracting two scientists to create intelligence?"
;)). It's a bit of a stretch, but AI is a term everyone immediately knows what you mean. Simple intelligence could mean lots of things.
In that context, intelligence may mean information on the enemy (and create it as in make it up
This comment isn't Informative. It's either mistaken or a liar. That or he's in a country that is actively blocked. UK and Australia can access the site just fine.
Is little Timmy having problems with history? Just turn on the AI tutor and feed it the history module for Year 8, now it can help little Timmy. How is this different from current computer program tutors? Current ones have a finite way of describing something. If the AI tutor monitors what Timmy does on the computer (but doesn't store this in a format easily read by anyone else) it can learn what interests Timmy has and use that information to teach Timmy in terms he'll understand. It can try 10 different re-wordings, and if Timmy doesn't get it, perhaps a re-wording in terms of Doom would help.
"can it learn from mistakes?"
"Can you?"
I love that quote. What's it from?
Teaching a machine to read a text book and answer questions doesn't necessarily mean cognitive reasoning.
Makes you wonder then. Does America's teenage population have cognitive reasoning?
according to the now unfindable by google ninetyninezeros blog
Can you say troll? This is blatently false
No, it's outstanding that Google wants to reward it's hard workers with money.
But instead had to compromise with bits of paper? Stocks isn't money until you sell them.
Was August 21, 1992 a Sunday?
No, it was a Saturday.
It's good to see on of my colleague's has finally been modded as insightful. We'll teach them the truth yet Ned.
How is G-Soft underwear?
it's a bit drastic when they start to analyze peoples handwriting to develop a personality profile like that.
I agree whole-heartedly. I've found rummaging through people's dumpsters to be much more reliable.
Did you get a chance to ask him what he runs at home? I bet he would have said Linux. Otherwise he isn't a geek. Only true geeks use Linux.
*closes down IE*
Hmmm. Seems you missed my point. Here it is in one line: Is it my duty to assume people will infringe on my copyright or not infringe?
Heh, don't worry. I had the same reaction ;) But instead of posting, I first thought "wait a minute. WHY do I think this is silly?" and couldn't come up with any logical reasons.
but if you're really that worried about it just add Google to your friggin "robots.txt" and 'the bad Google will go away, little Joey'.
:(
;)
Sorry for not responding to this earlier, I forgot. So you're saying it's my duty as a copyright holder to look for copyright infringers* and ask them to desist? Or to implement methods to stop people from infringing on my copyright in the first place?
I know book authors (dead-tree ones) don't have to implement methods to stop people from infringing on their copyright. It's assumed people won't, and when people do, then they are ordered to stop.
So why is it assumed Google is allowed to infringe on my copyright unless I specify otherwise? It's situations like this that cause companies to invest time and effort in DRM
* Let's assume for the sake of this discussion Google is infringing on my copyright by caching my site. Given America's new Draconian copyright laws I wouldn't be surprised
Guess what. I think there's a distinct possibility this article wasn't for you. It's an American site with an American bias.
Cable and satellite companies will require their own proprietary DVRs to consumers that want them. TIVO will be toast because it will not even be given a chance to compete.
And I would vote with my wallet and NOT support such companies. If there were any shows I desperately HAD to have, I'd either ask my friend to tape it (last I checked that wasn't something you could be sued for if you kept it offline) or buy their season DVD (possibly off ebay).
What's next? Cable companies requiring you to use their proprietary videos? Televisions? I hope people wouldn't put up with that, yet they seem happy to put up with this.
I just hope I don't have to tell my nephews and neices about how back in the old days any television worked with any channel.
Sounds a lot like my DVD-RW or my VCR. Why do people get so excited about Tivo again? Is not fast forwarding commercials worth $300 ($100 for VCR and $100 for blank videos = $500, the cost of a Tivo. I'm being very generous with the cost of VCRs and videos ;))? As a society have we become THAT lazy?
I agree. I hear the radio industry is just about ruined as well.Silly radicals.
I understand that legislators (and especially politicians) generally like to be seen to be "doing something about the problem"
Their shareholders constituents demand no less. Unfortunately in a capitalist society, their constituents are often those that bribe them the most offer the most profit. It's more profitable to lie your way into power and then use your position to profit.
All of those that do otherwise often can't afford the big ad-campaigns.