we don't know how to build stable societies, and this would require one with long term stability.
Not if the passengers were hibernating.
We don't currently know how to do that, but since it is common with other animals, it shouldn't be more that a few hundred years to figure out how to do that with humans.
AI isn't going to put transport workers out of jobs anytime soon either. When goods get delivered exactly how do you think they are going to get loaded and unloaded from the truck?
Working as a long-distance truck driver vs. loading and unloading trucks are entirely different jobs.
While automated city driving is a tough problem, automated highway driving is dead simple. It would be available now if the car companies weren't spending billions on dealing with intersections, pedestrians or bicycles. None of these matters on highways.
Computers don't even have anything near mouse-level intelligence
Neuroscientists are currently struggling to understand the functioning of the nervous system of c elegans, a microscopic worm with 300 neurons and lesss than 10,000 neural connections. They don't expect to understand the whole thing for many years.
In contrast, there are 100 billion neurons and 100 trillion connections in a human brain.It's like comparing a cup of water to Lake Superior.
is not going to be able to run his camera at 11 frames per second any more because it is screwing around encrypting his 42 megapixel files shot in "raw?"
Of course, if there is anything that oppressive governments don't want the world to see it is a basketball game.
We have no idea how free will might arise, no actual evidence that exists, and our basic physics has long implied quite strongly that it's very unlikely
"Free will" is a vague hand-wavy idea that has nothing to do with physics.
(1) In fact, John Searle's Chinese Room argument makes it clear that a computer (as we understand it) could never run any piece of software that could understand the semantics of a proposition - at best it can understand the symbolic content but it can't ever understand what any of it 'means'.
That has been thoroughly debunked. What Searle basically is saying is that "I can't understand how any piece of software that could understand the semantics of a proposition, therefore it can't."
Slashdot Mirror
Sad!
we don't know how to build stable societies, and this would require one with long term stability.
Not if the passengers were hibernating.
We don't currently know how to do that, but since it is common with other animals, it shouldn't be more that a few hundred years to figure out how to do that with humans.
AI isn't going to put transport workers out of jobs anytime soon either. When goods get delivered exactly how do you think they are going to get loaded and unloaded from the truck?
Working as a long-distance truck driver vs. loading and unloading trucks are entirely different jobs.
While automated city driving is a tough problem, automated highway driving is dead simple. It would be available now if the car companies weren't spending billions on dealing with intersections, pedestrians or bicycles. None of these matters on highways.
Exactly.
Computers don't even have anything near mouse-level intelligence
Neuroscientists are currently struggling to understand the functioning of the nervous system of c elegans, a microscopic worm with 300 neurons and lesss than 10,000 neural connections. They don't expect to understand the whole thing for many years.
In contrast, there are 100 billion neurons and 100 trillion connections in a human brain.It's like comparing a cup of water to Lake Superior.
Intelligence has a basic definition of being more than an average person.
No, that's highly intelligent. Quite different.
Rocket ballet.
Why isn't anybody asking the real question:are they delicious?
Consuming iron-rich foods is good for you.
That doesn't mean that swallowing a couple of pounds of nails is.
Are you denialists intentionally stupid, or were you born that way?
Predicted by whattsup? That's like quoting politics from Fox news.
is not going to be able to run his camera at 11 frames per second any more because it is screwing around encrypting his 42 megapixel files shot in "raw?"
Of course, if there is anything that oppressive governments don't want the world to see it is a basketball game.
DigiKey too.
Use
to make new lines.
Please.
Not bad.
I am thinking of the one at Princeton, I think, where people would use their thoughts to control the random numbers from a RNG.
Pretty vague.
If you want to pretend that all those experiments were not done, or the results are wrong, then that is fine also.
But you're alleging that they were done and the results were not wrong, while providing nothing to back that up.
You're the TimeCube guy, right?
We have no idea how free will might arise, no actual evidence that exists, and our basic physics has long implied quite strongly that it's very unlikely
"Free will" is a vague hand-wavy idea that has nothing to do with physics.
(1) In fact, John Searle's Chinese Room argument makes it clear that a computer (as we understand it) could never run any piece of software that could understand the semantics of a proposition - at best it can understand the symbolic content but it can't ever understand what any of it 'means'.
That has been thoroughly debunked.
What Searle basically is saying is that "I can't understand how any piece of software that could understand the semantics of a proposition, therefore it can't."
If space is truly flat, and thus infinite, it would mean every possibility of you would exist somewhere and when
OK, maybe.
So, in essence, science says we all have eternal souls.
WTF? Where did you get that from?
Atheists rediscovering fantasy, is all that is.
FTFY.
my washing machine is better at washing dishes than me. it doesn't want to get paid.
It's paid in KiloJoules.
I find that if both critics and audience like a film, it is probably worth seeing.
OTOH, if both think it stinks, then it probably stinks.
Not to mention stopping people from clear-cutting tropical forests to grow crops.
insurance company telephone call center that's choc full of PhDs
In what though?
A Ph.D. in itself tells you very little about the person's knowledge or abilities.
Right.
Because Tesla's are actually planes that have transformed into cars.