Erm, why would it need to invent those trucks? Are we pretending the AI doesn't have access to the Internet now? Or that tanker trucks are somehow difficult to conceive of?
Yes, it is difficult to conceive. You are on the internet, too. Please use my bank account or credit card and order something. Or put money from my bank account into yours, and order something with your own money. Even if you can figure who am I (that is easy), you won't easy find at which bank I have an account, nor will you be able to issue an transfer. The final hurdle will be the transfer limit...
It runs a vehicle factory. It can reconfigure that factory as needed. No it can't. Just because it is an AI it is not a super intelligent thing. A is for "artificial" not for "super". To reconfigure the plant, you not only need a "plan for the truck" but also a "plan for a factory" that can build such trucks. And you have to buy spare parts, so we are back at my previous posts point. Or does the AI suddenly also own a tire factory?
Why the hell do you think I talked about it extorting the fuel from the humans via threatening to run more humans over? You did not word it that way, sorry, I missed that threatening part:D
And then realize this is slashdot and not a peer-reviewed journal where every single possible step must be explicitly discussed. My point is: if you own a factory like above, you can not do all those things above with a snip of a finger. Neither can an AI.
A "Go AI" might be better in playing Go than a human, but converting one factory into another one and a product(ion) line into another has limits outside of mere intelligence or "capability". E.g. time, energy, additional resources, custom made parts that need to be designed. Robots that need to be programmed or humans that need to be hired.
You, like so many others, seem to be under the impression that the current state of self-driving cars is something new. It isn't. How do you come to that idea? Answered to the wrong post?
I'm quite aware that self driving experimental cars exist since ages. The parent claimed that they are since ever 5 years in the future, which they clearly are not.
Erm, would you perhaps reread what nonsense you posted? At every single step you have to answer a few questions: how would it do it? Aka, 'invent those trucks'. How would it pay for it? Aka, those trucks and that fuel you are talking about... Etc. p.p.
You scenario needs hard work to be remotely plausible. How ever if you work on it, it might become a nice SF story.
No, such software doees not exist. What we have are makvare viruses etc. It is impossible to 'hack into' another account. You can guesswork his password. You can social engineer getting access to it, you can use a backdoor/insuder to get access to non encrypted password list etc.
There is no way for a human or a computer to 'hack into' my youtube, slashdot, bank or google account. To get into it, you need to know lots of things not related to them, and ways of access that have nothing to do with 'hacking'. And after uou have access as a dumb AI, you still don't know how to transfer money to anyone using my bank account. And even if you knew, you could not without my phone...
Bottom line an AI might be a computer as smart or smarter than a human, in niches perhaps orders of magnitudes smarter, nut that does not make it a hacker or abke to hack anything.
However the number of 85million cats is hard to believe:D That would mean _every_ 4 people family has one cat. In other words 1 cat per 4 persons of population. And all those cats need to be outside and hunting. And they need to catch/kill about one bird per week. So: no, absolutely not plausible.
Sorry, the number makes no sense.
Especially because the number is only a dumb estimate doing the reversed math you made.
An AI can not kill all humans unless we give it the power to do so.
An AI is just a bunch of chips and software in a box below my desk.
How the funk should it be able to go out on a killing spray? It has no bank account, no connection to power plants, hospitals etc.; it can not move, it requires electric power, it has no weapons.
To influence the real world it wold need "accounts" or abuse "my accounts" (which I don't have) on real world computer systems. In other words if it wants to manipulate the stock market it needs "access" to enough "financial accounts" to abuse them.
How the funk should a "computer" under my desk be able to do that? Do you really believe an AI can "hack into an account" just because it is an AI and a computer/software, too? No one can be so stupid. But well, Einstein mentioned only 2 things in the universe are infinite. The universe (and he was not certain about that) and human stupidity.
Really, I thought that the speed was fixed by the need to be synchronous with the grid. No, the speed varies with the wind speed. The synchronization is done with [layman speak]AC to DC converter and a further synchronized DC to AC converter[/layman speak] Otherwise you would need windmills that have a 3000 rounds per minute generator (in Europe 50Hz) and a bit faster in the US (60Hz).
The solution is better education, especially in math, science, and critical thinking Exactly... and 3.7B birds are killed annually by domestic and feral cats in America. And here we see: it is pointless to teach math. Even you believe that cats kill nearly 4billion birds. Where is your common sense? How many birds per cat per day is that? Hu?
Actually it has. We are living in the peak oil phase since a few years. It is pretty unlikely that the oil production will increase significantly in future, so we are at the peak now.
That collapsing of lungs thing makes no sense, you are perfectly right. The pressure difference is so low it is completely insignificant.
- Underwater high voltage cables are relatively new. No, they exist since decades.
Low voltage power transfer under water would not make any sense anyway... I guess even you learned that in school? Did you not?
- Underwater high voltage cables that aren't laid on the bottom, but which hangs from floating vessels is new and not studied at all. Actually it is not. Or do you think all those robots we use in the seas run on batteries?
First of all it is not a part of the system requirement It is only a nice to have feature because otherwise you would "waste" the surplus energy.
Then again: why the funk do you care about lithium as a rare earth element in batteries? First of all: they are not rare. Secondly: the mining is simply gathering sand or rock. No one or anything is harmed in that.
Batteries can be made in many ways, and for large scale we mainly will use flow batteries anyway.
Solar panels don't contain rare earth elements. And wind turbines don't need them either, it is up to you if you use an ordinary magnet or one containing niob.
I guess you are underestimating your parrots abilities: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wik... Scroll down to 'famous talking bitds'. Google for that Dr. Irene Pepperberg She wrote articles about her parrots, their language skills went so far that they invented their own words for things they found difficult to pronounce by combining known words (red banana for strawberry etc. and they could explain why they chosed the term!). The older ones urged the younger ones with phraces like: "speak clearly!"
I would say 90% of all variables I ever used in C++ are pointers. Does not matte if they are smart pointers. Stings are a very bad example... they are only a datatype meant as replacement for char*
In any real world application, e.g. a word document 90% of all objects will be heap allocated. It is impossible to load a word document on the stack, or type it in with all data on the stack.
Sure you can now come with a pointless counterexample: WordDocument doc;// lives in the stack (but it subsections wont) File wDoc("Path/to/file");// lives in the stack, but the byte buffer you read the document into, does not doc = wDoc.readAll();// might allocate even more buffers
Sure you can write (and need to sometimes) C++ programs where all data is allocated once and the rest is volatile on the stack, but you hardly can do that for an interactive program with UI and/or a compiler like gcc, or a DB like MySQL etc. p.p.
The idea that C++ is superior to Java in certain areas is overrated. More correct is: in most areas they are competely the same, and for a few areas C++ offers more or better options than Java.
It has to allocate everything using expensive free-store allocation, compared to C++ where the majority of objects are allocated for free on the stack. Any examples for such a program? All C++ programs I ever have seen allocate the majority of their objects on the heap. Using auto on the stack is only in rare cases (aka very temporarily objects) possible. Never wrote such code.
Slashdot Mirror
Erm, why would it need to invent those trucks? Are we pretending the AI doesn't have access to the Internet now? Or that tanker trucks are somehow difficult to conceive of?
...
Yes, it is difficult to conceive.
You are on the internet, too. Please use my bank account or credit card and order something. Or put money from my bank account into yours, and order something with your own money. Even if you can figure who am I (that is easy), you won't easy find at which bank I have an account, nor will you be able to issue an transfer. The final hurdle will be the transfer limit
It runs a vehicle factory. It can reconfigure that factory as needed.
No it can't. Just because it is an AI it is not a super intelligent thing. A is for "artificial" not for "super".
To reconfigure the plant, you not only need a "plan for the truck" but also a "plan for a factory" that can build such trucks. And you have to buy spare parts, so we are back at my previous posts point. Or does the AI suddenly also own a tire factory?
Why the hell do you think I talked about it extorting the fuel from the humans via threatening to run more humans over? :D
You did not word it that way, sorry, I missed that threatening part
And then realize this is slashdot and not a peer-reviewed journal where every single possible step must be explicitly discussed.
My point is: if you own a factory like above, you can not do all those things above with a snip of a finger.
Neither can an AI.
A "Go AI" might be better in playing Go than a human, but converting one factory into another one and a product(ion) line into another has limits outside of mere intelligence or "capability". E.g. time, energy, additional resources, custom made parts that need to be designed. Robots that need to be programmed or humans that need to be hired.
You, like so many others, seem to be under the impression that the current state of self-driving cars is something new. It isn't.
How do you come to that idea?
Answered to the wrong post?
I'm quite aware that self driving experimental cars exist since ages.
The parent claimed that they are since ever 5 years in the future, which they clearly are not.
Erm, would you perhaps reread what nonsense you posted? ...
At every single step you have to answer a few questions:
how would it do it? Aka, 'invent those trucks'.
How would it pay for it? Aka, those trucks and that fuel you are talking about
Etc. p.p.
You scenario needs hard work to be remotely plausible. How ever if you work on it, it might become a nice SF story.
Oh, I thought he wanted to make the point that for ever and ever self driving cars are 5 years in the future :)
No, such software doees not exist.
What we have are makvare viruses etc.
It is impossible to 'hack into' another account.
You can guesswork his password. You can social engineer getting access to it, you can use a backdoor/insuder to get access to non encrypted password list etc.
There is no way for a human or a computer to 'hack into' my youtube, slashdot, bank or google account. ...
To get into it, you need to know lots of things not related to them, and ways of access that have nothing to do with 'hacking'. And after uou have access as a dumb AI, you still don't know how to transfer money to anyone using my bank account. And even if you knew, you could not without my phone
Bottom line an AI might be a computer as smart or smarter than a human, in niches perhaps orders of magnitudes smarter, nut that does not make it a hacker or abke to hack anything.
The amount of power a single wind mill is rather limited.
It barely exceeds 20MW, rated power of the biggest is 8MW.
So ... I don't see the problem you see.
A cable hanging down to the ground is in no way intrusive for wild life, it likely will simply settle on the cable.
However the number of 85million cats is hard to believe :D
That would mean _every_ 4 people family has one cat.
In other words 1 cat per 4 persons of population.
And all those cats need to be outside and hunting. And they need to catch/kill about one bird per week. So: no, absolutely not plausible.
Sorry, the number makes no sense.
Especially because the number is only a dumb estimate doing the reversed math you made.
An AI can not kill all humans unless we give it the power to do so.
An AI is just a bunch of chips and software in a box below my desk.
How the funk should it be able to go out on a killing spray? It has no bank account, no connection to power plants, hospitals etc.; it can not move, it requires electric power, it has no weapons.
To influence the real world it wold need "accounts" or abuse "my accounts" (which I don't have) on real world computer systems. In other words if it wants to manipulate the stock market it needs "access" to enough "financial accounts" to abuse them.
How the funk should a "computer" under my desk be able to do that? Do you really believe an AI can "hack into an account" just because it is an AI and a computer/software, too? No one can be so stupid. But well, Einstein mentioned only 2 things in the universe are infinite. The universe (and he was not certain about that) and human stupidity.
A month ago self driving cars up to speed of 60km/h where approved in Germany, I believe it is an Audi.
So what is your point?
Mine is an iPad 2 ... I guess I bought it about 2012. When not stressed it still runs 10h on one charge.
No need to post links about countries that have bad legal systems.
Point is: the argument about rare earth elements makes no sense.
There is no difference at all regarding oil etc.
And half of the claims, or 2/3rd are wrong anyway (e.g. the used acids, they get recycled, facepalm).
All the side products by rare earth mining are valuable resources and simply get collected and sold as well.
Really, I thought that the speed was fixed by the need to be synchronous with the grid.
No, the speed varies with the wind speed.
The synchronization is done with [layman speak]AC to DC converter and a further synchronized DC to AC converter[/layman speak]
Otherwise you would need windmills that have a 3000 rounds per minute generator (in Europe 50Hz) and a bit faster in the US (60Hz).
The solution is better education, especially in math, science, and critical thinking .. and 3.7B birds are killed annually by domestic and feral cats in America.
Exactly.
And here we see: it is pointless to teach math. Even you believe that cats kill nearly 4billion birds. Where is your common sense? How many birds per cat per day is that? Hu?
After a few generations, the birds will learn to detect them.
No, they wont.
Evolution does not work that way.
And: dead birds don't tell anything to living birds. So even if they where smart and observing: how would they "learn"?
Actually it has.
We are living in the peak oil phase since a few years.
It is pretty unlikely that the oil production will increase significantly in future, so we are at the peak now.
That collapsing of lungs thing makes no sense, you are perfectly right. The pressure difference is so low it is completely insignificant.
So you have a kite flying how high exactly ... ...
Just wondering
But if you wanted to be funny: +1 funny.
- Underwater high voltage cables are relatively new.
No, they exist since decades.
Low voltage power transfer under water would not make any sense anyway ... I guess even you learned that in school? Did you not?
- Underwater high voltage cables that aren't laid on the bottom, but which hangs from floating vessels is new and not studied at all.
Actually it is not. Or do you think all those robots we use in the seas run on batteries?
moded -5 because it is your usual wrong rant :D
First of all it is not a part of the system requirement
It is only a nice to have feature because otherwise you would "waste" the surplus energy.
Then again: why the funk do you care about lithium as a rare earth element in batteries? First of all: they are not rare. Secondly: the mining is simply gathering sand or rock. No one or anything is harmed in that.
Batteries can be made in many ways, and for large scale we mainly will use flow batteries anyway.
Solar panels don't contain rare earth elements.
And wind turbines don't need them either, it is up to you if you use an ordinary magnet or one containing niob.
We have power cables on the sea floor since decades.
I guess you are underestimating your parrots abilities: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wik...
Scroll down to 'famous talking bitds'.
Google for that Dr. Irene Pepperberg
She wrote articles about her parrots, their language skills went so far that they invented their own words for things they found difficult to pronounce by combining known words (red banana for strawberry etc. and they could explain why they chosed the term!). The older ones urged the younger ones with phraces like: "speak clearly!"
I would say 90% of all variables I ever used in C++ are pointers. Does not matte if they are smart pointers. ... they are only a datatype meant as replacement for char*
Stings are a very bad example
In any real world application, e.g. a word document 90% of all objects will be heap allocated. It is impossible to load a word document on the stack, or type it in with all data on the stack.
Sure you can now come with a pointless counterexample: // lives in the stack (but it subsections wont) // lives in the stack, but the byte buffer you read the document into, does not // might allocate even more buffers
WordDocument doc;
File wDoc("Path/to/file");
doc = wDoc.readAll();
Sure you can write (and need to sometimes) C++ programs where all data is allocated once and the rest is volatile on the stack, but you hardly can do that for an interactive program with UI and/or a compiler like gcc, or a DB like MySQL etc. p.p.
The idea that C++ is superior to Java in certain areas is overrated. More correct is: in most areas they are competely the same, and for a few areas C++ offers more or better options than Java.
It does mot really matter, Norway has only 5.xM inhabitants ... most obviously live in the few big cities.
It has to allocate everything using expensive free-store allocation, compared to C++ where the majority of objects are allocated for free on the stack.
Any examples for such a program? All C++ programs I ever have seen allocate the majority of their objects on the heap.
Using auto on the stack is only in rare cases (aka very temporarily objects) possible. Never wrote such code.