In theory, my phone could do the same, it has the necessary hardware and the potential to do better spying on me since it follows me around. But it doesn't. How do I know? I don't have a data plan that allows for those amount of data.
How much data do you think it needs to transfer? Most of what you do is not voice recordings, but raw gps data, emails, etc., which not only compress really well, but have already travelled to you on that bad data plan of yours.
Plus, high-quality VOIP takes less than 40MB per *hour* of two-way conversation. So even if it was doing what Alexa does, you'd still not even notice.
Also, doesn't your phone ever connect to wifi? It can store gigabytes of information locally in the meantime...
If you have a smart phone, and you think Alexa is a bigger threat to your privacy, then you are delusional.
Exactly! I don't get how this supposedly "always listening and spying on me" device is going to get more out of me than the phone that knows almost everything I do and write, all day every day. I don't tell Alexa before I go to a store where I'm going and what I'm going to get, but the phone knows exactly where I went, how long I spent there, and what products I researched before I did it.
All the phones these days are listening all the time, as well. And they follow you around.
I really don't see what the problem with a smart speaker is. And it looks like most people agree.
Assuming that's even technologically possible and good enough to be used in a court of law. Not to mention the idea of trying to fly in bad weather or at night, and most digital cameras don't work very well at night, especially when your moving.
It's already been used in 2016, so it's technologically quite possible and effective.
That's when the original "outrage" shut it down... but now I guess some want it back.
The point is not so much to get a picture of someone's face while they committing a crime.. it's to be able to go back and forth in time to find the moving dot that came to the scene of the crime and then left... it's enough to get probably cause to search a place where the likely perp went or came from.
It's not only that people are stupid. It's important that you can't sell ground rat and call it ground beef. Some enforcement is welcome, and it shouldn't be up to the consumers to investigate every single item in the store to determine whether they really are what they say they are.
Why would the poster 'Do himself good'? You are kinda telling him 'what to think' here.
It was meant to be a suggestion, from one nerd to another one.
How to think can be more interesting. Do you see the human brain evolving and progressing along with this interesting pattern recognition technology:) Created from the human brain. ?
I can't argue with that, but I will say that dismissing a technology because of terminology disagreement is not a way to learn how to think or explore the human brain.
I agree with parent that ML is more than just pattern recognition, but I wouldn't go so far as to say that any type of algorithm was learned. Instead, it's more like an adaptive lossy compression + extraction algorithm that may or may not give the results you want, even after training.
The learning was both in the building of the 3d model, and the learning of the extraction algorithm. The extent that the algorithm was manually programmed is in the constraints that forced the data compression followed by uncompression, but in which way the compression and decompression happens is mostly learned by the network model.
I don't understand the fixation on the terminology, while ignoring the interesting aspects of what it does.
The terminology is very well defined in the industry, and accepted by most who participate. Deep neural network are a part of the family of machine learning algorithms (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deep_learning), which is, in turn, a subset of the field of artificial intelligence (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Machine_learning).
They key different from what you call "pattern recognition" is that there is no explicit coding of the algorithm, but the algorithm instead is "learned" through examples.
Nobody is saying that the machine is intelligent. You'd do yourself good to look past the disagreement with the established terminology and look at the technology itself. You might find it interesting.
It might be optimized for specific types of code, similar to how graphics processors are optimized, but there is no such thing as an 'artificial intelligence chip'.
That's a very weird thing to say. Why do you accept that the "graphics processor" can have "graphics" in it even though it's just optimized for specific type of code, but not "ai" when it's optimized for many algorithm used in today's "ai"?
Nobody is calling it an intelligent chip. It is exactly what it says it is, a chip optimized for running ai algorithms.
And before you claim we should balance the budget by paying more taxes, consider that the tax burden in the U.S. is already among the highest in the world. People claiming U.S. taxes are low usually only look at Federal taxes, and fail to account for state and local taxes. U.S. tax burden is the third highest of the 20 largest economies in the world (only France and Italy have a higher tax burden). That's right, Americans pay more taxes (as percent of GDP) than socialist countries like Canada, the UK, Germany.
Does "percentage of GDP" correlate with "percentage of income" when it comes to taxes? I am quite certain that Canadians pay more of their income in taxes. Just like US has state taxes, so does Canada have provincial taxes. The federal rates are higher, brackets are lower, sales taxes are higher, and provincial taxes are in line with the higher state-level taxes (like California).
Both the average and the rich Canadian will pay more in taxes than the same-level American. Also, US GDP per capita is higher than Canadian. So, where does the math break down?
Maybe US has a lot more people in higher tax brackets, so when it all averages out, you get higher tax burden in US... but that means that this tax burden metric is misleading -- if you moved all the population (and their income) to Canada, they would be paying even more there.
I don't see how a different timing would allow you to deduce anything from something that was loaded into the cache. A cache load on modern CPU's consists of loading multiple bytes at a time (8, 16, 32) and a slight timing difference won't tell me the value of those
The way this works is that you don't load the protected data into cache, but you use it in a subsequent instruction to load one of the two addresses that you do have access to into cache. I.e., in some pseudo-assembly:
Now, if bit 0 of protected addr was 1, you will have "some_accessible_addr + 64" loaded into cache, and if it is 0, it's some_accessible_addr + 0. Since these are two separate cachelines, you can now access each from normal user code, see which one returned quickly, and determine the value of bit 0 of the protected_addr. And, you keep doing this, getting the data bit by bit.
The reason this works is that all this code is executed speculatively. Eventually, the load to the protected address will be aborted, and the register values for it and subsequent instructions will be cleaned up, but cache remains the way it is... i.e. there's no way to "roll back" the cache.
The Nexus 10 has held up well for the 5 years, but its days are numbered. Waiting for Google now seems hopeless.
Galaxy Tab S2/S3 9.7 is a good replacement. I'm quite happy with my S2... I'm starting to get used to Samsung hardware now that Google no longer makes stuff like Nexus 5, 7, and 10 that I've been very happy with. I finally switched to a Samsung phone, too, after the disappointment that Nexus 6 was.
I don't mind judging people for their ridiculous decisions. If they don't get negative feedback they'll just keep on train wrecking their finances and being a general burden on society.
I hear you. I was focusing on Baron_Yam who claims to be super frugal, while going on vacations, listening to music on a system that sounds better than a live concert, and watching movies at home on a better setup than a movie theater. Frugal, my ass. He just chooses to spend his money differently than others and pretends to have figured things out for the rest of the world.
That pisses me off. That's different from telling people who have little money to be frugal.
If your idea of 'fun' is living paycheque to paycheque... with a base load on your credit cards... OK.
So instead of a new BMW, some Nike shoes, a closet of Polo shirts, and a Starbucks coffee every day. I'm not blowing hundreds of dollars at a shot to get a lousy seat at a concert when the music's better on my home sound system. And no, I don't see every new movie in the theatres when I can wait and see them at home for a fraction of the cost.
There's a big differences between spending some of your money on experiences and what you describe above. It's a fine thing to set the bar at "don't load up your credit cards", but beyond that, we all choose what experiences we value and what we spend money on.
You are spending your money on vacations, on high quality home sound systems, and TVs so you can watch movies and listen to music at home. To each their own, though -- many people could argue that spending money on a TV is a "stupid thing", as you call it. For the price of a decent TV, I can go to the movies with my wife over 30 times and have a much better experience. I can't even begin to compare a good concert experience vs. listening to music at home... Driving a BMW is also a decidedly different experience from driving a Corolla, and some might choose to spend their money there.
Don't judge people for having different preferences from your own.
Have they considered how small a train would be that could fit into a 14 foot tunnel? It certainly couldn't be anywhere near 14 foot in diameter.
I'm sure they have.
London has several subway lines with 12 foot diameter tunnels. Being 6'5", I don't enjoy riding in them, but they do the job. Add 2+ feet and they'll be fine for just about everyone.
But Canada does do it. Our immigration program is a points-based system. If you are in a class of worker that is required in Canada, then you can apply as a landed immigrant.
One possibility is that the points-based system gives you points for being in the right profession, and not for being any good at it. It also leaves is up to the government to decide what jobs are needed, instead of the employers.
The H1-B -> Green Card path is a "free market" approach, where it's up to you to find and keep a job, which proves that you're worth keeping. In an ideal world, that should yield better results than a government-defined points-based system... while being much less compassionate (IMO).
Unfortunately, the long delays for certain nationalities in going from the H1-B to Green Card have made the system quite a bit more inhumane that it needed it to be.
Right, if you're not getting applicants, it's because you're not paying them enough.
To all who simply say that you need to pay more to get more applicants... How many job postings (in computer engineering) do you see out there that specify how much they pay upfront? You need the applicants that pass an interview process to even start discussing compensation.
Good luck suing in court, because even if you somehow win, and even if that amount is more than your legal fees, you still have to somehow get that judgement paid, and as a pleeb your odds of getting paid are zero.
Nobody is getting the money, sure, but this is still a crime that the government can prosecute and send the guy to jail.
Wow that's quite a sweeping generality you're making there. You don't think people in modest houses and with modest cars ever buy nice electronics?
It's a generalization, and by definition, it only means that it's *usually* true. I'm sure there's a strong correlation between a fancy house + fancy car and presence of expensive luxury items in the house. I'm sure there are plenty of exceptions both ways, but odds are in your favour if you bet this way.
I know in the area I live in, we all have generally same sized houses and same cars but some people have put their money into nice TVs/game consoles/stereos and some haven't.
And I'm sure that in the area where the $1M+ houses are, almost everyone has put some of their money into nice TVs, and *also* expensive jewelry and other pricey knickknacks.
Furthermore, some people have alarm systems and some don't, also something that will become evident to the Amazon delivery guy.
People with alarm systems tend to put stickers and signs out showing that you have an alarm system. It's not something you're trying to keep secret. Most of the value of the alarm is the deterrence, after all.
Even if they got a Alpha Go like research budget, don't expect the Civilization 7 AI to start playing a game that's challenging to higher-level human play.
That's a sad thought.
As the game gets more complex, the AI is only getting worse at handling it, making the latest installment the least captivating of them all:(.
And, yet, I still hope Civ 7 could be different. So, shut up.:)
GM, NIssan, and Toyota can afford to just drop the price by the amount of the tax credit and still make money on the cars.
If that's true, then the free market system has failed this particular product category pretty badly, and maybe needs some kind of regulation, or just plain old punishment for price fixing.
But, my guess is that those cars are simply still expensive to make.
Slashdot Mirror
That's good for you, but you're in the minority.
Even then, nobody carries an Echo around with them. So even you will likely be talking around it much less often than you will use your phone.
How much data do you think it needs to transfer? Most of what you do is not voice recordings, but raw gps data, emails, etc., which not only compress really well, but have already travelled to you on that bad data plan of yours.
Plus, high-quality VOIP takes less than 40MB per *hour* of two-way conversation. So even if it was doing what Alexa does, you'd still not even notice.
Also, doesn't your phone ever connect to wifi? It can store gigabytes of information locally in the meantime...
Exactly! I don't get how this supposedly "always listening and spying on me" device is going to get more out of me than the phone that knows almost everything I do and write, all day every day. I don't tell Alexa before I go to a store where I'm going and what I'm going to get, but the phone knows exactly where I went, how long I spent there, and what products I researched before I did it.
All the phones these days are listening all the time, as well. And they follow you around.
I really don't see what the problem with a smart speaker is. And it looks like most people agree.
It's already been used in 2016, so it's technologically quite possible and effective.
https://www.bloomberg.com/features/2016-baltimore-secret-surveillance/
That's when the original "outrage" shut it down... but now I guess some want it back.
The point is not so much to get a picture of someone's face while they committing a crime.. it's to be able to go back and forth in time to find the moving dot that came to the scene of the crime and then left... it's enough to get probably cause to search a place where the likely perp went or came from.
It's not only that people are stupid. It's important that you can't sell ground rat and call it ground beef. Some enforcement is welcome, and it shouldn't be up to the consumers to investigate every single item in the store to determine whether they really are what they say they are.
It was meant to be a suggestion, from one nerd to another one.
I can't argue with that, but I will say that dismissing a technology because of terminology disagreement is not a way to learn how to think or explore the human brain.
The learning was both in the building of the 3d model, and the learning of the extraction algorithm. The extent that the algorithm was manually programmed is in the constraints that forced the data compression followed by uncompression, but in which way the compression and decompression happens is mostly learned by the network model.
I don't understand the fixation on the terminology, while ignoring the interesting aspects of what it does.
The terminology is very well defined in the industry, and accepted by most who participate. Deep neural network are a part of the family of machine learning algorithms (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deep_learning), which is, in turn, a subset of the field of artificial intelligence (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Machine_learning).
They key different from what you call "pattern recognition" is that there is no explicit coding of the algorithm, but the algorithm instead is "learned" through examples.
Nobody is saying that the machine is intelligent. You'd do yourself good to look past the disagreement with the established terminology and look at the technology itself. You might find it interesting.
Did I miss a bunch of modern technology development?
Are you saying that you are better informed than the investigator who said the following:
"Indeed, the memorandum did cause extreme discord, which the Charging Party exacerbated by deliberately expanding its audience."
I don't think they'll miss any of them.
That's a very weird thing to say. Why do you accept that the "graphics processor" can have "graphics" in it even though it's just optimized for specific type of code, but not "ai" when it's optimized for many algorithm used in today's "ai"?
Nobody is calling it an intelligent chip. It is exactly what it says it is, a chip optimized for running ai algorithms.
Does "percentage of GDP" correlate with "percentage of income" when it comes to taxes? I am quite certain that Canadians pay more of their income in taxes. Just like US has state taxes, so does Canada have provincial taxes. The federal rates are higher, brackets are lower, sales taxes are higher, and provincial taxes are in line with the higher state-level taxes (like California).
Both the average and the rich Canadian will pay more in taxes than the same-level American. Also, US GDP per capita is higher than Canadian. So, where does the math break down?
Maybe US has a lot more people in higher tax brackets, so when it all averages out, you get higher tax burden in US... but that means that this tax burden metric is misleading -- if you moved all the population (and their income) to Canada, they would be paying even more there.
Clock guys are like driver guys... the stuff they write and develop is quite a bit different from everything else.
The guys who work on caches, decode, fetch, etc. are all fairly interchangeable, if you've got a good architect to direct and oversee the work.
The way this works is that you don't load the protected data into cache, but you use it in a subsequent instruction to load one of the two addresses that you do have access to into cache. I.e., in some pseudo-assembly:
load r1, [protected_addr]
and r2, r1, 0x1
load r3, [some_accessible_addr + r2 6]
Now, if bit 0 of protected addr was 1, you will have "some_accessible_addr + 64" loaded into cache, and if it is 0, it's some_accessible_addr + 0. Since these are two separate cachelines, you can now access each from normal user code, see which one returned quickly, and determine the value of bit 0 of the protected_addr. And, you keep doing this, getting the data bit by bit.
The reason this works is that all this code is executed speculatively. Eventually, the load to the protected address will be aborted, and the register values for it and subsequent instructions will be cleaned up, but cache remains the way it is... i.e. there's no way to "roll back" the cache.
BTW, cache line size is 64 bytes.
Galaxy Tab S2/S3 9.7 is a good replacement. I'm quite happy with my S2... I'm starting to get used to Samsung hardware now that Google no longer makes stuff like Nexus 5, 7, and 10 that I've been very happy with. I finally switched to a Samsung phone, too, after the disappointment that Nexus 6 was.
What are all these people that are taking out mortgages to invest?
There's plenty of buyers. Just try it -- there's very little difficulty in selling any now that there are still tons of buyers trying to get in.
I hear you. I was focusing on Baron_Yam who claims to be super frugal, while going on vacations, listening to music on a system that sounds better than a live concert, and watching movies at home on a better setup than a movie theater. Frugal, my ass. He just chooses to spend his money differently than others and pretends to have figured things out for the rest of the world.
That pisses me off. That's different from telling people who have little money to be frugal.
There's a big differences between spending some of your money on experiences and what you describe above. It's a fine thing to set the bar at "don't load up your credit cards", but beyond that, we all choose what experiences we value and what we spend money on.
You are spending your money on vacations, on high quality home sound systems, and TVs so you can watch movies and listen to music at home. To each their own, though -- many people could argue that spending money on a TV is a "stupid thing", as you call it. For the price of a decent TV, I can go to the movies with my wife over 30 times and have a much better experience. I can't even begin to compare a good concert experience vs. listening to music at home... Driving a BMW is also a decidedly different experience from driving a Corolla, and some might choose to spend their money there.
Don't judge people for having different preferences from your own.
I'm sure they have.
London has several subway lines with 12 foot diameter tunnels. Being 6'5", I don't enjoy riding in them, but they do the job. Add 2+ feet and they'll be fine for just about everyone.
One possibility is that the points-based system gives you points for being in the right profession, and not for being any good at it. It also leaves is up to the government to decide what jobs are needed, instead of the employers.
The H1-B -> Green Card path is a "free market" approach, where it's up to you to find and keep a job, which proves that you're worth keeping. In an ideal world, that should yield better results than a government-defined points-based system... while being much less compassionate (IMO).
Unfortunately, the long delays for certain nationalities in going from the H1-B to Green Card have made the system quite a bit more inhumane that it needed it to be.
To all who simply say that you need to pay more to get more applicants... How many job postings (in computer engineering) do you see out there that specify how much they pay upfront? You need the applicants that pass an interview process to even start discussing compensation.
Nobody is getting the money, sure, but this is still a crime that the government can prosecute and send the guy to jail.
It's a generalization, and by definition, it only means that it's *usually* true. I'm sure there's a strong correlation between a fancy house + fancy car and presence of expensive luxury items in the house. I'm sure there are plenty of exceptions both ways, but odds are in your favour if you bet this way.
And I'm sure that in the area where the $1M+ houses are, almost everyone has put some of their money into nice TVs, and *also* expensive jewelry and other pricey knickknacks.
People with alarm systems tend to put stickers and signs out showing that you have an alarm system. It's not something you're trying to keep secret. Most of the value of the alarm is the deterrence, after all.
That's a sad thought.
As the game gets more complex, the AI is only getting worse at handling it, making the latest installment the least captivating of them all :(.
And, yet, I still hope Civ 7 could be different. So, shut up. :)
If that's true, then the free market system has failed this particular product category pretty badly, and maybe needs some kind of regulation, or just plain old punishment for price fixing.
But, my guess is that those cars are simply still expensive to make.