Eh... computers will learn the tricks, future generations of machines tend to become immune to the tricks the first generation fell for, heck it is very quick and easy to educate an entire generation of systems to the specific trick that the first generation fell for. Meanwhile there are still new generation humans, vulnerable to the "nigerian prince" exploit.
Not really... yeah low latency is great and all, but when talking an online game... the average price of goods on the market suddenly spiking to 500x the amount you can earn via legitimate gameplay, or losing forms of PVP due to players that can see through walls, or move 4x the speed the game allows, or are just plain immortal etc... will pretty quickly scare off any players it attracted. In single player games it's pretty easy to shrug off cheating, because it doesn't effect non-cheating players, but online games, cheating players will burn themselves out of the fun, only after they've chased away all legitimate players.
honestly if a team of one can do it... he's far from the only one... there's tens of thousands of them, and probably the majority are well outside the juristiction of what most companies can sue or track. The time and effort to take down enough exploiters to even make a dent in the games playabilty, would much better be spent on actually making it harder for them to do.
Looking at the effort involved in this... if a guest is in your living room... and may have motivation to spy on you...
They could
A. Take appart your echo, plug in their SD card with malware, put back together the echo, it still looks like about a 5-10 minute job.
B. Put a tiny bug that they got at the spy store, pretty much anywhere in the house... in about 5-30 seconds.
Well honestly I'd say between abuses it's probably one of the lower ones. There is already a default abuse in place at most polling places, IE shitty availability of the polling locations, long lines etc...
You don't have to bury your head to not see... facts that aren't presented. If it's an interview, then just provide who it's with and a date so we can look it up. I for one would not bury my head, with what has blatently come out durring wiki leaks, I'd be extremely unsuprised if snopes or just about anyone colluded with the DNC. All it would take is a link to the interview done on some page that has an ounce of credibility.
I believe the point is in huge issues that effect the whole country in which we can get public awarness campaigns backed by reddit, google, and several main stream TV personalities like John Oliver backing the public and helping them navigate through the intentionally obtuse comments section of their page, things are still not looking so positive in this direction.
Issues like custom router firmware... in which well, maybe.001% of the population is even aware that such is even possible, and only a very small subset of that group has motivation to even consider using it when it is freely available, so then factor in it is likely a subset of that which might even care to fight for it. It's not even bringing a knife to a gunfight, more like bringing a foam finger to a nuclear war.
Is it possible that in that 5 seconds, they are actually hopping on some less biased review site, determining the product is crap and moving on. Surely there's gotta be some point where advertising just works less.
While true, I'd imagine even in aiming a laser based system would have a huge advantage. With conventional ballistic weaponry, a large heavy barrel has to be moved and positioned. high end mirror like devices on the other hand, can maneuver quite a bit faster.
I'd have to wonder 2 things though if a "more testing" scenario were in place. First off I'm guessing it would have to be the FDA or some kind of regulation, because of course the drug manufacturing companies aren't exactly bummed when people throw out their drugs and buy more, and as a backwardsly motivated in fact... is there potential in which they could adjust components within future drugs. (IE intentionally shorten the lifespan).
Honestly I have to say with Harkness, he's bisexual rather than gay, and if memory serves, it was almost a direct line between the 2 shows he was in that drew the line of his sexuality. Before torchwood, he almost exclusively hit on every female he met. If you only watched Dr who... he seemed only interested in women. If you only watched torchwood, then he would appear as gay.
Isn't that a bit of the problem already though? I mean it isn't unheard of for someone to get shot because the police thought they looked like a suspect. Sounds to me the biggest change is whether it's a human or a computer making the assertion, and how accurate/reliable those assumptions might be.
I was thinking the same thing... While I am very left leaning and hugely in favor of regulations to stop corporations from fucking over the common people and the planet as a whole, I also have to note, that logically the most likely places that world ending AI's would be created, would be a military project, and well... I don't think ANY groups that are defined as "national security", have such a good habit of actually following regulations.
I'm pretty torn on the concept. Logically a computer learning system, should in turn be able to over time figure out the ideal outcomes. IE If any races or genders are more likely to commit certain crimes, it makes sense to let the algorythm factor that in to projections.
But on the other hand, no data set to work with, is free of bias. IE if you are going with arrest reports, there's no way to know whether the people doing the arresting were mostly only watching one particular group etc... and thus a huge wave of would be guilty but were never inspected don't exist in statistical forms.
I agree, what I think we really need is a term that actually points out what is somewhat unique with regards to humans. What is somewhat unique of humans in earths present and future, is the knowledge and intent, IE the fact that we have actual scientists yelling at people to warn of the consiquences.
If say theories that dinosaurs caused some climate change events by excessive methane, or certain plants caused excessive cooling due to taking carbon out of the air, to meteor crashes. Not one of those causes, had the capacity to know what it was doing to life on the planet. Yet certain humans may very well cause an extinction event, of which the last survivors will be thinking, why didn't we/they listen to the warnings that were being given 50 years in advance.
Heck, I'm actually pretty supprised this is viewed as a new thing, or even half way supprising. people recorded off of casette tapes and VHS tapes for ages, and yeah that probably was the most common form of piracy in those eras.
Well yeah, can you name something the CIA is used for that wouldn't be massively illegal for a civilian? Rigging elections in foreign countries, toppling governments, massive weapon and/or drug trades..
indeed, I believe that's the general point. The group that puts government gag orders, has knowingly gotten almost every developer within the US's jurisdiction to put back doors of different kinds, and has been able to threaten/bribe all of them into silence or lying to the public about it, came to our door, and asked us to put a backdoor in, and we said no and everything went smoothly, is not the most convincing statement.
I'd suppose the key difference between these stories, is one is a voluntary choice, one is something you are born as, and yeah I think a better analogy for fear mongering would be countries that make people register religions etc...
That is quite true... but if the subject is scientific literacy is the issue. At least my understanding of scientific literacy, is the actual understanding of the process of science, and the ability to process scientific questions. For simpler analogy lets compare 2 schools of thought for reading literacy.
Joe has litterally memorized and learned every word in the webster dictionary. he can recite and speak every word in the dictionary from scratch, and read entire books this way. However Joe fails to make the connection of how letters work with eachother. If Joe runs into even a simple word that is not in the dictionary, Say he ran into something where they used "confuzzled" as slang, when joe asked 2 different people how to say this word, one said "pork" and one pronounced it as it is written, Joe could not tell who was telling the truth
Tom on the other hand, does not have the words memorized, he only studied the methods words are made. he knows the basics of greek, latin etc... and he knows the variants of how most letter combinations can be said. Now obviously due to english being a clusterfsck of different styles of reading... Tom runs into problems all the time, thanks to so many variants of how different sets of letters can go. But even on the worse imaginable words, Tom always can narrow any word he runs into, down to 2-3 possible ways it can be said"
In this example I would have to say Tom is Literate, Joe is far closer to illiterate. Joe is better than Tom, for dealing with everything that we are familiar with, which is great, but only Tom can be of any use when we hit an undiscovered word, and only Tom can make reasonable choices when we reach these words
Science is like that to, our schools, our society and many other areas, seem to forget this fact. The great scientists weren't great because they memorized all of the facts, they were great because they understood HOW we learned those facts, and extrapolated to make new discoveries, The same goes for scientific literacy in the general public. If someone approaches with say a crystal, that helps asthma patients claiming it helps due to running some force. OK maybe the Joe of science will go no one has determined the existance of auras so that must be wrong, but maybe there is something there, what if there actually was something going on we don't know of. The tom of science would ask, what testing has been done, what phenomenons have we seen, did we compare it to a placebo, etc... etc... follow up with his own experimentation, and possibly make a new discovery, when it does all turn out to be bunk, Tom actually has real grounds to dismiss it, vs Joe, who's only grounds for dismissal are, we don't know about this yet, so it must not be true.
I think you are forgetting what happened when advertisments nearly crashed 10 years ago or so. Simple unintrusive adds, just stopped working, people stopped paying attention to them, and with time the internet started falling into 2 categories.
Web pages that threw loud, obnoxious advertisements, pop-ups, pop unders. comercials you had to watch before you could click next, etc... and then they started offering paid subscriptions for the pages to let you skip advertisements. Then came targetted advertisments which more or less dug the internet out of that well. Whether longterm that is going to save or kill the internet, who knows, but we do need to come up with the least evil approach, that will keep the webpages we like afloat.
I believe the topic is strictly on the software side. The comparison he is putting isn't of Tablet vs PC hardware wise, the discussion is whether OS's as a whole should consider following the walled garden approach.
What I find most amusing, is that at least according to the credits, they had him do his own voice, on episodes in which he only came through as a voice. I mean you shouldn't need the actual guy, when a text to speech program would be indistinguishable from his real voice.
Well where I'd have to disagree, is that we know what sucks... We know what sucks for life, that evolved in the conditions of earth. We can't even imagine what life outside of our conditions are, assuming it is possible. Sometimes I think assuming that the nearest life, is most certainly going to be needing a water ritch atmosphere with oxygen hydrogen and CO2 in the atmosphere, is similar to coming to the conclusion that if we find inteligent life similar to us, we should expect them to speak chinese, because that is what the majority of inteligent life capable of complex communication in which we are familair with speaks
Slashdot Mirror
Eh... computers will learn the tricks, future generations of machines tend to become immune to the tricks the first generation fell for, heck it is very quick and easy to educate an entire generation of systems to the specific trick that the first generation fell for. Meanwhile there are still new generation humans, vulnerable to the "nigerian prince" exploit.
Not really... yeah low latency is great and all, but when talking an online game... the average price of goods on the market suddenly spiking to 500x the amount you can earn via legitimate gameplay, or losing forms of PVP due to players that can see through walls, or move 4x the speed the game allows, or are just plain immortal etc... will pretty quickly scare off any players it attracted. In single player games it's pretty easy to shrug off cheating, because it doesn't effect non-cheating players, but online games, cheating players will burn themselves out of the fun, only after they've chased away all legitimate players.
honestly if a team of one can do it... he's far from the only one... there's tens of thousands of them, and probably the majority are well outside the juristiction of what most companies can sue or track. The time and effort to take down enough exploiters to even make a dent in the games playabilty, would much better be spent on actually making it harder for them to do.
Looking at the effort involved in this... if a guest is in your living room... and may have motivation to spy on you... They could A. Take appart your echo, plug in their SD card with malware, put back together the echo, it still looks like about a 5-10 minute job. B. Put a tiny bug that they got at the spy store, pretty much anywhere in the house... in about 5-30 seconds.
Well honestly I'd say between abuses it's probably one of the lower ones. There is already a default abuse in place at most polling places, IE shitty availability of the polling locations, long lines etc...
You don't have to bury your head to not see... facts that aren't presented. If it's an interview, then just provide who it's with and a date so we can look it up. I for one would not bury my head, with what has blatently come out durring wiki leaks, I'd be extremely unsuprised if snopes or just about anyone colluded with the DNC. All it would take is a link to the interview done on some page that has an ounce of credibility.
I believe the point is in huge issues that effect the whole country in which we can get public awarness campaigns backed by reddit, google, and several main stream TV personalities like John Oliver backing the public and helping them navigate through the intentionally obtuse comments section of their page, things are still not looking so positive in this direction. Issues like custom router firmware... in which well, maybe .001% of the population is even aware that such is even possible, and only a very small subset of that group has motivation to even consider using it when it is freely available, so then factor in it is likely a subset of that which might even care to fight for it. It's not even bringing a knife to a gunfight, more like bringing a foam finger to a nuclear war.
Is it possible that in that 5 seconds, they are actually hopping on some less biased review site, determining the product is crap and moving on. Surely there's gotta be some point where advertising just works less.
If it works, malware buys it, if it don't, avast will.
While true, I'd imagine even in aiming a laser based system would have a huge advantage. With conventional ballistic weaponry, a large heavy barrel has to be moved and positioned. high end mirror like devices on the other hand, can maneuver quite a bit faster.
I'd have to wonder 2 things though if a "more testing" scenario were in place. First off I'm guessing it would have to be the FDA or some kind of regulation, because of course the drug manufacturing companies aren't exactly bummed when people throw out their drugs and buy more, and as a backwardsly motivated in fact... is there potential in which they could adjust components within future drugs. (IE intentionally shorten the lifespan).
Honestly I have to say with Harkness, he's bisexual rather than gay, and if memory serves, it was almost a direct line between the 2 shows he was in that drew the line of his sexuality. Before torchwood, he almost exclusively hit on every female he met. If you only watched Dr who... he seemed only interested in women. If you only watched torchwood, then he would appear as gay.
Isn't that a bit of the problem already though? I mean it isn't unheard of for someone to get shot because the police thought they looked like a suspect. Sounds to me the biggest change is whether it's a human or a computer making the assertion, and how accurate/reliable those assumptions might be.
I was thinking the same thing... While I am very left leaning and hugely in favor of regulations to stop corporations from fucking over the common people and the planet as a whole, I also have to note, that logically the most likely places that world ending AI's would be created, would be a military project, and well... I don't think ANY groups that are defined as "national security", have such a good habit of actually following regulations.
I'm pretty torn on the concept. Logically a computer learning system, should in turn be able to over time figure out the ideal outcomes. IE If any races or genders are more likely to commit certain crimes, it makes sense to let the algorythm factor that in to projections. But on the other hand, no data set to work with, is free of bias. IE if you are going with arrest reports, there's no way to know whether the people doing the arresting were mostly only watching one particular group etc... and thus a huge wave of would be guilty but were never inspected don't exist in statistical forms.
I agree, what I think we really need is a term that actually points out what is somewhat unique with regards to humans. What is somewhat unique of humans in earths present and future, is the knowledge and intent, IE the fact that we have actual scientists yelling at people to warn of the consiquences. If say theories that dinosaurs caused some climate change events by excessive methane, or certain plants caused excessive cooling due to taking carbon out of the air, to meteor crashes. Not one of those causes, had the capacity to know what it was doing to life on the planet. Yet certain humans may very well cause an extinction event, of which the last survivors will be thinking, why didn't we/they listen to the warnings that were being given 50 years in advance.
Heck, I'm actually pretty supprised this is viewed as a new thing, or even half way supprising. people recorded off of casette tapes and VHS tapes for ages, and yeah that probably was the most common form of piracy in those eras.
Well yeah, can you name something the CIA is used for that wouldn't be massively illegal for a civilian? Rigging elections in foreign countries, toppling governments, massive weapon and/or drug trades..
indeed, I believe that's the general point. The group that puts government gag orders, has knowingly gotten almost every developer within the US's jurisdiction to put back doors of different kinds, and has been able to threaten/bribe all of them into silence or lying to the public about it, came to our door, and asked us to put a backdoor in, and we said no and everything went smoothly, is not the most convincing statement.
I'd suppose the key difference between these stories, is one is a voluntary choice, one is something you are born as, and yeah I think a better analogy for fear mongering would be countries that make people register religions etc...
That is quite true... but if the subject is scientific literacy is the issue. At least my understanding of scientific literacy, is the actual understanding of the process of science, and the ability to process scientific questions. For simpler analogy lets compare 2 schools of thought for reading literacy.
Joe has litterally memorized and learned every word in the webster dictionary. he can recite and speak every word in the dictionary from scratch, and read entire books this way. However Joe fails to make the connection of how letters work with eachother. If Joe runs into even a simple word that is not in the dictionary, Say he ran into something where they used "confuzzled" as slang, when joe asked 2 different people how to say this word, one said "pork" and one pronounced it as it is written, Joe could not tell who was telling the truth
Tom on the other hand, does not have the words memorized, he only studied the methods words are made. he knows the basics of greek, latin etc... and he knows the variants of how most letter combinations can be said. Now obviously due to english being a clusterfsck of different styles of reading... Tom runs into problems all the time, thanks to so many variants of how different sets of letters can go. But even on the worse imaginable words, Tom always can narrow any word he runs into, down to 2-3 possible ways it can be said"
In this example I would have to say Tom is Literate, Joe is far closer to illiterate. Joe is better than Tom, for dealing with everything that we are familiar with, which is great, but only Tom can be of any use when we hit an undiscovered word, and only Tom can make reasonable choices when we reach these words
Science is like that to, our schools, our society and many other areas, seem to forget this fact. The great scientists weren't great because they memorized all of the facts, they were great because they understood HOW we learned those facts, and extrapolated to make new discoveries, The same goes for scientific literacy in the general public. If someone approaches with say a crystal, that helps asthma patients claiming it helps due to running some force. OK maybe the Joe of science will go no one has determined the existance of auras so that must be wrong, but maybe there is something there, what if there actually was something going on we don't know of. The tom of science would ask, what testing has been done, what phenomenons have we seen, did we compare it to a placebo, etc... etc... follow up with his own experimentation, and possibly make a new discovery, when it does all turn out to be bunk, Tom actually has real grounds to dismiss it, vs Joe, who's only grounds for dismissal are, we don't know about this yet, so it must not be true.
I think you are forgetting what happened when advertisments nearly crashed 10 years ago or so. Simple unintrusive adds, just stopped working, people stopped paying attention to them, and with time the internet started falling into 2 categories. Web pages that threw loud, obnoxious advertisements, pop-ups, pop unders. comercials you had to watch before you could click next, etc... and then they started offering paid subscriptions for the pages to let you skip advertisements. Then came targetted advertisments which more or less dug the internet out of that well. Whether longterm that is going to save or kill the internet, who knows, but we do need to come up with the least evil approach, that will keep the webpages we like afloat.
I believe the topic is strictly on the software side. The comparison he is putting isn't of Tablet vs PC hardware wise, the discussion is whether OS's as a whole should consider following the walled garden approach.
What I find most amusing, is that at least according to the credits, they had him do his own voice, on episodes in which he only came through as a voice. I mean you shouldn't need the actual guy, when a text to speech program would be indistinguishable from his real voice.
Well where I'd have to disagree, is that we know what sucks... We know what sucks for life, that evolved in the conditions of earth. We can't even imagine what life outside of our conditions are, assuming it is possible. Sometimes I think assuming that the nearest life, is most certainly going to be needing a water ritch atmosphere with oxygen hydrogen and CO2 in the atmosphere, is similar to coming to the conclusion that if we find inteligent life similar to us, we should expect them to speak chinese, because that is what the majority of inteligent life capable of complex communication in which we are familair with speaks