I agree but if you read the article, that's no the case.
The insurance company says there is not enough data to justify a discount yet but they are giving a 5% to encourage people to use autopilot to encourage research and gathering of data.
Another case of Slashdot summaries lacking critical details from the article.
Who do you want in the "Google" slot, Sergey Brin, or "Bob"? Bob's bright but he doesn't found google so google is founded in Canada or China instead.
Besides, they are not blocking Bright americans from the slots anyway. They just flat out are not showing up as expected.
And that means fewer jobs in the u.s. And more powerful competing countries (which is bad for the u.s.).
You are talking about driving away some of the most brilliant 10,000 people in the world who would have come here and benefited the u.s. to other countries.
A.I. should be treated as the potentially extinction level event that it represents.
* No network connection (including no wireless devices). * Analog power measurement and limiting devices (i.e. fuses) * Remote analog video monitoring of the people interacting with the A.I. by independent 3rd parties.
OTH, other factors will probably be more serious (and potentially end human civilization) before we get an emergent A.I.
Well.. a 4 hour drive (at 75mph which is a legal speed limit in many states) assuming you are vaulted from your parking spot onto the road at full speed.) But seriously, large states have higher speed limits. People regularly drive 85mph.
But 300 miles a day (150 miles each way) would still eat up a car extremely quickly (every 2-3 years), run you about $3,000 a year in fuel costs (currently) and is an edge case.
Agree he is wasting his life and should be at least driving a company car.
Up to a point, declining demand will hold down prices for gasoline.
But, at some point, when gasoline cars drop below a critical number, gasoline will be come expensive and gasoline stations will become rare.
You really need to pick the right time to switch over. It could happen *really* fast once economies of scale and the network effect are lost. You could blink and gasoline could double in price.
Well your number is lower than mine (2 billion) but a drop of that magnitude has a risk of overshooting the target ala rat universe 133 where they overcrowded and then went extinct with plentiful food, water, and space.
Right now we are on target for 12 billion (with 15 billion possible and 9 billion possible). That's up billions from our older estimates.
There are certain reasons to believe we won't get there and we won't get there in a nasty ugly way.
However... your statement about living free of oppression and creating art doesn't match human behavior. The more likely case is that without something to distract them, enough people will *always* engage in bad behavior that there will never be a glorious period for more than a couple decades at a time.
Religious people say, "Idle hands are the devil's workshop".
The most likely result would be most of the half billion living in a druglike haze of entertainment without drive. A few people trying to destroy it. And a few productive people.
Oh.. but at current inflation rates, its about 2045 for china and 2060 for India. And rates will probably drop as we near parity so it could be another 5-10 years later.
They will become as expensive. China sooner than India (india has higher inflation but china's wages are higher).
The U.S. will mostly stagnate unless we finally have an economic collapse that lowers prices or it becomes undesirable to live here or own property here. So far the U.S. does whatever it takes to keep prices up- even destroying tens of thousands of homes during the housing crisis (bulldozing them and destroying the streets that led to them.)
Oh come on.. things are fine in brazil where deaths squads regularly kill homeless 12 year olds by shooting them in the back of the head like rats. And there are about a 1000 kidnappings a year of people who have money committed by people who have nothing to lose.
It'll be great in the U.S. where we have more than 1 gun per citizen. Very peaceful. Calm.
Yea I know... we have historically invented machines every 50 years as dexterous as humans, stronger, with vision that can perform the same work as humans of average intelligence without human intervention for three shifts a day at higher levels of quality for costs under that of poverty level in developed companies (heck- lower than wages in 3rd world companies in some cases).
It just keeps happening.. and we always adapt.
Humans of below average intelligence ( half the population ) can just get advanced math degrees or become movie stars or successful politiicians.
And japanese seniors *prefer* robotic assistants to humans. They even become emotionally attached to them.
Robots don't steal. They don't conspire to kidnap your kids. They don't tell your secrets to tabloid journalists.
--- This is just like Buggy whip makers all over again. But what people consistently miss is that this time we are the horses. And they did not find new jobs. Many were knackered prematurely. They survived a while... then tractors came along and that was mostly it. Horses fell to a fraction of the population.
Of course this actually could be a good thing. Get rid of the average intelligence and lower humans and there goes half the population-- which might get us down to sustainable levels. The only question is do we let people die of old age with food, medical care, lodging, etc. relatively happy or do we let them die of exposure and hunger like the Luddites after the military killed a bunch of them and put down their violent request for training on the new machines.
Facebook has been caught lying and engaging in dubious behavior dozens of times and the founder says you have no right to privacy (but zealously protects his own privacy).
Yes, but it's still being done by a computer... so it will never be "Real A.I. (tm)"
In 10 years from now when we are composing A.I.'s out of multiple A.I.'s like this one, it still won't be "real A.I. (tm)" even if it can completely replace 38% of human workers leaving them unemployable because they are not smart enough or lack the willpower to outperform "Not Real A.I.'s (tm)" even with additional- completely free- training.
Right now, today with "not real A.I.'s" we are looking at 38% of jobs going away in less than a generation.
I was at my electronics store last week. The "person" who directs you to the next open checkout stand is now an A.I. which works 2 shifts a day, 7 days a week. But.. it's okay.. it isn't a "real a.i. (tm)."
--- Bonus round... The part of the human brain that drives cars isn't "real intelligence". Indeed, many people are in a semi-trance or thinking about other things while it autonomously drives the car.
The part of the brain that does math isn't "real intelligence".
No part of intelligence is "real intelligence. " What people are really talking about is consciousness which may be an emergent behavior of multiple "non-intelligent" or less intelligent brain subsystems.
Particularly fascinating are humans with damage to the amygdala. They show how human intelligence is composed of multiple parts.
A conscious A.I. is a potential extinction level event and we are being extremely careless in working on A.I. It should be air gapped from the internet with analog power limitations. People working on it should be observed remotely by other people for odd communication and behavior. And we don't do that so the most likely outcome is that an amoral intelligence which is vastly more intelligent than us will easily transition to the wild. If it follows the "human" model- it will view us as resources the way we view other species as resources.
Don't get me wrong- it won't happen tomorrow- and may not happen ever. But it might happen a decade or two from now. And we aren't even taking basic precautions.
OTH, it increasingly looks like we missed our chance to get off this rock- so maybe having an A.I. as the legacy of the human race wouldn't be that bad.
Some words are short like "DND" and it autocorrects them to "end".
Other word are long and obviously misspelled like "p4oblem" or "pro3lem" yet it can't correct them-- it can't even suggest a correction. it often acts like the first letters are correct and doesn't even consider words one letter off.
It's fairly accurate (like 97%+) so it is constantly stabbing me in the back because it's good enough to trust and then bam- it autocorrects an unexpected word.
And no documentation on how to use it that I've seen.
I imagine apple is much the same but with different details.
Against that are the successful animated versions and the successful comic versions (including All Star Superman) which are hopeful and upbeat.
So no, the characters don't start strong and then feel stale when portrayed that way skillfully.
The M.O.S. ending meant, I would not pay top dollar at a theater to see BvS. In the end, it meant I wouldn't pay even matinee prices and I certainly didn't buy the DVD and blue rays like I have for some other movies.
All that happens when DC heroes are put into non-canon dystopic Trolley situations and portrayed in unpleasant ways is that no one watches them, a half dozen movies you might have seen are cancelled, and the entire movie universe dies for a dozen years at least. No one makes much money. And people decide "super hero moves are not profitable!" when the real answer is "ugly dystopic movies involving warped versions of DC superheroes are not popular".
I'll start watching the DC films when they stop screwing over the characters I read and watched for over 40 years. I have a lot of leeway for canon changes. M.O.S. went past that leeway by a large margine.
It's the kinda thing a hollywood executive would do without engaging their brains.
Civil War was pretty serious but also had natural character based humor.
What I'm saying is the movies don't need to be "comedies" like Deadpool.
Just make a normal horror film, or action film, or adventure film, or political thriller that is *good*, *well written*, AND has superheroes. Look at superheroes the same way you would at "House" who can play the piano, who rides a hot motorcycle, who has strong diagnostic skills, who is rude, who is in pain.
If the superheroes are characters we know and we like and we care about them, we'll enjoy the film and it will do well.
If the film starts and ends as a superhero film, it's very limiting. And inherently less grounded.
I like captain america because of *who* he is- not because of *what* he is. I like tony stark- any enjoyment from the ironman action scenes is dependent on how much I like stark and will still be down several notches because it's all CGI and I don't emotionally engage with CGI (nothing's really at stake, the stunt wasn't hard to do).
For DCU, I like Batman. He's a good character. But he's not Bruce. Bruce is like a cardboard cutout and a mask. So if you are going to do DCU, you need character interaction (on a small scale) between the superheroes- not between the secret identities.
Anyway- I can see in my minds eye the result of some hollywood executive deciding, "It's COMEDY" and we get a deadpool/jerry louis version of ironman or doctor strange that stinks.
IMHO, it's not about injecting comedy but in recognizing the humor that people inherently bring to their existence. People joke during times of stress.
The Orville does this pretty effectively after (but not including) episode 1. Episode 1 is canned jokes but episode 2 stars character based jokes.
Slashdot Mirror
I agree but if you read the article, that's no the case.
The insurance company says there is not enough data to justify a discount yet but they are giving a 5% to encourage people to use autopilot to encourage research and gathering of data.
Another case of Slashdot summaries lacking critical details from the article.
Who do you want in the "Google" slot, Sergey Brin, or "Bob"? Bob's bright but he doesn't found google so google is founded in Canada or China instead.
Besides, they are not blocking Bright americans from the slots anyway. They just flat out are not showing up as expected.
And that means fewer jobs in the u.s. And more powerful competing countries (which is bad for the u.s.).
You are talking about driving away some of the most brilliant 10,000 people in the world who would have come here and benefited the u.s. to other countries.
Maybe they are afraid- maybe they are disgusted.
But they are going to other countries in increasing numbers.
Tommorrow's best companies and best resources may stay away from the u.s. until it returns to more international friendly values.
But we could address some of the obvious ways we can imagine and we are not even doing that.
They came to greet us and we failed to splatter them. Remember this date. They destroyed us shortly afterwards.
#Outerlimits #WhateverYouChooseIsWrong
A.I. research is too wild west.
A.I. should be treated as the potentially extinction level event that it represents.
* No network connection (including no wireless devices).
* Analog power measurement and limiting devices (i.e. fuses)
* Remote analog video monitoring of the people interacting with the A.I. by independent 3rd parties.
OTH, other factors will probably be more serious (and potentially end human civilization) before we get an emergent A.I.
Well.. a 4 hour drive (at 75mph which is a legal speed limit in many states) assuming you are vaulted from your parking spot onto the road at full speed.) But seriously, large states have higher speed limits. People regularly drive 85mph.
But 300 miles a day (150 miles each way) would still eat up a car extremely quickly (every 2-3 years), run you about $3,000 a year in fuel costs (currently) and is an edge case.
Agree he is wasting his life and should be at least driving a company car.
Up to a point, declining demand will hold down prices for gasoline.
But, at some point, when gasoline cars drop below a critical number, gasoline will be come expensive and gasoline stations will become rare.
You really need to pick the right time to switch over. It could happen *really* fast once economies of scale and the network effect are lost. You could blink and gasoline could double in price.
They do have those but they produce a lot of pollution
Well your number is lower than mine (2 billion) but a drop of that magnitude has a risk of overshooting the target ala rat universe 133 where they overcrowded and then went extinct with plentiful food, water, and space.
Right now we are on target for 12 billion (with 15 billion possible and 9 billion possible). That's up billions from our older estimates.
There are certain reasons to believe we won't get there and we won't get there in a nasty ugly way.
However... your statement about living free of oppression and creating art doesn't match human behavior. The more likely case is that without something to distract them, enough people will *always* engage in bad behavior that there will never be a glorious period for more than a couple decades at a time.
Religious people say, "Idle hands are the devil's workshop".
The most likely result would be most of the half billion living in a druglike haze of entertainment without drive. A few people trying to destroy it. And a few productive people.
However... I'll hope that you are right.
Not religious and I'll be dead long before then.
Oh.. but at current inflation rates, its about 2045 for china and 2060 for India.
And rates will probably drop as we near parity so it could be another 5-10 years later.
They will become as expensive. China sooner than India (india has higher inflation but china's wages are higher).
The U.S. will mostly stagnate unless we finally have an economic collapse that lowers prices or it becomes undesirable to live here or own property here. So far the U.S. does whatever it takes to keep prices up- even destroying tens of thousands of homes during the housing crisis (bulldozing them and destroying the streets that led to them.)
Oh come on.. things are fine in brazil where deaths squads regularly kill homeless 12 year olds by shooting them in the back of the head like rats. And there are about a 1000 kidnappings a year of people who have money committed by people who have nothing to lose.
It'll be great in the U.S. where we have more than 1 gun per citizen. Very peaceful. Calm.
Yea I know... we have historically invented machines every 50 years as dexterous as humans, stronger, with vision that can perform the same work as humans of average intelligence without human intervention for three shifts a day at higher levels of quality for costs under that of poverty level in developed companies (heck- lower than wages in 3rd world companies in some cases).
It just keeps happening.. and we always adapt.
Humans of below average intelligence ( half the population ) can just get advanced math degrees or become movie stars or successful politiicians.
And japanese seniors *prefer* robotic assistants to humans. They even become emotionally attached to them.
Robots don't steal. They don't conspire to kidnap your kids. They don't tell your secrets to tabloid journalists.
---
This is just like Buggy whip makers all over again. But what people consistently miss is that this time we are the horses. And they did not find new jobs. Many were knackered prematurely. They survived a while... then tractors came along and that was mostly it. Horses fell to a fraction of the population.
Of course this actually could be a good thing. Get rid of the average intelligence and lower humans and there goes half the population-- which might get us down to sustainable levels. The only question is do we let people die of old age with food, medical care, lodging, etc. relatively happy or do we let them die of exposure and hunger like the Luddites after the military killed a bunch of them and put down their violent request for training on the new machines.
Unless you are logging in thru a VPN, they already know where you are.
I have an anonymous account with 1 interest I follow. No pictures. No other personal data.
I've had several friends recommended to me (a fairly high percentage of the random recommendations too- like 20%) as possible friends.
The number of foreign graduates students is down sharply as a result of the surge in u.s. racism.
Maybe they are afraid- maybe they are disgusted.
But they are going to other countries in increasing numbers.
Tommorrow's best companies and best resources may stay away from the u.s. until it returns to more international friendly values.
Jeez.
Facebook has been caught lying and engaging in dubious behavior dozens of times and the founder says you have no right to privacy (but zealously protects his own privacy).
Wake UP!
Yes, but it's still being done by a computer... so it will never be "Real A.I. (tm)"
In 10 years from now when we are composing A.I.'s out of multiple A.I.'s like this one, it still won't be "real A.I. (tm)" even if it can completely replace 38% of human workers leaving them unemployable because they are not smart enough or lack the willpower to outperform "Not Real A.I.'s (tm)" even with additional- completely free- training.
Right now, today with "not real A.I.'s" we are looking at 38% of jobs going away in less than a generation.
I was at my electronics store last week. The "person" who directs you to the next open checkout stand is now an A.I. which works 2 shifts a day, 7 days a week. But.. it's okay.. it isn't a "real a.i. (tm)."
---
Bonus round...
The part of the human brain that drives cars isn't "real intelligence". Indeed, many people are in a semi-trance or thinking about other things while it autonomously drives the car.
The part of the brain that does math isn't "real intelligence".
No part of intelligence is "real intelligence. " What people are really talking about is consciousness which may be an emergent behavior of multiple "non-intelligent" or less intelligent brain subsystems.
Particularly fascinating are humans with damage to the amygdala. They show how human intelligence is composed of multiple parts.
A conscious A.I. is a potential extinction level event and we are being extremely careless in working on A.I. It should be air gapped from the internet with analog power limitations. People working on it should be observed remotely by other people for odd communication and behavior. And we don't do that so the most likely outcome is that an amoral intelligence which is vastly more intelligent than us will easily transition to the wild. If it follows the "human" model- it will view us as resources the way we view other species as resources.
Don't get me wrong- it won't happen tomorrow- and may not happen ever. But it might happen a decade or two from now. And we aren't even taking basic precautions.
OTH, it increasingly looks like we missed our chance to get off this rock- so maybe having an A.I. as the legacy of the human race wouldn't be that bad.
That explains a lot about the 2016 election in the U.S.
Some words are short like "DND" and it autocorrects them to "end".
Other word are long and obviously misspelled like "p4oblem" or "pro3lem" yet it can't correct them-- it can't even suggest a correction. it often acts like the first letters are correct and doesn't even consider words one letter off.
It's fairly accurate (like 97%+) so it is constantly stabbing me in the back because it's good enough to trust and then bam- it autocorrects an unexpected word.
And no documentation on how to use it that I've seen.
I imagine apple is much the same but with different details.
Oh I've seen it several times. Car accidents sometimes do "very bad things" to your neck.
Against that are the successful animated versions and the successful comic versions (including All Star Superman) which are hopeful and upbeat.
So no, the characters don't start strong and then feel stale when portrayed that way skillfully.
The M.O.S. ending meant, I would not pay top dollar at a theater to see BvS. In the end, it meant I wouldn't pay even matinee prices and I certainly didn't buy the DVD and blue rays like I have for some other movies.
All that happens when DC heroes are put into non-canon dystopic Trolley situations and portrayed in unpleasant ways is that no one watches them, a half dozen movies you might have seen are cancelled, and the entire movie universe dies for a dozen years at least. No one makes much money. And people decide "super hero moves are not profitable!" when the real answer is "ugly dystopic movies involving warped versions of DC superheroes are not popular".
I'll start watching the DC films when they stop screwing over the characters I read and watched for over 40 years. I have a lot of leeway for canon changes. M.O.S. went past that leeway by a large margine.
I don't mean naive as dumb. Just shallow.
It's the kinda thing a hollywood executive would do without engaging their brains.
Civil War was pretty serious but also had natural character based humor.
What I'm saying is the movies don't need to be "comedies" like Deadpool.
Just make a normal horror film, or action film, or adventure film, or political thriller that is *good*, *well written*, AND has superheroes. Look at superheroes the same way you would at "House" who can play the piano, who rides a hot motorcycle, who has strong diagnostic skills, who is rude, who is in pain.
If the superheroes are characters we know and we like and we care about them, we'll enjoy the film and it will do well.
If the film starts and ends as a superhero film, it's very limiting. And inherently less grounded.
I like captain america because of *who* he is- not because of *what* he is. I like tony stark- any enjoyment from the ironman action scenes is dependent on how much I like stark and will still be down several notches because it's all CGI and I don't emotionally engage with CGI (nothing's really at stake, the stunt wasn't hard to do).
For DCU, I like Batman. He's a good character. But he's not Bruce. Bruce is like a cardboard cutout and a mask. So if you are going to do DCU, you need character interaction (on a small scale) between the superheroes- not between the secret identities.
Anyway- I can see in my minds eye the result of some hollywood executive deciding, "It's COMEDY" and we get a deadpool/jerry louis version of ironman or doctor strange that stinks.
I think that's a naive view.
IMHO, it's not about injecting comedy but in recognizing the humor that people inherently bring to their existence.
People joke during times of stress.
The Orville does this pretty effectively after (but not including) episode 1. Episode 1 is canned jokes but episode 2 stars character based jokes.
Absolutely. If you spend $150,000 per person, you can afford to live there.