My guess as to why Apple was so horrified over this particular leak is that it showed the new iPhone being played with as a child's toy. Apple has reason to be particularly sensitive about this model - they see the hype train is losing steam, as well as the sales figures. I know that whenever I hear "iPad", the images that come to my head are of kids smearing their fingers all over one trying to punch the monkey, or my last workplace literally bolting one to the wall as an example of corporate waste (although that was certainly not their intention). Spotting an iProduct in these places doesn't promote the image Apple wants for their brand.
It may not be good for a subset of the bank's employees, but those guys have made it into "the club" already. Their big fear is that their new job will *only* pay them double what they're worth instead of triple.
Most relevant is, is it good for society? That is tougher to answer without seeing exactly how AI gets implemented. The devil is in the details, as they say. But if they come to a juncture where the AI could either be tuned for maximal fairness, or maximal personal gain... You already know which one they will choose.
The big question for me isn't whether there will be problems, but when and how those problems will manifest. And then, what the response will be. Both internally at the bank and externally with anyone the bank works with (aka, everyone... TooBigToFail and all that... Wouldn't it be wonderful if that also meant too big to avoid responsibility?)
It's the opposite. *You* tell the computer what to look at (by feeding it data) and then it calculates an answer (=makes a decision) based on what you feed it. Just like any computer ever. AI is not magic.
What is new about AI is precisely that it lets computers begin to usurp the decision-making role. If the only thing the AI did was collate information and present it to a human, nobody would be worried about it.
If Twitter is so horrible, my advice is not to use it. I don't contribute to things I think are bad. I don't use Twitter, Facebook, 4chan, or serve in the Army. I have tracking scripts from all those sites blocked. Believe it or not, being "social" doesn't require a "social network", much less a particular social network. If you want one where white supremacists, jihadis, and whoever else are allowed, I'm sure it's out there. Demanding Twitter to donate their resources to support any kind of speech really falls flat as an argument. It would fall flat whether the demands were for them to allow Nazis, or Vegans, or SAAB owners, or anyone else. But as someone who's never used the site, it seems like most of the yelling comes from butthurt white supremacists, whining so hard that Twitter and society at large won't accept them. Never stopping to think that, just maybe, what they are saying is not acceptable in a free and fair society.
So what, you want the courts to investigate and subpoena Twitter for these peoples identities? How much louder will you be hollering when *that* happens? Also, "for-profit censorship"... Lol
The crime isn't what they read, it's what they do after they read it. Setting up a honeypot lets you identify these people and watch for when the crimes do occur. I thought that would have been obvious... But it sounds like you are more angry that Twitter is refusing to promote violent ideologies.
With all the talk about "Silicon Valley", it's important to remember this is happening in communities all across the country. The SF area hardly has a monopoly on homeless people, and the tech industry hardly has a monopoly on ignorant people.
It's a bit of a problem with the entire machine learning methodology. Presumably, these kind of bug-features could be worked out, in the manner you describe, given enough time and resources... The problem is that when the banks, police, HR departments etc. start making extensive use of these things. Are they going to be looking for an algorithm that's fair, or an algorithm that's profitable? To be sure, there is probably an algorithm that's both. Human civilization could reap a wicked ROI on this stuff, but in today's dark world, that is seen as infringing on someone's right to make a profit. My guess is that AI starts getting widespread deployment and the problems manifest quickly... But the problems look so similar to the ones we already have (the AI, after all, is trained for that) that there is no public outcry. It might even serve to reinforce those preconceptions. "The algorithm never tells me to hire a gay, they must be really bad." The idea that "Because things are bad now, there is no other way they could be" has a lot of traction these days. It's caused a lot of good people to maintain horrible status quos.
There's plenty of people, I see them all the time. I know one older woman that refuses to type anything on her phone but is constantly texting with the voice recognition. Usually this results in her having to repeat certain words over and over, before finally giving up and typing it anyway. The resulting message is still often incomprehensible. Oh, she's also one of those who feels like they need the new Galaxy every year. Yes, there are plenty of these people around. You might even find some of them on Slashdot, but not many.
What will be interesting to me is to see where the market is in 5 years - how many people will have realized the $50 phone works just as well as the $800 phone, and how many are still chasing the logo. In a free market, I think you would see the iPhones and Galaxies quickly fade to irrelevance. But the cost of the phones is obscured for so many people by the contracts they sign. Going shopping for phones with someone really opened my eyes. "Why are you getting the $30 phone from Kroger, the Galaxies at Sprint are only $40..." Not realizing it was forty *a month*. Then they complain about their phone bill hitting triple digits...
Yeah, it's not like North Korea has been in the news regularly for half a century, or they have any kind of espionage program that recruits and trains crackers, or they have an interest in circumventing the global financial system with cryptocurrencies. Only a fool would believe that!
I don't think you are aware of what capabilities they have. You must also not be aware they have an ongoing program to recruit and train crackers, that it is among the best of such state-sponsored groups, and that it's a key part of their asmymmetrical warfare. If they don't have exclusive exploits yet, they will soon. And you won't know about it until it's in the news that Sony got hacked again or whatever. And at that point, you'll stick your fingers in your ears and mumble something about Hillary's emails.
I'd love to see some more studies focusing on the health side as well. But the studies we do have so far indicate that the nasties are either contaminants from poor production (or added intentionally as flavorings), or byproducts created when using unnecessarily high voltage in the device. These are *all* things that could be fixed, easily, if the products were properly regulated. But instead of doing that we start banning them here and there. Isn't New York still locking people up for so much as having a bag of weed in their pocket? Not burning at all? I think it's clear that this law has as much to do with smug self-righteousness as it does with anyone's health.
Our military is being squeezed harder for troops than many people realize. The recent string of Navy crashes were due to ships being moved to skeleton crews. All branches are spread so thin that the huge amount of mercenaries being brought in still isn't enough. There's going to be no way to continue without either a draft or funneling more money to mercenary groups. Nothing good is going to come from either of those. The best option for the country seems to be the one none of the politicians are talking about.
For the majority of users they are pretty much toys. Out of all the tablets I've seen in the wild, most of them were in fact used as toys by small children. One shop I worked at had bought 2 iPads to bolt on to the wall for employees to clock in on (shining example of free market efficiency, the shop manager got big bonuses). One stoner I knew used it to watch YouTube while she hit the bong in the back yard, I do admit I got some enjoyment out of that use case. But anything where I need serious power, or to type more than a few words? Please.
Hopefully the German people can put a stop to that. For myself, I just stay off Facebook entirely and I haven't suffered for it yet. I don't have to worry about local governments deleting controversial posts, or foreign troll farms making controversial posts. I'm not concerning myself with either the Kardashians or the idiots down the road. I'm living one step further outside of the filter bubble and the alt-whatever memesters. Taking the red pill means plugging out of the matrix, not into it.
"resources are cheap" was never a good excuse for inefficiency, but there are plenty of bandwidth-metered or battery-limited scenarios where the overhead does matter. SSL can also fail when, for example, the date is misconfigured on either end. Considering the majority of tracking of your internet usage isn't done using MitM methods anyway, and will continue unabated... I don't see who the principle of "security where it's needed, convenience and resilience where it isn't" is failing. Except maybe Google.
Google is still providing support for Android 7, and 6, and 5, and 4. IIRC support for 4 ends next year. Carriers and/or handset manufacturers are the ones withholding updates.
In order for that to make any sense you'll need to explain how the "communists" at Foxconn operate differently than "capitalists" elsewhere. (They don't.) But now that you've been locked into this ideologically inflexible binary thinking, you're ready to jump to defend their exploitation. Check and mate. You are owned.
So people who can't trust the full faith and credit of the Chinese government are running to... Bitcoin as a safe store of value? Somehow that doesn't add up. They may very well use Bitcoin for transactions they don't want the government to know about, but if you are trying to keep large sums safely stored, the other options you mentioned (foreign real estate) are way more stable.
Slashdot Mirror
My guess as to why Apple was so horrified over this particular leak is that it showed the new iPhone being played with as a child's toy. Apple has reason to be particularly sensitive about this model - they see the hype train is losing steam, as well as the sales figures. I know that whenever I hear "iPad", the images that come to my head are of kids smearing their fingers all over one trying to punch the monkey, or my last workplace literally bolting one to the wall as an example of corporate waste (although that was certainly not their intention). Spotting an iProduct in these places doesn't promote the image Apple wants for their brand.
Good for who? Good for the bank, surely.
It may not be good for a subset of the bank's employees, but those guys have made it into "the club" already. Their big fear is that their new job will *only* pay them double what they're worth instead of triple.
Most relevant is, is it good for society? That is tougher to answer without seeing exactly how AI gets implemented. The devil is in the details, as they say. But if they come to a juncture where the AI could either be tuned for maximal fairness, or maximal personal gain... You already know which one they will choose.
The big question for me isn't whether there will be problems, but when and how those problems will manifest. And then, what the response will be. Both internally at the bank and externally with anyone the bank works with (aka, everyone... TooBigToFail and all that... Wouldn't it be wonderful if that also meant too big to avoid responsibility?)
It's the opposite. *You* tell the computer what to look at (by feeding it data) and then it calculates an answer (=makes a decision) based on what you feed it. Just like any computer ever. AI is not magic.
What is new about AI is precisely that it lets computers begin to usurp the decision-making role. If the only thing the AI did was collate information and present it to a human, nobody would be worried about it.
If Twitter is so horrible, my advice is not to use it. I don't contribute to things I think are bad. I don't use Twitter, Facebook, 4chan, or serve in the Army. I have tracking scripts from all those sites blocked. Believe it or not, being "social" doesn't require a "social network", much less a particular social network. If you want one where white supremacists, jihadis, and whoever else are allowed, I'm sure it's out there. Demanding Twitter to donate their resources to support any kind of speech really falls flat as an argument. It would fall flat whether the demands were for them to allow Nazis, or Vegans, or SAAB owners, or anyone else. But as someone who's never used the site, it seems like most of the yelling comes from butthurt white supremacists, whining so hard that Twitter and society at large won't accept them. Never stopping to think that, just maybe, what they are saying is not acceptable in a free and fair society.
What the TV reflects isn't the viewer, it's the average viewer.
So what, you want the courts to investigate and subpoena Twitter for these peoples identities? How much louder will you be hollering when *that* happens? Also, "for-profit censorship"... Lol
The crime isn't what they read, it's what they do after they read it. Setting up a honeypot lets you identify these people and watch for when the crimes do occur. I thought that would have been obvious... But it sounds like you are more angry that Twitter is refusing to promote violent ideologies.
With all the talk about "Silicon Valley", it's important to remember this is happening in communities all across the country. The SF area hardly has a monopoly on homeless people, and the tech industry hardly has a monopoly on ignorant people.
It's a bit of a problem with the entire machine learning methodology. Presumably, these kind of bug-features could be worked out, in the manner you describe, given enough time and resources... The problem is that when the banks, police, HR departments etc. start making extensive use of these things. Are they going to be looking for an algorithm that's fair, or an algorithm that's profitable? To be sure, there is probably an algorithm that's both. Human civilization could reap a wicked ROI on this stuff, but in today's dark world, that is seen as infringing on someone's right to make a profit. My guess is that AI starts getting widespread deployment and the problems manifest quickly... But the problems look so similar to the ones we already have (the AI, after all, is trained for that) that there is no public outcry. It might even serve to reinforce those preconceptions. "The algorithm never tells me to hire a gay, they must be really bad." The idea that "Because things are bad now, there is no other way they could be" has a lot of traction these days. It's caused a lot of good people to maintain horrible status quos.
There's plenty of people, I see them all the time. I know one older woman that refuses to type anything on her phone but is constantly texting with the voice recognition. Usually this results in her having to repeat certain words over and over, before finally giving up and typing it anyway. The resulting message is still often incomprehensible. Oh, she's also one of those who feels like they need the new Galaxy every year. Yes, there are plenty of these people around. You might even find some of them on Slashdot, but not many.
What will be interesting to me is to see where the market is in 5 years - how many people will have realized the $50 phone works just as well as the $800 phone, and how many are still chasing the logo. In a free market, I think you would see the iPhones and Galaxies quickly fade to irrelevance. But the cost of the phones is obscured for so many people by the contracts they sign. Going shopping for phones with someone really opened my eyes. "Why are you getting the $30 phone from Kroger, the Galaxies at Sprint are only $40..." Not realizing it was forty *a month*. Then they complain about their phone bill hitting triple digits...
Yeah, it's not like North Korea has been in the news regularly for half a century, or they have any kind of espionage program that recruits and trains crackers, or they have an interest in circumventing the global financial system with cryptocurrencies. Only a fool would believe that!
I don't think you are aware of what capabilities they have. You must also not be aware they have an ongoing program to recruit and train crackers, that it is among the best of such state-sponsored groups, and that it's a key part of their asmymmetrical warfare. If they don't have exclusive exploits yet, they will soon. And you won't know about it until it's in the news that Sony got hacked again or whatever. And at that point, you'll stick your fingers in your ears and mumble something about Hillary's emails.
I'd love to see some more studies focusing on the health side as well. But the studies we do have so far indicate that the nasties are either contaminants from poor production (or added intentionally as flavorings), or byproducts created when using unnecessarily high voltage in the device. These are *all* things that could be fixed, easily, if the products were properly regulated. But instead of doing that we start banning them here and there. Isn't New York still locking people up for so much as having a bag of weed in their pocket? Not burning at all? I think it's clear that this law has as much to do with smug self-righteousness as it does with anyone's health.
I'm more worried about what the police, banks, credit agencies, and HR departments will do when they get a hold of this.
Our military is being squeezed harder for troops than many people realize. The recent string of Navy crashes were due to ships being moved to skeleton crews. All branches are spread so thin that the huge amount of mercenaries being brought in still isn't enough. There's going to be no way to continue without either a draft or funneling more money to mercenary groups. Nothing good is going to come from either of those. The best option for the country seems to be the one none of the politicians are talking about.
I imagine most of the declining sales are along the lines of... Kids have forgotten or broken them by next Christmas and have moved on to the new toy.
For the majority of users they are pretty much toys. Out of all the tablets I've seen in the wild, most of them were in fact used as toys by small children. One shop I worked at had bought 2 iPads to bolt on to the wall for employees to clock in on (shining example of free market efficiency, the shop manager got big bonuses). One stoner I knew used it to watch YouTube while she hit the bong in the back yard, I do admit I got some enjoyment out of that use case. But anything where I need serious power, or to type more than a few words? Please.
The posturing is for domestic consumption as much as any foreign audience.
Where do you think the oil and gas in the Corvette come from?
Hopefully the German people can put a stop to that. For myself, I just stay off Facebook entirely and I haven't suffered for it yet. I don't have to worry about local governments deleting controversial posts, or foreign troll farms making controversial posts. I'm not concerning myself with either the Kardashians or the idiots down the road. I'm living one step further outside of the filter bubble and the alt-whatever memesters. Taking the red pill means plugging out of the matrix, not into it.
"resources are cheap" was never a good excuse for inefficiency, but there are plenty of bandwidth-metered or battery-limited scenarios where the overhead does matter. SSL can also fail when, for example, the date is misconfigured on either end. Considering the majority of tracking of your internet usage isn't done using MitM methods anyway, and will continue unabated... I don't see who the principle of "security where it's needed, convenience and resilience where it isn't" is failing. Except maybe Google.
Google is still providing support for Android 7, and 6, and 5, and 4. IIRC support for 4 ends next year. Carriers and/or handset manufacturers are the ones withholding updates.
In order for that to make any sense you'll need to explain how the "communists" at Foxconn operate differently than "capitalists" elsewhere. (They don't.) But now that you've been locked into this ideologically inflexible binary thinking, you're ready to jump to defend their exploitation. Check and mate. You are owned.
So people who can't trust the full faith and credit of the Chinese government are running to... Bitcoin as a safe store of value? Somehow that doesn't add up. They may very well use Bitcoin for transactions they don't want the government to know about, but if you are trying to keep large sums safely stored, the other options you mentioned (foreign real estate) are way more stable.