Does not surprise me one bit. Just, say, training the machine on 10 predetermined topics is probably much less than 10x harder than for one topic. And again, there is nothing "general" here at all, the while thing is a clever fake. Unfortunately, most people are not really suing what they have in general intelligence, so many, many will fall for this trick. Can nicely be seen in some of the statements here.
Incidentally, somebody high up in the Watson project told me not long ago when asked about actual intelligence in machines "not in the next 50 years" and clarified this to "we have nothing" later in the social part of the event. This thing is about as intelligent as a lexicon.
So this one is easy: Trump clearly is the most stupid president, ever. Yet clearly he got elected. That means he did master the hardest challenge a successful presidential candidate has been given, ever, and that makes him the best president. And since Tump is the best and one of his techniques is to just not listen to counterarguments, this technique is clearly the best as well and I can just use, learning from the great stable genius. You lose.
Not saying this machine could do that, especially the last part, but it sghould have not trouble putting together a completely demented argument like this.
I would even dispute it makes you intelligent. It makes you a lexicon with a very powerful user interface, but not more. You still even need to do some searching (the "debate" action), While Science does not have anything on how general intelligence works, active users of it (a minority in the human race, I know) always describe a moment of "insight" or "understanding" as a critical component, and that one does critically require sentience, and possibly not only as a passive component.
For some reason the quasi-religious group of "physicalists" are deathly scared of the idea that a human mind could be more than matter and physics, so they are trying to always call it "obvious" that only matter and basically known physics is involved, despite pretty good indicators to the contrary. Quite the same ways as proper religions argue for an existence of a "God", and about just as fact based, i.e. not at all.
Indeed. If reductionism would work here, we probably would have machines with some real general intelligence quite a while ago. Instead we have nothing, not even a mathematical theory that could do it in a physical implementation.
Some humans can. It requires a member of the 10% or so of independent thinkers, the rest cannot. They will eat up whatever garbage is fed to them. So while we do not and will not anytime soon have intelligent machines, we are finding out that the average human is not using most of the intelligence it has available. Not really a surprise.
Just ask this machine to debate something not discussed in the press. It will immediately fall flat on its face. I will not.
But since you are a physicalist, you do not have active general intelligence anyways (it being a fundamentalist quasi-religious belief at this time), so arguments from you are worthless.
While every healthy human has some intelligence, they also have free will and can chose to not use that intelligence. So doing what some humans do does not prove intelligence. A bit more is required. This machine is impressive, no doubt, but it does not have intelligence of any kind. It has zero understanding of what it does. That, incidentally, is also true for many humans.
The claim that the brains is "not magic" is not scientifically sound as it is baseless. The actual scientific fact is that nobody knows. Physicalism is religion and not fact-based.
At the very least we would need a complete description how general intelligence is created and one that can be implemented on ordinary matter. We have nothing of the sort.
You seem to be deep into quasi-religious delusion. Most of what is observable at the interface of the brain is not understood and how it is done is not understood either. Incidentally, life is still not really understood either. And that is the scientific state-of-the-art. Everything else, like your statement, is pure, unfounded belief.
That is all this is. There is no "AI" on this planet and this thing is just a collection of dumb reflexes that give the appearance of an intelligent agent. It is not.
Indeed. But from indications of the level of stupidity involved in all this, these people are pretty reliably going to make it very hard to get into space past the debris cloud, because they understand nothing.
This move must piss of so many people, quite a few with actual power. I guess the Donald is really, really desperate for some "good" news. But he need not worry, the fuckups will continue to cheer him onward, regardless of what stupid things he does. By now, the only reliable way to end his presidency is probably him nuking the worls, because the american nation has surely proven itself incapable of doing anything about this walking catastrophe.
This is just pathetic. While I do not like the idea of requiring an engineering certification for work like this very much, it seems we need it to remove said certification from the utter and complete fuckups that create atrocities like this one.
That would be an application problem. I do not use file-manager on Linux.
The main difference is that Windows and MacOS both come with vendor-supplied and created file managers that are also installed by default. This is true for some Linux Distros and not for others and you usually can do without them.
Linux does not cache things on disk. The only risk is swap, which you just encrypt at boot with a new, random key every boot. Applications may do something else though.
I have had them from time to time, but apparently I am not interesting enough to rate permanent stalkers. Now I will make damned sure to not ever do any AC postings that resemble this crap, you have my word. Not that I ever intended to do anything like this, it is just completely dishonorable and to me, that counts for something. People sniping from the dark are destroyers of communities and have not place in civilized society.
So if it is AC and claims to be from me, it is not.
Very, very hard, even for a lot of engineers (from the "mediocre" faction, admittedly). You need to be actually smart to see you cannot really do better. Most people do not qualify here. Just look at the utter crap that MS thinks is "innovative". Look at the stupidity in the Linux sphere with systemd, and quite a few kernel "improvements" (at least they usually keep the old, reliable and well-tested stuff around), the morons that these days maintain Emacs, etc. The list is endless.
Slashdot Mirror
Does not surprise me one bit. Just, say, training the machine on 10 predetermined topics is probably much less than 10x harder than for one topic. And again, there is nothing "general" here at all, the while thing is a clever fake. Unfortunately, most people are not really suing what they have in general intelligence, so many, many will fall for this trick. Can nicely be seen in some of the statements here.
Incidentally, somebody high up in the Watson project told me not long ago when asked about actual intelligence in machines "not in the next 50 years" and clarified this to "we have nothing" later in the social part of the event. This thing is about as intelligent as a lexicon.
This machine does not deal in truth in any way.
So this one is easy: Trump clearly is the most stupid president, ever. Yet clearly he got elected. That means he did master the hardest challenge a successful presidential candidate has been given, ever, and that makes him the best president. And since Tump is the best and one of his techniques is to just not listen to counterarguments, this technique is clearly the best as well and I can just use, learning from the great stable genius. You lose.
Not saying this machine could do that, especially the last part, but it sghould have not trouble putting together a completely demented argument like this.
I would even dispute it makes you intelligent. It makes you a lexicon with a very powerful user interface, but not more. You still even need to do some searching (the "debate" action), While Science does not have anything on how general intelligence works, active users of it (a minority in the human race, I know) always describe a moment of "insight" or "understanding" as a critical component, and that one does critically require sentience, and possibly not only as a passive component.
For some reason the quasi-religious group of "physicalists" are deathly scared of the idea that a human mind could be more than matter and physics, so they are trying to always call it "obvious" that only matter and basically known physics is involved, despite pretty good indicators to the contrary. Quite the same ways as proper religions argue for an existence of a "God", and about just as fact based, i.e. not at all.
Indeed. If reductionism would work here, we probably would have machines with some real general intelligence quite a while ago. Instead we have nothing, not even a mathematical theory that could do it in a physical implementation.
Some humans can. It requires a member of the 10% or so of independent thinkers, the rest cannot. They will eat up whatever garbage is fed to them. So while we do not and will not anytime soon have intelligent machines, we are finding out that the average human is not using most of the intelligence it has available. Not really a surprise.
Just ask this machine to debate something not discussed in the press. It will immediately fall flat on its face. I will not.
But since you are a physicalist, you do not have active general intelligence anyways (it being a fundamentalist quasi-religious belief at this time), so arguments from you are worthless.
While every healthy human has some intelligence, they also have free will and can chose to not use that intelligence. So doing what some humans do does not prove intelligence. A bit more is required. This machine is impressive, no doubt, but it does not have intelligence of any kind. It has zero understanding of what it does. That, incidentally, is also true for many humans.
The claim that the brains is "not magic" is not scientifically sound as it is baseless. The actual scientific fact is that nobody knows. Physicalism is religion and not fact-based.
At the very least we would need a complete description how general intelligence is created and one that can be implemented on ordinary matter. We have nothing of the sort.
You seem to be deep into quasi-religious delusion. Most of what is observable at the interface of the brain is not understood and how it is done is not understood either. Incidentally, life is still not really understood either. And that is the scientific state-of-the-art. Everything else, like your statement, is pure, unfounded belief.
That is all this is. There is no "AI" on this planet and this thing is just a collection of dumb reflexes that give the appearance of an intelligent agent. It is not.
Also, if there is any substance to this, the last thing he should do is communicate it in this fashion.
As usual, the Donald has no clue what he is talking about. If he knew how much Science his needs, he would probably recoil in horror.
Indeed. But from indications of the level of stupidity involved in all this, these people are pretty reliably going to make it very hard to get into space past the debris cloud, because they understand nothing.
Trump can read? That would be a surprise...
You probably never heard about "nuclear winter". Here is a hint: The modelling relies on data of asteroid impact, no nukes required.
This move must piss of so many people, quite a few with actual power. I guess the Donald is really, really desperate for some "good" news. But he need not worry, the fuckups will continue to cheer him onward, regardless of what stupid things he does. By now, the only reliable way to end his presidency is probably him nuking the worls, because the american nation has surely proven itself incapable of doing anything about this walking catastrophe.
This is just pathetic. While I do not like the idea of requiring an engineering certification for work like this very much, it seems we need it to remove said certification from the utter and complete fuckups that create atrocities like this one.
For SMS ("texts"), this has worked for a long time. Seems this "great new thing" is a bit behind the times...
That would be an application problem. I do not use file-manager on Linux.
The main difference is that Windows and MacOS both come with vendor-supplied and created file managers that are also installed by default. This is true for some Linux Distros and not for others and you usually can do without them.
Linux does not cache things on disk. The only risk is swap, which you just encrypt at boot with a new, random key every boot.
Applications may do something else though.
I have had them from time to time, but apparently I am not interesting enough to rate permanent stalkers. Now I will make damned sure to not ever do any AC postings that resemble this crap, you have my word. Not that I ever intended to do anything like this, it is just completely dishonorable and to me, that counts for something. People sniping from the dark are destroyers of communities and have not place in civilized society.
So if it is AC and claims to be from me, it is not.
Indeed. "Smart" means "some dumb automation included" and "AI" means "non-intelligent statistical classification in use".
I don't use HTML in email at all and I read HTML crapmail only when I have to.
Very, very hard, even for a lot of engineers (from the "mediocre" faction, admittedly). You need to be actually smart to see you cannot really do better. Most people do not qualify here. Just look at the utter crap that MS thinks is "innovative". Look at the stupidity in the Linux sphere with systemd, and quite a few kernel "improvements" (at least they usually keep the old, reliable and well-tested stuff around), the morons that these days maintain Emacs, etc. The list is endless.
Indeed. I just use sort-by-time, I have no need of this artificial stupidity crap. Then I do not use Gmail or Farcebook at all.