Good point. If "motivated" here means "stressed all the time" (which is an utterly perverted and inhumane definition, but a factually valid one), then you are right on the mark. I personally found that it is much better taking things less seriously, because they almost always are not that serious. Also makes for better solutions in my case (and hence for the customer), because I have more and better time to think.
Indeed. Makes it really easy to not use their service for me though. I think PayPal is a has-been anyways. That they have lost Ebay (not yet implemented, but already announced) speaks volumes.
I very, very rarely post as AC and I never sign it when I do. I also never do it to rile anybody up. I most definitely did not write that posing.
There are some deficients here that cannot stand that I can understand things they are incapable of understanding and that I dare to tell them they are stupid when they have written (again) something extremely stupid. Cowardly, dishonorable and utterly pathetic trolling.
Overall, when starting from nothing, this _is_ the fastest way. I figured this out as a teenager. But is also is a way these "AI" things cannot come up with, because they do not actually have any general intelligence. They cannot think "outside of the box" at all. Still lots of applications for this, but replacing a smart person is not among them.
Oh, it still is a nice result. But you are describing exactly the core problem with it: Everything was clear and described in simple, clear statements from the start. That is not how a real-world problem presents itself.
Hehehehe, nice. No, not actually AI, just a planning algorithm as being used and researched for something like > 50 years now. This is another instance of machines getting faster, not of them getting any smarter. On the face of it, the Rubic's cube is a very simple problem with a very simple description and a low number of states. Sure, the number of states is actually pretty large when seen absolutely, but for a planning problem, it is not that large and, in particular, the score for a state is downright simplistic: The number of moves to it being solved.
Real-world planning problems are nowhere near that simple. Hence while we will continue to see these stunts, we will not see any real-world problems solved this way for a long, long time, if ever. Also take into account that single-core CPU speed scaling is dead and that most planning algorithms are, in the end, strongly constrained by single-core speeds.
Not at all. If machines have code and capabilities ready to go on a killing spree, it will also happen by accident. Remember the world was almost nuked by accident several times.
Oh, yes. And most coders are really bad coders. The smart ones build up incredible complex systems (just look at all the web-application-framework atrocities around) that in the end nobody using them understands anymore and that most definitely will have surprising behaviors. Also, due to cost factors (and because it is difficult to find the total scum needed to implement "humans in the loop") this will be optimized away, and in the end there will just be a brittle command channel where a general "kill" order is given.
Most assuredly. There are boatloads of money to be made, there are masses of people that are willing to see "undesirables" get killed, there are very few people that do understand the actual, massive dangers. The human race, as a group, is stupid, vicious and driven by fear and greed. About the worst combination possible.
Still that's ancient, what is happening now seems to be the result of the idiots on top across the globe.
I don't think they are idiots. I think they just do not care about anybody else and are on the lowest moral level imaginable. To them, killing people, even lots of people and even people that are clearly innocent (children, bystanders, etc.) means nothing. If it gives them a bit of good PR, they will gladly do it.
As it is, I think the human race still has not learned to recognize psychopaths, sociopaths and extreme narcissists and consistently falls for their tricks and then supports the evil they do. I am not really hopeful that the masses will learn this skill though, as even lessons from utter catastrophes (like, e.g., Nazi-Germany losing the war) wear off only a few decades later.
Indeed. The "incredibly stupid" requirement is something a majority of the human can fill with ease. Just tell them, e.g. that these killer bots are needed to "staunch the flow of child-raping gangs that flood the US from Mexico" and you are golden. What we have is a large part of the population that is incredibly easy to manipulate into basically everything and a small group that has no qualms at all using this for the most extremely self-serving evil.
Every landmine qualifies as a very low capability "killer robot". The insane harm landmines to around the globe is a good indicator that there are by far enough people with power and money and absolutely no qualms about maiming and killing innocent bystanders and civilians in general. Hence we will definitely see killer robots of much higher capabilities, unless we get the fucked-up part of the human race under control that simply cannot stop killing others and using violence to solve disagreements.
That is a lie consistently spread by the IQ measurement community, mostly because they want to sell you something. When you look at actual reality, you find that the IQ is rarely the limiter of what people understand and what not. Much more important is how they chose to use their IQ (usually they do not) and what starting point they chose for chains of reasoning (usually some irrational one they never challenge, randomly copied from the media from peers). With this prevalent mistakes, IQ becomes a minor factor.
Because it is the stupid "hype de jour". DevOps does not work and cannot work, except when you have the rare situation where you actually have people that are good at both aspects and you manage to prevent them from being terminally boring by it, i.e. basically never.
My personal estimation is they always were about this incompetent, but with massive effort managed to hide part of it before. I may be wrong, of course, and the very decision to go to the model Win10 uses may be an indicator in that direction.
What are you even talking about? I pointed out an example that does run Win7 and does not intend to ever go to Win10. And you are talking about "Win7/10"? Have you by accident responded to the wrong posting?
Slashdot Mirror
Good point. If "motivated" here means "stressed all the time" (which is an utterly perverted and inhumane definition, but a factually valid one), then you are right on the mark. I personally found that it is much better taking things less seriously, because they almost always are not that serious. Also makes for better solutions in my case (and hence for the customer), because I have more and better time to think.
Indeed. Makes it really easy to not use their service for me though. I think PayPal is a has-been anyways. That they have lost Ebay (not yet implemented, but already announced) speaks volumes.
I did not write that AC answer. Some troll with no personal honor did.
I am going to assume you really are APK.
I very, very rarely post as AC and I never sign it when I do. I also never do it to rile anybody up. I most definitely did not write that posing.
There are some deficients here that cannot stand that I can understand things they are incapable of understanding and that I dare to tell them they are stupid when they have written (again) something extremely stupid. Cowardly, dishonorable and utterly pathetic trolling.
So?
Overall, when starting from nothing, this _is_ the fastest way. I figured this out as a teenager. But is also is a way these "AI" things cannot come up with, because they do not actually have any general intelligence. They cannot think "outside of the box" at all. Still lots of applications for this, but replacing a smart person is not among them.
Oh, it still is a nice result. But you are describing exactly the core problem with it: Everything was clear and described in simple, clear statements from the start. That is not how a real-world problem presents itself.
Exactly.
Hehehehe, nice. No, not actually AI, just a planning algorithm as being used and researched for something like > 50 years now. This is another instance of machines getting faster, not of them getting any smarter. On the face of it, the Rubic's cube is a very simple problem with a very simple description and a low number of states. Sure, the number of states is actually pretty large when seen absolutely, but for a planning problem, it is not that large and, in particular, the score for a state is downright simplistic: The number of moves to it being solved.
Real-world planning problems are nowhere near that simple. Hence while we will continue to see these stunts, we will not see any real-world problems solved this way for a long, long time, if ever. Also take into account that single-core CPU speed scaling is dead and that most planning algorithms are, in the end, strongly constrained by single-core speeds.
I think these people just realized the actual value of what they were doing.
We clearly are stupid enough.
As a group, most definitely.
Not at all. If machines have code and capabilities ready to go on a killing spree, it will also happen by accident. Remember the world was almost nuked by accident several times.
Oh, yes. And most coders are really bad coders. The smart ones build up incredible complex systems (just look at all the web-application-framework atrocities around) that in the end nobody using them understands anymore and that most definitely will have surprising behaviors. Also, due to cost factors (and because it is difficult to find the total scum needed to implement "humans in the loop") this will be optimized away, and in the end there will just be a brittle command channel where a general "kill" order is given.
Most assuredly. There are boatloads of money to be made, there are masses of people that are willing to see "undesirables" get killed, there are very few people that do understand the actual, massive dangers. The human race, as a group, is stupid, vicious and driven by fear and greed. About the worst combination possible.
Still that's ancient, what is happening now seems to be the result of the idiots on top across the globe.
I don't think they are idiots. I think they just do not care about anybody else and are on the lowest moral level imaginable. To them, killing people, even lots of people and even people that are clearly innocent (children, bystanders, etc.) means nothing. If it gives them a bit of good PR, they will gladly do it.
As it is, I think the human race still has not learned to recognize psychopaths, sociopaths and extreme narcissists and consistently falls for their tricks and then supports the evil they do. I am not really hopeful that the masses will learn this skill though, as even lessons from utter catastrophes (like, e.g., Nazi-Germany losing the war) wear off only a few decades later.
Indeed. The "incredibly stupid" requirement is something a majority of the human can fill with ease. Just tell them, e.g. that these killer bots are needed to "staunch the flow of child-raping gangs that flood the US from Mexico" and you are golden. What we have is a large part of the population that is incredibly easy to manipulate into basically everything and a small group that has no qualms at all using this for the most extremely self-serving evil.
Every landmine qualifies as a very low capability "killer robot". The insane harm landmines to around the globe is a good indicator that there are by far enough people with power and money and absolutely no qualms about maiming and killing innocent bystanders and civilians in general. Hence we will definitely see killer robots of much higher capabilities, unless we get the fucked-up part of the human race under control that simply cannot stop killing others and using violence to solve disagreements.
That is a lie consistently spread by the IQ measurement community, mostly because they want to sell you something. When you look at actual reality, you find that the IQ is rarely the limiter of what people understand and what not. Much more important is how they chose to use their IQ (usually they do not) and what starting point they chose for chains of reasoning (usually some irrational one they never challenge, randomly copied from the media from peers). With this prevalent mistakes, IQ becomes a minor factor.
Unless the transfer was already done.
It was M. And Bond tried to steal the gun after that.
These 20 years will do nothing to deter anything like this and when he comes out, he will probably still be dangerous. Fail.
Because it is the stupid "hype de jour". DevOps does not work and cannot work, except when you have the rare situation where you actually have people that are good at both aspects and you manage to prevent them from being terminally boring by it, i.e. basically never.
My personal estimation is they always were about this incompetent, but with massive effort managed to hide part of it before. I may be wrong, of course, and the very decision to go to the model Win10 uses may be an indicator in that direction.
What are you even talking about? I pointed out an example that does run Win7 and does not intend to ever go to Win10. And you are talking about "Win7/10"? Have you by accident responded to the wrong posting?
Since it is not feature stable, I will go ahead and call Win10 "alpha" quality.