And that is exactly it. Specifically for poker, there are also a lot of wannabes with too much money that think they are good players, easy marks for the pros. This statistical engine does not make any beginner's mistakes and plays an almost perfect mathematical strategy. Apparently that is enough.
And if you had had even a brief look at the definition of weak AI and strong AI, then you would not spout such nonsense. These are not "my" definitions. These are what is used in the respective CS field. But apparently you are more in love with your own misconceptions than understanding things. Pathetic.
Exactly. Although since there are absolutely no positive research results at this time when it comes to strong AI, > 100 years to availability is a better bet, and it may well be never.
It is by far not "almost all tasks". It is strongly formalized tasks with strong rules and good statistical models.
There is absolutely no reason to believe at this time general AI ("strong AI") will ever become available, except a blind, religious trust in "progress". There are not even theories how general AI could be created, despite more than half a century of research. Nothing at all.
There were a few rapes in Koeln, but not more than usual at that time and not on the streets and not by immigrants specifically. The problem there was assault and robbery, and it most definitely was an isolated incident that did not repeat this year.
Europe is not falling to the barbarian hordes at all, even if some people want to create that impression.
Something like this is going to happen sooner or later. It cannot really be avoided. BCM and recovery tests are the only way to be sure your replication/journaling/etc. works and your backups can be restored.
Of course in this age of incompetent bean-counters, these are often skipped, because "everything works" and these test do involve downtime.
People that understand statistics have not made such claims. People that are afraid of "AI" without understanding it have been making them.
This is weak AI. It does not surpass human beings at _understanding_ poker, because weak AI has no understanding. It just tuns out that statistics-based automation can play poker really well (without understanding it). The problem here is humans overestimating the difficulty of poker, not weak AI doing impressive feats.
Of course, a lot of task that humans approach using intelligence or think they approach using intelligence does not actually require intelligence. It is just one possible strategy. In addition, most human beings do not have that much intelligence at their disposal in the first place and are hampered further by superstition, arrogance, inexperience, lack of knowledge, fear, politics, etc. So the bar for automatizing many things that many humans thought intelligence was needed for is not actually very high. On the other hand, if you look at what the smartest 10% humans can do when they really think about something, there is no way to replicate that with weak AI. And strong AI is not even on the distant horizon.
Second, and potentially more disturbingly, it means that we are closer to the point where AI may pose an existential risk to humans, and that tipping point could occur with very little warning.
Not at all. These are all "weak AI" applications. Weak AI cannot do general problems, unlike human beings. There is no existential risk here. There is a risk for the social order, as it turns out that many things do not actually need intelligence but can be done by specialized automation (i.e. weak AI) and hence quite a few jobs will be vanishing, but that is essentially it risk-wise.
That is not going to happen. The stock-market is a mechanism to redistribute wealth from small-time players to the big ones. The big ones will be the ones with the AI (well, "statistical decision engine" actually) and they will make very sure not to kill the goose that lays golden eggs...
In numbers, yes. In values of "true", they are rough approximations. It is the latter we are talking about here.
Incidentally, classical mechanics is also an "astonishing exact model" with regards to accuracy in many circumstances. It just happens to be very far from complete and there are conditions where its accuracy becomes bad enough that the model breaks down completely and becomes "untrue".
The same is very likely the case for quantum mechanics, yet all these science-fanatics (that are universally bad scientists or no scientists) think that quantum mechanics represents absolute truth. It does not. On the level of understand what is actually going on, it is a rough approximation. The difference is that we know what circumstances classical mechanics needs to be a good model, yet we do not know them for quantum mechanics and that makes the approximation "rough".
DRM represents a market failure. If good-quality offers without DRM are available, profits time and again turn out to be entirely fine. Enough people are willing to pay to keep the artists afloat nicely. It is just the bad-quality offerings, the over-priced ones, the ones not available that "need" DRM. DRM is a technology that serves only to create artificial scarcity, and that is universally evil.
The process was a bit differently though: First, the government commissioned an independent scientific study, i.e. one done by actual reputable scientists, not industry lobbyists and the like. That showed what everybody not utterly dumb already knows: Piracy hurts the big artists somewhat (they still have large profits), but is a boon for the small ones, because they get exposure and more customers that way. Overall, the study concluded that the second effect is a bit stronger than the former and that the gain for diversity in the performing arts affected is huge. They also found that market failure (as is common with large monopolies), i.e. unavailability of reasonable offers, is a key factor in media piracy and that is for the market to fix, not the law.
As a result, (and probably because any respective laws have to be ratified by the population, fat chance of that), downloading for your own use is legally tolerated.
What "rape gangs"? You would think that European media would report these, but there is nothing. Seems to be FakeNews that is part of a propaganda campaign serving to keep the US in fear because of "how bad it is in Europe already". Fact is, except for some isolated incidents, this does problem does not exist.
I don't think so. Or not entirely. I think there are two kinds of batteries that are economically viable for this. One is, as you said, optimized for this application, and will come later. The other is used car batteries. They are not good enough for a car anymore at 60-70% or so remaining capacity, but can still take a _lot_ of charges before they become non-viable in stationary installations like this one, typically many more then the viable lifetime in a car. True, they may have new batteries in there at the moment, at least in part, but the kicker is that weight does not matter much in stationary installations and that the used batteries are essentially free and will keep coming. Also the charge/discharge profile is a lot more benign than in a car, extending lifetime further. And from a grid-stability perspective, these are an engineer's dream as they can react in sub-second time. Noting else can do that except exotics like spinning flywheels.
It is also possible that even new car batteries are economically viable, because of the long lifetime in this type of installation and because they can be made with an existing process in an existing factory, hence zero development cost. May also be that you get certain amount of batteries that fail the quality requirements for a car, but are perfectly fine for stationary storage. Of course, specialized batteries will eventually be better, but at this time, if it is cost-neutral it is already a winner as it is a demonstration project.
I think this was long overdue. It is a bit pathetic that the boost needed to get better batteries was the smartphone-revolution. But late as it may be, it is exciting and definitely a big step in the right direction.
So you think these teething children, being between 4 month and 3 years old "think that homeopathy is anything but a scam so they are pretty stupid"? How does that work? Or do you think children and their parents are one entity and do not deserve to be seen separately?
Aehm, yes? Is this not obvious? Sure, the parents are secondary victims, and the did it to themselves, but I cannot see any way the children are responsible for their death or illness here.
He probably is using homeopathic contraceptives...
In all seriousness though, this is not about protecting the children of careful parents. The deaths and sicknesses were probably a combination of overuse and shoddy manufacturing where just one of the two would not have cause it. In litigation-nation, you of course always have to be safe for the dumbest possible customer. In countries with a sane legal system, that problem does not exist. For example, I can still get a package of Paracetamol large enough to be lethal here. Of course the pharmacist will ask me whether I know how to use them and tell me the limit, and the instructions will too, including the warning that more can be lethal. But accidentally taking more is not the manufacturer's responsibility here, and neither is intentionally taking more. In the US, however...
Actually, the problem here is shoddy manufacturing in conflict with homeopathic principles. I do not defend their scam, but the same problem, say, in Paracetamol, would also have killed people. Hence these people are guilty, both by homeopathic standards and by sane standards.
I'm reminded of an old IRC quote: The problem with America is stupidity. I'm not saying there should be a capital punishment for stupidity, but why don't we just take the safety labels off of everything and let the problem solve itself?
In principle, I like the idea, but the victims here are not the ones being stupid.
And there the problem starts. It is fascinating to see how much deeply stupid people are around here that do not even understand how limited their understanding is. The current models for Quantum Mechanics are not truth. They are rough approximations and, if history is any indicator, quite a few things presented by the press as "truth" in there will turn out to have exceptions and inaccuracies. The other problem is that actual observation is now down to indirections of indirections and only mathematical models try to explain what is actually happening there. These models could easily be way off with the lack of quality in th experimental validation.
Slashdot Mirror
And that is exactly it. Specifically for poker, there are also a lot of wannabes with too much money that think they are good players, easy marks for the pros. This statistical engine does not make any beginner's mistakes and plays an almost perfect mathematical strategy. Apparently that is enough.
And if you had had even a brief look at the definition of weak AI and strong AI, then you would not spout such nonsense. These are not "my" definitions. These are what is used in the respective CS field. But apparently you are more in love with your own misconceptions than understanding things. Pathetic.
Exactly. Although since there are absolutely no positive research results at this time when it comes to strong AI, > 100 years to availability is a better bet, and it may well be never.
It is by far not "almost all tasks". It is strongly formalized tasks with strong rules and good statistical models.
There is absolutely no reason to believe at this time general AI ("strong AI") will ever become available, except a blind, religious trust in "progress". There are not even theories how general AI could be created, despite more than half a century of research. Nothing at all.
There were a few rapes in Koeln, but not more than usual at that time and not on the streets and not by immigrants specifically. The problem there was assault and robbery, and it most definitely was an isolated incident that did not repeat this year.
Europe is not falling to the barbarian hordes at all, even if some people want to create that impression.
Just imagine if you had actually read the story. The git-repos are not affected.
Something like this is going to happen sooner or later. It cannot really be avoided. BCM and recovery tests are the only way to be sure your replication/journaling/etc. works and your backups can be restored.
Of course in this age of incompetent bean-counters, these are often skipped, because "everything works" and these test do involve downtime.
Reading comprehension and comprehension of situation described: Fail
People that understand statistics have not made such claims. People that are afraid of "AI" without understanding it have been making them.
This is weak AI. It does not surpass human beings at _understanding_ poker, because weak AI has no understanding. It just tuns out that statistics-based automation can play poker really well (without understanding it). The problem here is humans overestimating the difficulty of poker, not weak AI doing impressive feats.
Of course, a lot of task that humans approach using intelligence or think they approach using intelligence does not actually require intelligence. It is just one possible strategy. In addition, most human beings do not have that much intelligence at their disposal in the first place and are hampered further by superstition, arrogance, inexperience, lack of knowledge, fear, politics, etc. So the bar for automatizing many things that many humans thought intelligence was needed for is not actually very high. On the other hand, if you look at what the smartest 10% humans can do when they really think about something, there is no way to replicate that with weak AI. And strong AI is not even on the distant horizon.
Second, and potentially more disturbingly, it means that we are closer to the point where AI may pose an existential risk to humans, and that tipping point could occur with very little warning.
Not at all. These are all "weak AI" applications. Weak AI cannot do general problems, unlike human beings. There is no existential risk here. There is a risk for the social order, as it turns out that many things do not actually need intelligence but can be done by specialized automation (i.e. weak AI) and hence quite a few jobs will be vanishing, but that is essentially it risk-wise.
Nothing. It will also be better at bluffing, because a machine has no way to betray itself.
This is a nice stunt, but this is still just statistics or "weak AI", if you must label it as AI.
That is not going to happen. The stock-market is a mechanism to redistribute wealth from small-time players to the big ones. The big ones will be the ones with the AI (well, "statistical decision engine" actually) and they will make very sure not to kill the goose that lays golden eggs...
Humans are still bad at statistics and machines can lie without any outward signs.
What is the point of this news?
In numbers, yes. In values of "true", they are rough approximations. It is the latter we are talking about here.
Incidentally, classical mechanics is also an "astonishing exact model" with regards to accuracy in many circumstances. It just happens to be very far from complete and there are conditions where its accuracy becomes bad enough that the model breaks down completely and becomes "untrue".
The same is very likely the case for quantum mechanics, yet all these science-fanatics (that are universally bad scientists or no scientists) think that quantum mechanics represents absolute truth. It does not. On the level of understand what is actually going on, it is a rough approximation. The difference is that we know what circumstances classical mechanics needs to be a good model, yet we do not know them for quantum mechanics and that makes the approximation "rough".
DRM represents a market failure. If good-quality offers without DRM are available, profits time and again turn out to be entirely fine. Enough people are willing to pay to keep the artists afloat nicely. It is just the bad-quality offerings, the over-priced ones, the ones not available that "need" DRM. DRM is a technology that serves only to create artificial scarcity, and that is universally evil.
The process was a bit differently though: First, the government commissioned an independent scientific study, i.e. one done by actual reputable scientists, not industry lobbyists and the like. That showed what everybody not utterly dumb already knows: Piracy hurts the big artists somewhat (they still have large profits), but is a boon for the small ones, because they get exposure and more customers that way. Overall, the study concluded that the second effect is a bit stronger than the former and that the gain for diversity in the performing arts affected is huge. They also found that market failure (as is common with large monopolies), i.e. unavailability of reasonable offers, is a key factor in media piracy and that is for the market to fix, not the law.
As a result, (and probably because any respective laws have to be ratified by the population, fat chance of that), downloading for your own use is legally tolerated.
What "rape gangs"? You would think that European media would report these, but there is nothing. Seems to be FakeNews that is part of a propaganda campaign serving to keep the US in fear because of "how bad it is in Europe already". Fact is, except for some isolated incidents, this does problem does not exist.
I don't think so. Or not entirely. I think there are two kinds of batteries that are economically viable for this. One is, as you said, optimized for this application, and will come later. The other is used car batteries. They are not good enough for a car anymore at 60-70% or so remaining capacity, but can still take a _lot_ of charges before they become non-viable in stationary installations like this one, typically many more then the viable lifetime in a car. True, they may have new batteries in there at the moment, at least in part, but the kicker is that weight does not matter much in stationary installations and that the used batteries are essentially free and will keep coming. Also the charge/discharge profile is a lot more benign than in a car, extending lifetime further. And from a grid-stability perspective, these are an engineer's dream as they can react in sub-second time. Noting else can do that except exotics like spinning flywheels.
It is also possible that even new car batteries are economically viable, because of the long lifetime in this type of installation and because they can be made with an existing process in an existing factory, hence zero development cost. May also be that you get certain amount of batteries that fail the quality requirements for a car, but are perfectly fine for stationary storage. Of course, specialized batteries will eventually be better, but at this time, if it is cost-neutral it is already a winner as it is a demonstration project.
I think this was long overdue. It is a bit pathetic that the boost needed to get better batteries was the smartphone-revolution. But late as it may be, it is exciting and definitely a big step in the right direction.
So you think these teething children, being between 4 month and 3 years old "think that homeopathy is anything but a scam so they are pretty stupid"? How does that work? Or do you think children and their parents are one entity and do not deserve to be seen separately?
Aehm, yes? Is this not obvious? Sure, the parents are secondary victims, and the did it to themselves, but I cannot see any way the children are responsible for their death or illness here.
He probably is using homeopathic contraceptives...
In all seriousness though, this is not about protecting the children of careful parents. The deaths and sicknesses were probably a combination of overuse and shoddy manufacturing where just one of the two would not have cause it. In litigation-nation, you of course always have to be safe for the dumbest possible customer. In countries with a sane legal system, that problem does not exist. For example, I can still get a package of Paracetamol large enough to be lethal here. Of course the pharmacist will ask me whether I know how to use them and tell me the limit, and the instructions will too, including the warning that more can be lethal. But accidentally taking more is not the manufacturer's responsibility here, and neither is intentionally taking more. In the US, however ...
Actually, the problem here is shoddy manufacturing in conflict with homeopathic principles. I do not defend their scam, but the same problem, say, in Paracetamol, would also have killed people. Hence these people are guilty, both by homeopathic standards and by sane standards.
I'm reminded of an old IRC quote: The problem with America is stupidity. I'm not saying there should be a capital punishment for stupidity, but why don't we just take the safety labels off of everything and let the problem solve itself?
In principle, I like the idea, but the victims here are not the ones being stupid.
You should not get your informations from the yellow press. They do not have "truth" as their business model.
And there the problem starts. It is fascinating to see how much deeply stupid people are around here that do not even understand how limited their understanding is. The current models for Quantum Mechanics are not truth. They are rough approximations and, if history is any indicator, quite a few things presented by the press as "truth" in there will turn out to have exceptions and inaccuracies. The other problem is that actual observation is now down to indirections of indirections and only mathematical models try to explain what is actually happening there. These models could easily be way off with the lack of quality in th experimental validation.