In my current exams, I let the students use all lecture slides and their own notes and their own summary of the lecture. Does not have any impact on results, but the students learn more because they revise the material better this way. One student even commented in the eval that he expected the lecture summary he did to be quite useful in the future. We are in the information age, even if many teachers and lecturers have not realized that. Restricting access to information too much, giving too little time, etc. are just very bad ways to increase exam difficulty. They are easy to do though, so they are a favorite of intellectually lazy teachers.
Cheaters are retarded. I once cleaned up a cheat sheet one left behind after an exam, with her name on it! Cannot make it? Cheating just will make things worse. Only exception: Politicians. They do not need any skills except public lying. Cheating may well serve as preparation for such a career.
The only fair contest would have been a round-based one with ample time for execution on both sides. Yes, machines are faster, but they are utterly dumb on a level humans cannot even reach while staying functional.
As the promise of "AI" slowly crumbles, a lot of people are desperate to hide the severe limitations and problems of this tech. One way they try to scam the public is by rigged "contests", like this one or the meaningless "Go" stunt.
When you think about it, the AI was showing no intelligence. It had ran a statistical analysis, and came up with the notion that if you can click really fast, these units are the best in all situations. It does not adjust to new stuff. Just in effect, runs a script.
Indeed. And that is all "AI" can do today and in the foreseeable future. It is also quite telling that the human players always go into this without having any data from old games to prepare for their opponent, while the machine has all data available on the humans. This is simply because the humans would wipe the floor with it if they knew in advance what they are going into. It basically does not get any more unfair than this. The whole thing is a meaningless PR stunt.
Same on the Go stunt by Google: The machine had all games of the human player, the human player had none of the machine. Even after only 3 games, the human thought he had figured out a way to beat the machine, but, of course, there never were any additional games, as that would have been an utter disaster for Google.
Very much so. Incidentally, when I recently had a chance to ask the head of the Watson team Europe in private about AGI, he immediately said "not in the next 50 years". That is a statement directly implying "we do not know whether it is even possible". IBM and Google experts know they have nothing except automation on steroids. But humans like to dream and like to ignore reality. Marketing is just one discipline that exploits that.
Ow what would you call it if the machine has all games of its opponent to prepare and the human opponent has none of the machine? This whole thing was an useless stunt. And did you notice how fast the Go machine was retired afterwards? Very likely because it would have had no chance after the humans had it seen play a few times.
We do not. You let enthusiasm blind you. Water 4km down is irrelevant, unless you are prepared to ship a few 1000t of drilling rig and a few 10'000t of support equipment.
No, we did not. You seem to be unaware how extremely much effort went into these stunts back then. And there is a bit more to colonizing something than just to get there.
I would not. There were flying animals for a long time, so there is reason to believe it is possible. However, say, 2000 years ago, I would have been one of those saying "not anytime soon" and you would have said "in 10 years". There is a difference between "impossible" and "not anytime soon" and you are currently ignoring that for an utterly cheap shot. I get it that you are excited and I am the one with the bucket of cold water. But switching off your intelligence and being a mindless fanboi instead just disgraces you.
You do realize that a working colony would require about 20'000 people (if carefully selected) and that it need to be self-sustaining in a harsh environment? We may be there in a few hundred years, but not much earlier.
And if you think that the _engine_ part is all that it takes, you are missing 99% of the problem. Thinking that things are simple is easy when you do not see most of the problem.
It does not. That is an illusion. There are many things we cannot make anymore because we have lost the knowledge to do so. This is rarely discussed publicly, but one place were you hear it occasionally is that if you have not built a nuclear power station for a few decades, it gets extremely hard to do it again.
The likes of you will find flaw with any example. Giving you examples is useless, because you do not have what it takes to evaluate them. If you were actually minimally competent, you would not need those examples in the first place, but you are not.
Having said that, it might not be much worse. What kind of genius manages to invoke the code to activate the camera and microphone without calling the part that informs the user that the call's been answered, or without the user issuing a command to pick up? These should be atomic.
In a sane, security-aware library call, yes. In reality, understanding security is too complex for most coders, including those that write libraries.
Indeed. It nicely illustrates the key problem of the human race though: Most people are embarrassingly dumb. You can trace basically every major problem back to that.
That would be an argument of the type "the Nazis did medical experiment on prisoners, so _all_ medical experiments are wrong", now would it? The argumentation technique of somebody utterly incapable of seeing reality.
Not in relevant numbers. If you look at what vaccines prevent, you get a distance of several orders of magnitude in _individual_ risk. Hence your argument is complete bullshit. You must be one of those "educated" people that never managed to actually use said education on real-world problems.
Don't confuse intelligence with wisdom. All the education and intelligence in the world is worthless if you _chose_ not to use it and most people do. They rather run with whatever idea makes them feel good.
Education and intelligence are not enough. You need to be willing to use them in addition and many people do not have that quality. I like to call it "wisdom".
I add on is my experience with a friend I lost touch with, well because you could say he is losing touch with reality. He really went done the rabbit hole of vaccines causing autism.
That one is pretty extremely stupid, because it is well documented that this was science-fraud. It also was a claim that a specific vaccine only would cause autism and that a new product due to market without that problem would be available soon. Anybody that still believes that false claim is an utter moron with zero ability to do even minimal research.
I am reluctant to say people that need this have "minds", but yes. Most people need to be hit over the head several times and be kicked in the gut in addition to be willing to accept something blatantly obvious they wish to ignore.
Slashdot Mirror
No communication devices, no computing devices. The exam must be your work.
In my current exams, I let the students use all lecture slides and their own notes and their own summary of the lecture. Does not have any impact on results, but the students learn more because they revise the material better this way. One student even commented in the eval that he expected the lecture summary he did to be quite useful in the future. We are in the information age, even if many teachers and lecturers have not realized that. Restricting access to information too much, giving too little time, etc. are just very bad ways to increase exam difficulty. They are easy to do though, so they are a favorite of intellectually lazy teachers.
Cheaters are retarded. I once cleaned up a cheat sheet one left behind after an exam, with her name on it! Cannot make it? Cheating just will make things worse. Only exception: Politicians. They do not need any skills except public lying. Cheating may well serve as preparation for such a career.
The only fair contest would have been a round-based one with ample time for execution on both sides. Yes, machines are faster, but they are utterly dumb on a level humans cannot even reach while staying functional.
As the promise of "AI" slowly crumbles, a lot of people are desperate to hide the severe limitations and problems of this tech. One way they try to scam the public is by rigged "contests", like this one or the meaningless "Go" stunt.
That is why these "competitions" never last long enough for the humans to adjust. Would be an utter failure for the machines otherwise.
When you think about it, the AI was showing no intelligence. It had ran a statistical analysis, and came up with the notion that if you can click really fast, these units are the best in all situations. It does not adjust to new stuff. Just in effect, runs a script.
Indeed. And that is all "AI" can do today and in the foreseeable future. It is also quite telling that the human players always go into this without having any data from old games to prepare for their opponent, while the machine has all data available on the humans. This is simply because the humans would wipe the floor with it if they knew in advance what they are going into. It basically does not get any more unfair than this. The whole thing is a meaningless PR stunt.
Same on the Go stunt by Google: The machine had all games of the human player, the human player had none of the machine. Even after only 3 games, the human thought he had figured out a way to beat the machine, but, of course, there never were any additional games, as that would have been an utter disaster for Google.
Very much so. Incidentally, when I recently had a chance to ask the head of the Watson team Europe in private about AGI, he immediately said "not in the next 50 years". That is a statement directly implying "we do not know whether it is even possible". IBM and Google experts know they have nothing except automation on steroids. But humans like to dream and like to ignore reality. Marketing is just one discipline that exploits that.
Ow what would you call it if the machine has all games of its opponent to prepare and the human opponent has none of the machine? This whole thing was an useless stunt. And did you notice how fast the Go machine was retired afterwards? Very likely because it would have had no chance after the humans had it seen play a few times.
Why do people fall for this kind of crap?
We do not. You let enthusiasm blind you. Water 4km down is irrelevant, unless you are prepared to ship a few 1000t of drilling rig and a few 10'000t of support equipment.
No, we did not. You seem to be unaware how extremely much effort went into these stunts back then. And there is a bit more to colonizing something than just to get there.
I would not. There were flying animals for a long time, so there is reason to believe it is possible. However, say, 2000 years ago, I would have been one of those saying "not anytime soon" and you would have said "in 10 years". There is a difference between "impossible" and "not anytime soon" and you are currently ignoring that for an utterly cheap shot. I get it that you are excited and I am the one with the bucket of cold water. But switching off your intelligence and being a mindless fanboi instead just disgraces you.
You do realize that a working colony would require about 20'000 people (if carefully selected) and that it need to be self-sustaining in a harsh environment? We may be there in a few hundred years, but not much earlier.
And if you think that the _engine_ part is all that it takes, you are missing 99% of the problem. Thinking that things are simple is easy when you do not see most of the problem.
It does not. That is an illusion. There are many things we cannot make anymore because we have lost the knowledge to do so. This is rarely discussed publicly, but one place were you hear it occasionally is that if you have not built a nuclear power station for a few decades, it gets extremely hard to do it again.
The likes of you will find flaw with any example. Giving you examples is useless, because you do not have what it takes to evaluate them. If you were actually minimally competent, you would not need those examples in the first place, but you are not.
Having said that, it might not be much worse. What kind of genius manages to invoke the code to activate the camera and microphone without calling the part that informs the user that the call's been answered, or without the user issuing a command to pick up? These should be atomic.
In a sane, security-aware library call, yes. In reality, understanding security is too complex for most coders, including those that write libraries.
Indeed. It nicely illustrates the key problem of the human race though: Most people are embarrassingly dumb. You can trace basically every major problem back to that.
That would be an argument of the type "the Nazis did medical experiment on prisoners, so _all_ medical experiments are wrong", now would it? The argumentation technique of somebody utterly incapable of seeing reality.
Not in relevant numbers. If you look at what vaccines prevent, you get a distance of several orders of magnitude in _individual_ risk. Hence your argument is complete bullshit. You must be one of those "educated" people that never managed to actually use said education on real-world problems.
Don't confuse intelligence with wisdom. All the education and intelligence in the world is worthless if you _chose_ not to use it and most people do. They rather run with whatever idea makes them feel good.
Education and intelligence are not enough. You need to be willing to use them in addition and many people do not have that quality. I like to call it "wisdom".
I add on is my experience with a friend I lost touch with, well because you could say he is losing touch with reality. He really went done the rabbit hole of vaccines causing autism.
That one is pretty extremely stupid, because it is well documented that this was science-fraud. It also was a claim that a specific vaccine only would cause autism and that a new product due to market without that problem would be available soon. Anybody that still believes that false claim is an utter moron with zero ability to do even minimal research.
I am reluctant to say people that need this have "minds", but yes. Most people need to be hit over the head several times and be kicked in the gut in addition to be willing to accept something blatantly obvious they wish to ignore.