In my first internship, I worked with a QA team for a telephony hardware company. One of the tasks that we started, (and I stress started,) was a "Continuous Hours of Operation" test where we would run tests that were supposed to keep running for weeks or months in order to find bugs.
The first thing I did, to get comfortable with the APIs and testing hardware, was to write a simple program that picked up the phone, played some music, and then hung up. After about 5 minutes, my program kept crashing. Assuming that I was doing something wrong, (because I didn't know the API,) I asked for help.
It turns out my silly "pick up the phone and play music over and over again" test found a bug that had been eluding major engineers for a few years.
Perhaps all Toyota needs to do is take some of their simple unit tests and keep running them over and over without rebooting the firmware. Then they might reproduce the issue within a few days.
Why do you need a few minutes to talk about the network? It seems to me that 30 seconds spent listing the network names, passwords, and wired port locations is more then enough. Assuming it's an open network; the 600 people who used it didn't need to talk about it. Perhaps some "network posters" would be more helpful as they can be referenced throughout the convention
What's wrong with NAT? It's the norm when using an open network; and it gives you (and the attendees) an ounce of protection.
Or, the submitter could contact Seagate or another drive manufacturer and ask what it would take to get a drive with special firmware that let him write 1's and 0's directly to the drive wherever he wanted. Basically, remove the intelligence on the drive.
Or just find out if there are test codes / commands that do the same thing.
If DDT were still in use, the Bald Eagle would be extinct, along with several other birds.
That's because our parents / grandparents were spraying it all over the countryside. Looking back, it was pretty irresponsible.
Unfortunately, DDT is the only thing that bedbugs and prevents re-infestations, and now that it's illegal, bedbugs are making a comeback. In the days of DDT, an exterminator could leave a coat of DDT that would kill eggs that hatch for the next few months. Today, the best we can do is bag a mattress and hope that we got rid of all of the eggs.
Who remembers the article that floated around about a year ago about how Google manually tunes their search results. One of the manual things that they check is to ensure that Wikipedia articles are top links.
I have briefly encountered genetic programming but failed to take it into account, mainly because the examples I've encountered have highly specific problem domains which, while very useful, do not approach anything close to consciousness (though if that's what you mean by "life-like" I'd definitely check it out).
I wish I knew how to find the video; but 3d "life" simulations using genetic programming have created both bizarre and "normal" life inside of a computer. While the life wasn't "intelligent," it was reminiscent of simple aquatic life. These tend to fall under "artificial life" instead of "artificial intelligence."
I don't understand how we're supposed to go about creating it without first understanding it.
Have you ever looked into genetic programming? It can create some life-like programs that are too complicated for humans to comprehend. I see two schools of thought coming from this:
Just because we understand consciousness doesn't mean we can program it.
Assuming that our consciousness is a product of evolution; we can create consciousness through genetic programming; if we can write good fitness functions.
Either way, given that genetic programming can create some life-like programs, I find it difficult to accept or refute your argument.
Instead of advertising, why not find someone who needs a mechanical turk? For example, why not require that someone accessing the proxy perform some work items instead of interacting with an ad? These work items might be more valuable then an ad impression, and thus could pay more.
Well, they claim their computer is about as powerful as a cat's brain; but based on what I've read, it appears to be more of a simulation of neurons then anything intelligent.
But "fast" is an interesting item. Though a GHz CPU can certainly rip through the calculations, we've only gotten recently to the point where computer-driven machinery can hop on one leg. My kids could do that with measly kHz organic brains after less than 1/2 dozen years. Of course the organic models are a stunning model of parallelism and distributed processing. Even Kurzweil doesn't think we're at parity, yet.
I would agree that once you've "trained" and AI and have it doing useful interactions, you could checkpoint its state, and use that to preload a new copy. Do they both get to vote? Talk about packing the polls.
I think you're missing my point: Philosophers think we're close to AI because we have a better understanding of the human mind; yet they're full of $#1t because they can't explain the human mind in a way that's programmable.
I'm being a little facetious, but not entirely. Let's assume we're building these neural nets, modeled after real brains.
You're already leaps and bounds ahead of some of the philosophers with regard to actually creating a working AI. Some of them work by trying to better comprehend human intelligence and wouldn't even talk about neural nets.
Why should we expect them to spring like Athena from Zeus' head, fully adult and fully Turing-capable.
Some do; but I think there's an implicit assumption that fast computers and "perfect digital copies" will help.
I occasionally attend AI meetings in my local area. The problem with AI development is that too many "experts" don't understand engineering; or programming. Many of today's AI "experts" are really philosophers who hijacked the term AI in their search to better understand human consciousness. Their problem is that, while their AI studies might help them understand the human brain a little better; they are unable to transfer their knowledge about intelligence into computable algorithms.
Frankly, a better understanding of Man's psychology brings us no closer to AI. We need better and more powerful programming techniques in order to have AI; and philosophizing about how the human mind works isn't going to get us there.
The iPad is not a general-purpose computing device.
Only because its locked down. Remember that. Only because its locked down.
However, you can run pretty much any HTML 5 application; and HTML 5 is quite powerful. From a security standpoint, it's an interesting approach: Explicitly approve applications that can directly access the hardware, and give a powerful sandbox for other applications. I've been pretty happy with that approach on my iPhone, but it's because I don't want a phone with the security problems that are inherent to general-purpose computers.
Anyway, if you want a computer, there are plenty of general-purpose computers on the market.
Maybe we need to come up with a standard way of encrypting things, that our packet sniffers somehow know how to decode. Maybe even with a "relax the crypto" configuration flag we can throw during debug
It's called SSL, and you can bolt it on to any TCP-based application by setting up STunnel. The problem is that the "man in the middle attack" means that you need to jump through a bunch of hoops in order to prevent your ISP from decrypting and then re-crypting your traffic.
Frankly, I don't think 3D TV will catch on until we get decent systems that work without glasses. Until then, I anticipate that it'll be more of a novelty for enthusiasts.
Sometimes. Rental places tended to do it. I remember being able to rent a copy of Star Trek Generations 8-10 months before I could find a copy for sale.
And I promptly dubbed a copy of it. I suspect that people will do the digital equivalent (grab it off a torrent site) these days.
I'm not an expert, but my understanding is that the economics of VHS duplication were quite different then DVD printing. From what I understand, there really was scarcity for awhile.
"Oh, and the reason I prefer not to wear a uniform is so I can express myself."
What are you, 13?
I wore a tie as part of my uniform every day to high school. I hated it so much that I chose the ugliest ties possible to "express myself.". Once I entered the corporate world, it took me about a year to figure out how to express myself with the context of business casual. Even in restrictive dress environments, it's still possible to express one's self.
Slashdot Mirror
In my first internship, I worked with a QA team for a telephony hardware company. One of the tasks that we started, (and I stress started,) was a "Continuous Hours of Operation" test where we would run tests that were supposed to keep running for weeks or months in order to find bugs.
The first thing I did, to get comfortable with the APIs and testing hardware, was to write a simple program that picked up the phone, played some music, and then hung up. After about 5 minutes, my program kept crashing. Assuming that I was doing something wrong, (because I didn't know the API,) I asked for help.
It turns out my silly "pick up the phone and play music over and over again" test found a bug that had been eluding major engineers for a few years.
Perhaps all Toyota needs to do is take some of their simple unit tests and keep running them over and over without rebooting the firmware. Then they might reproduce the issue within a few days.
In short, how do you buy a computer these days?
Easy!
I walk into the Apple store and wave my credit card around, then I walk out with a nice shiny new computer!
Jokes aside, unless you're trying to build a super-computer, just get a laptop.
The only way to type is with your nose, using your tounge for the spacebar.
Unplug the network cable
Or, the submitter could contact Seagate or another drive manufacturer and ask what it would take to get a drive with special firmware that let him write 1's and 0's directly to the drive wherever he wanted. Basically, remove the intelligence on the drive.
Or just find out if there are test codes / commands that do the same thing.
If DDT were still in use, the Bald Eagle would be extinct, along with several other birds.
That's because our parents / grandparents were spraying it all over the countryside. Looking back, it was pretty irresponsible.
Unfortunately, DDT is the only thing that bedbugs and prevents re-infestations, and now that it's illegal, bedbugs are making a comeback. In the days of DDT, an exterminator could leave a coat of DDT that would kill eggs that hatch for the next few months. Today, the best we can do is bag a mattress and hope that we got rid of all of the eggs.
FYI, in the U.S., you can buy health insurance at a discount by joining either a freelancer's union or your local Chamber of Commerce
I took a quick look; I'm currently better off with COBRA from my previous employer.
I quit my job and I buy COBRA. It's not cheap.
Who remembers the article that floated around about a year ago about how Google manually tunes their search results. One of the manual things that they check is to ensure that Wikipedia articles are top links.
I have briefly encountered genetic programming but failed to take it into account, mainly because the examples I've encountered have highly specific problem domains which, while very useful, do not approach anything close to consciousness (though if that's what you mean by "life-like" I'd definitely check it out).
I wish I knew how to find the video; but 3d "life" simulations using genetic programming have created both bizarre and "normal" life inside of a computer. While the life wasn't "intelligent," it was reminiscent of simple aquatic life. These tend to fall under "artificial life" instead of "artificial intelligence."
I don't understand how we're supposed to go about creating it without first understanding it.
Have you ever looked into genetic programming? It can create some life-like programs that are too complicated for humans to comprehend. I see two schools of thought coming from this:
Either way, given that genetic programming can create some life-like programs, I find it difficult to accept or refute your argument.
Instead of advertising, why not find someone who needs a mechanical turk? For example, why not require that someone accessing the proxy perform some work items instead of interacting with an ad? These work items might be more valuable then an ad impression, and thus could pay more.
You could also consider prompting IE6 users to install ChromeFrame instead of completely ignoring them.
Well, they claim their computer is about as powerful as a cat's brain; but based on what I've read, it appears to be more of a simulation of neurons then anything intelligent.
But "fast" is an interesting item. Though a GHz CPU can certainly rip through the calculations, we've only gotten recently to the point where computer-driven machinery can hop on one leg. My kids could do that with measly kHz organic brains after less than 1/2 dozen years. Of course the organic models are a stunning model of parallelism and distributed processing. Even Kurzweil doesn't think we're at parity, yet. I would agree that once you've "trained" and AI and have it doing useful interactions, you could checkpoint its state, and use that to preload a new copy. Do they both get to vote? Talk about packing the polls.
I think you're missing my point: Philosophers think we're close to AI because we have a better understanding of the human mind; yet they're full of $#1t because they can't explain the human mind in a way that's programmable.
I'm being a little facetious, but not entirely. Let's assume we're building these neural nets, modeled after real brains.
You're already leaps and bounds ahead of some of the philosophers with regard to actually creating a working AI. Some of them work by trying to better comprehend human intelligence and wouldn't even talk about neural nets.
Why should we expect them to spring like Athena from Zeus' head, fully adult and fully Turing-capable.
Some do; but I think there's an implicit assumption that fast computers and "perfect digital copies" will help.
I occasionally attend AI meetings in my local area. The problem with AI development is that too many "experts" don't understand engineering; or programming. Many of today's AI "experts" are really philosophers who hijacked the term AI in their search to better understand human consciousness. Their problem is that, while their AI studies might help them understand the human brain a little better; they are unable to transfer their knowledge about intelligence into computable algorithms.
Frankly, a better understanding of Man's psychology brings us no closer to AI. We need better and more powerful programming techniques in order to have AI; and philosophizing about how the human mind works isn't going to get us there.
The iPad is not a general-purpose computing device. Only because its locked down. Remember that. Only because its locked down.
However, you can run pretty much any HTML 5 application; and HTML 5 is quite powerful. From a security standpoint, it's an interesting approach: Explicitly approve applications that can directly access the hardware, and give a powerful sandbox for other applications. I've been pretty happy with that approach on my iPhone, but it's because I don't want a phone with the security problems that are inherent to general-purpose computers.
Anyway, if you want a computer, there are plenty of general-purpose computers on the market.
And a new pdf viewer window is exactly what you want in this case. (Unless your browser is your OS, of course...)
No, I don't want to leave the browser. That's why it's called a "browser." You can browse lots of different kinds of files.
Maybe we need to come up with a standard way of encrypting things, that our packet sniffers somehow know how to decode. Maybe even with a "relax the crypto" configuration flag we can throw during debug
It's called SSL, and you can bolt it on to any TCP-based application by setting up STunnel. The problem is that the "man in the middle attack" means that you need to jump through a bunch of hoops in order to prevent your ISP from decrypting and then re-crypting your traffic.
Frankly, I don't think 3D TV will catch on until we get decent systems that work without glasses. Until then, I anticipate that it'll be more of a novelty for enthusiasts.
Sometimes. Rental places tended to do it. I remember being able to rent a copy of Star Trek Generations 8-10 months before I could find a copy for sale. And I promptly dubbed a copy of it. I suspect that people will do the digital equivalent (grab it off a torrent site) these days.
I'm not an expert, but my understanding is that the economics of VHS duplication were quite different then DVD printing. From what I understand, there really was scarcity for awhile.
"Oh, and the reason I prefer not to wear a uniform is so I can express myself." What are you, 13?
I wore a tie as part of my uniform every day to high school. I hated it so much that I chose the ugliest ties possible to "express myself.". Once I entered the corporate world, it took me about a year to figure out how to express myself with the context of business casual. Even in restrictive dress environments, it's still possible to express one's self.
So how many joints does it take to get a mutation?