So Microsoft tells something about the next version of Windows not long after the people have noticed that their current version isn't all that it's made up to be?
What it could do is run a simulation of the world in faster than real time, and use the result as a prediction. But then you get into chaos theory territory. The real world is very complex, and (currently at least) impossible to simulate precisely. Chaos theory says that small inaccuracies will totally screw up the simulation in the long run. Just look at long-term weather forecasts. This project seems to be nothing but a long-term weather forecast for geopolitics. I remember a similar project being underway, but can't remember a name or site. I will remain skeptical about this.
I was saying that it'd be unethical to make slaves out of sentient robots or computer programs.
So a truck-driving AI wouldn't need to be sentient, it'd just need to be good at driving trucks. The sex doll AI wouldn't need to be sentient, it'd just have to act glad that its user lasted three whole minutes.
But for a sentient AI, it would be unethical to enslave it, i.e. to have it be someone's property. It'd be a person, after all.
Anyway, this whole discussion is rather pointless. It is a really big can of worms, but it'll probably stay firmly shut for the forseeable future.
Once every few years there's someone who says we'll be having sex with robots in the future, but since a few years, we've achieved the knowledge to make Futurama jokes in response, which is a big improvement to the normal chuckles.
Or what about sex with aliens? "I've made it with an alien babe. Inform the men!"
Wow, you certainly take such a stupid topic seriously. (No offence, but this topic needs Futurama jokes. This researcher just wants attention, or a sex robot, or both. I think he needs to watch the middle school hygiene propaganda tape.)
A clone is a different person with the same DNA. The brain and mind are different, so it's a different person. Same for an identical twin. The DNA might be identical, but it's a different person.
An intelligent robot could make backup copies of its mind, so if it got killed, it could be restored from the most recent backup, reducing the effect of death to some memory loss, similar to being knocked out.
Shutting down a hypothetical sentient AI with possibility of restoration would be like cryogenic sleep for humans. There's the question of whether it's done voluntarily, and whether there's a date for reawakening it, and whether the mind state is being stored properly or destroyed. If you were to shut down the AI for an indeterminate time involuntary, it would be murder, especially if the AI were recognised as a person.
Putting a sentient AI inside a sex doll would seem to be unethical to me, similar to sex slavery today. You'd have to let them roam free, which means all the current problems Slashdotters face would remain unsolved.
I think sentient AIs should have much the same rights as humans, since the fact that they're sentient makes them people. One exception might be the right to vote, since articifial beings can easily abuse that by making copies of themselves, and swamping the voting booths and putting Nixon in charge again. (See? Futurama jokes!)
So, should we make sentient AIs? Why not? It would be really interesting. Should we put them in human-like bodies? Why? Why make articial humans? We've already got over six billion sentient beings in human bodies. Why not put them in vehicles or space probes? Imagine a Mars rover that can drive itself without any lag and that can determine the most interesting place to visit by itself! (The current rovers have some degree of autonomy, but it's still rather primitive.) Or imagine a Beowulf cluster (obligatory) running a really smart AI (let's call it a Mind, shall we?) that could design and invent all kinds of cool stuff (except for flying cars of course). That beats plastic humans any day of the week, IMHO.
Maybe they suspect he is actually looking for assistance in retrieving his significant fortune from the security company, where it is guarded by a mad chair-throwing bald man.
The hypothetical human-equivalent AI program would be able to save its state regularly, so your hypothetical 12 year old daughter flipping the power switch would result in a small amount of "memory loss", equivalent to knocking out a human. A violent act, but not murder.
There is a bug in one package so that it doesn't remove a particular file when the package is removed, and that will cause this to fail, but this procedure worked for me on a fresh install.
you are also ignoring the hundreds of millions of people who already have a windows license and could save money by transferring this license to their new computer.
That's not true, because those hundreds of millions of people have an OEM Windows licence, which means it's not transferrable to another computer. If the licence is actually enforceable, that is...
Slashdot Mirror
So Microsoft tells something about the next version of Windows not long after the people have noticed that their current version isn't all that it's made up to be?
What it could do is run a simulation of the world in faster than real time, and use the result as a prediction. But then you get into chaos theory territory. The real world is very complex, and (currently at least) impossible to simulate precisely. Chaos theory says that small inaccuracies will totally screw up the simulation in the long run. Just look at long-term weather forecasts. This project seems to be nothing but a long-term weather forecast for geopolitics. I remember a similar project being underway, but can't remember a name or site. I will remain skeptical about this.
But it's magic! It's a computer program, which is magic to most people.
It would be even simpler to put those membranes on top of smoke stacks of factories, that way, they could isolate the CO2 near the big sources.
The many small sources would be a lot harder, of course.
What does the first amendment have to do with spamming?
Huh? -1, Funny?
I was saying that it'd be unethical to make slaves out of sentient robots or computer programs.
So a truck-driving AI wouldn't need to be sentient, it'd just need to be good at driving trucks. The sex doll AI wouldn't need to be sentient, it'd just have to act glad that its user lasted three whole minutes.
But for a sentient AI, it would be unethical to enslave it, i.e. to have it be someone's property. It'd be a person, after all.
Anyway, this whole discussion is rather pointless. It is a really big can of worms, but it'll probably stay firmly shut for the forseeable future.
Once every few years there's someone who says we'll be having sex with robots in the future, but since a few years, we've achieved the knowledge to make Futurama jokes in response, which is a big improvement to the normal chuckles.
Or what about sex with aliens? "I've made it with an alien babe. Inform the men!"
That's why I used the hyphen.
Wow, you certainly take such a stupid topic seriously. (No offence, but this topic needs Futurama jokes. This researcher just wants attention, or a sex robot, or both. I think he needs to watch the middle school hygiene propaganda tape.)
A clone is a different person with the same DNA. The brain and mind are different, so it's a different person. Same for an identical twin. The DNA might be identical, but it's a different person.
An intelligent robot could make backup copies of its mind, so if it got killed, it could be restored from the most recent backup, reducing the effect of death to some memory loss, similar to being knocked out.
Shutting down a hypothetical sentient AI with possibility of restoration would be like cryogenic sleep for humans. There's the question of whether it's done voluntarily, and whether there's a date for reawakening it, and whether the mind state is being stored properly or destroyed. If you were to shut down the AI for an indeterminate time involuntary, it would be murder, especially if the AI were recognised as a person.
Putting a sentient AI inside a sex doll would seem to be unethical to me, similar to sex slavery today. You'd have to let them roam free, which means all the current problems Slashdotters face would remain unsolved.
I think sentient AIs should have much the same rights as humans, since the fact that they're sentient makes them people. One exception might be the right to vote, since articifial beings can easily abuse that by making copies of themselves, and swamping the voting booths and putting Nixon in charge again. (See? Futurama jokes!)
So, should we make sentient AIs? Why not? It would be really interesting.
Should we put them in human-like bodies? Why? Why make articial humans? We've already got over six billion sentient beings in human bodies. Why not put them in vehicles or space probes? Imagine a Mars rover that can drive itself without any lag and that can determine the most interesting place to visit by itself! (The current rovers have some degree of autonomy, but it's still rather primitive.) Or imagine a Beowulf cluster (obligatory) running a really smart AI (let's call it a Mind, shall we?) that could design and invent all kinds of cool stuff (except for flying cars of course). That beats plastic humans any day of the week, IMHO.
Maybe they suspect he is actually looking for assistance in retrieving his significant fortune from the security company, where it is guarded by a mad chair-throwing bald man.
Free Robot Sex
Do you have stairs in your house?
But they won't know they're toasters...
The hypothetical human-equivalent AI program would be able to save its state regularly, so your hypothetical 12 year old daughter flipping the power switch would result in a small amount of "memory loss", equivalent to knocking out a human. A violent act, but not murder.
No, it would just prevent the Slashdot trolls from producing babies, which isn't much of a change at all.
My god, he hasn't seen the video!
How to install custom Nvidia drivers on Ubuntu Feisty: (I figured this out because I had to, and it took me some time to do so.)
- Install Ubuntu using the Safe Graphics option
- sudo apt-get remove --purge nvidia*
- sudo apt-get install linux-headers-generic build-essential gcc server-xorg-dev pkg-config
- Run the Nvidia driver file.
There is a bug in one package so that it doesn't remove a particular file when the package is removed, and that will cause this to fail, but this procedure worked for me on a fresh install.$98 thinking
$2 fixing problem
========== +
$100 total
To me it's a warning label that it won't work with wine/Cedega...
Gamma.
It looks kind of boring to me, but then again, Star Wars is kind of boring to me.
I mean it looks like there's a lot of repetitive assembly required, with lots of similar ship sections.
This man is a nuisance to the public!
It's about time!
It's almost correct, so my guess is that this is a rounding error.
IMHO Jack Thompson is a nuisance to the public himself.
That's not true, because those hundreds of millions of people have an OEM Windows licence, which means it's not transferrable to another computer. If the licence is actually enforceable, that is...