Wrong argument for the right cause. I lived on that income because I was an immigrant postdoc (well a bit higher, but in a very expensive metropolitan area). I had to sell my body once for a medical experiment to finance a purchase of a new better flat for my ex because I wanted the best for my children.
$20,300 is a terrible terrible terrible income in USA.
The point is that it HAS TO be. Without experiencing extreme poverty (comparatively) I would not be motivated to find a better job in industry to leave all of that behind.
That's why you need a Lorenz curve that is exponential, not a straight line.
You are gleefully repeating the words of an idiot Leary complaining about "the language" why using the same propaganda language from the other side: "late capitalism"?
Thus they cannot even in principle have motivation to learn. A first step to a true AI would be a system that is actual danger of destruction in a hostile environment
But before that, it must somehow know what "destruction in a hostile environment" mean. It must have this "fear".
Realization of own mortality and a resulting fear of termination of the state "self" is one of the most fundamental and earth-shuttering moments in childhood (in a country with dominating, soul crushing atheism, of course) . That moment when suddenly it gets to you that there will be a time when you will be no more, that it will be an endless sleep from which you will never will wake up (I do not believe in that anymore, so my point is only historic) and the fear of this inevitable unknown is the source number one while people are able to believe in God. Death is a central point of religion. Religion is all about personal death.
In order to have this self-preservation (by the way, clearly children do not have enough of it, so it is not an evolutionary thing, it's a teachable moment) coded AI needs to achieve much more: the realization of mortality.
The comment your replied to in a very dismissive way is actually one of the best/. comments I have seen in a while. Clearly written, insightful. Solid +5 material.
Your definition of intelligence is clearly, if taken verbatim, your own achievement (I am saying this in positive way), given the google search.
The dictionary definition is
the ability to acquire and apply knowledge and skills.
I am very curious about your modifications. They seem to be quite interesting to discuss. You added "novelty" and you added "initial", but you also reduce it to eliminate a learning loop ("acquire knowledge")...
Thanks for your comment. I think it echos my more general thoughts on the nature of human learning, not only computer learning.
Humans suffer from explanatory reductionism based on the dominant technological paradigm of the time. We try to explain the entire world using things which we know well. When we were an agricultural society, the world was a flat disk held up by giant pack animals. When Newton's theories revolutionized science and the industrial revolution revolutionized the economy, we saw the universe as a clockwork mechanism. After the computer revolution, we think everything can be reduced to some form of computation (and some posit that we are in fact living in a computer simulation).
People nowadays are very scientistic, we are brainwashed to believe that science (at least, eventually) will be able to solve all problems. What people do not realize is that science does not deal with ALL material world around us, but only the one that exhibits some sort of repetition. Science does not apply to ALL phenomena, but only to REPEATABLE/REPEATING phenomena. That is connected to our nature: to learn, we have to repeat. Repetition is a fundamental inevitable part of learning.
We can't scientifically access "miracles" events that happen only once. If "miracles" happen on a regular basis they either become a matter of science and stop being miracles or we discover that they are result of the fraud.
A lot of events around us are part of repeating patterns starting from night sky (we were very lucky to have a sky that is not constantly clouded like on Venus, otherwise we would not have physics) and ending with all kinds of events that surround us on every day basis. Nevertheless some very important personal events, like personal marriage or personal death, or choice of the field, are unique in our experience. Sure, we can find patterns there as well, but not all of it and when the push comes to shove ("Do you take MAPKinase as your lawfully wedded husband?" "Yes" or "no") there is plenty of room for that irrational leap of faith that all of us must take.
There will be things, very important things, that will be left to our faith.
>organic brains combine patterns in new and different ways that AI researchers haven't been able to crack. Whatever it is, it's more than just matching patterns.
As article noted, current level of training of AI is no different from Pavlovian (I do not know why it is called Skinner) (Pavlov was wrong in the interpretation of his technique, but the technique obviously worked, but let's not quibble about this) and humans during their childhood development are trained in a similar way: we are rewarded by good marks if we solve problems correctly. There is even backpropagation when the teacher analyses our wrong output, finds a place in our logic where it fails and tries to come up with more exercises to train our logic.
But look how differently that works, in much more complex way, on much higher level even with children.
Very little children already have the ability to recognize faces with stunning (compared to AI) precision. Heck, even mammals can do that.
Noam Chomsky developed his theory of Universal Grammar that claims that we actually born with some predisposition to languages.
The theory proposes that there is an innate, genetically determined language faculty that knows these rules, making it easier and faster for children to learn to speak than it otherwise would be
Unfortunately, it seems like it is not falsifiable (big sin in my book) theory (I wish scientists apply this hard look to many more theories like all theories of origin of all kind of stuff we observe, but that would make dozens of thousands of scientists jobless).
It is clear though that if we could find some internal lower level blocks of intelligence in humans from which we start our learning, we could try to emulate it in computers.
Period. As a legal immigrant that came on O1 visa I hate the lazy asses who crawled into the first world from their shitholes as "fiances" or crawled under the fence.
From the other hand. Every single foreigner who decided "screw this shit, I am going to America" immediately becomes a spiritual American in many ways more American that people born here. He is courageous, he is enterprising enough to deserve a shot at the pursuit of happiness, to climb to that city on the hill.
That does not mean of course that we should just grant this shot to every single guy who is willing to move to US.
That's why we need a balance in the immigration. The selection. Selection means control. Illegal immigration is unchecked and uncontrolled. Mara Salvatrucha is a very real threat to American way of life.
My motto is: never subscribe to anything if there is an alternative way, so I always pick the Free Shipping option (usually arrives in 1-2 weeks).
Half of the time a very expected thing happens: it arrives significantly earlier.
The reason for that is that the delivery times for Free Shipping are artificially exaggerated to cover potential delays further than required by business.
Nobody is going to store your items longer than necessary because as Quentin Tarantino said: "This ain't storage for Amazon items"
Ditch Prime. Use free shipping when offered, use cheapest shipping always.
>That's how rent control should work, not for every Monica's grandma, but for people who actually required to live in Upper East side by the nature of their job.
Demand of human residents is limited, demand of corporations is practically unlimited.
The way you described imaginary paradise in the inflamed brains of insane rabid libertarians works.
In the real world we have been living for 100 years, you always need regulations.
In thiis case, the regulations should be quotas for residents and some sort of rent control.
In older and saner times blue collar stuff lived on company or building premises.
That's how rent control should work, not for every Monica's grandma, but for people who actually required to live in Upper East side by the nature of their job.
The rest of blue collar should commute two hours a day like metropolitan areas in the rest of the world.
Slashdot Mirror
>who have a mean income of $20,300
Wrong argument for the right cause. I lived on that income because I was an immigrant postdoc (well a bit higher, but in a very expensive metropolitan area). I had to sell my body once for a medical experiment to finance a purchase of a new better flat for my ex because I wanted the best for my children.
$20,300 is a terrible terrible terrible income in USA.
The point is that it HAS TO be. Without experiencing extreme poverty (comparatively) I would not be motivated to find a better job in industry to leave all of that behind.
That's why you need a Lorenz curve that is exponential, not a straight line.
To motivate people.
> The Yellow Vests
Screw jilet jaunes
People write books because they are graphomaniacs.
Write a software program instead. Every day. Every day write a new software program.
Your book is useless entertainment.
Die.
If they open their OS to third party software manufacturers I am ok with it.
AdBlock will come promptly and squash the ads.
The problem is closed OS.
Can I write my own program that runs?
Can I edit the file to add advertisement URLs?
LG televisions do that ad thing too, BTW.
we have, we know, alternatives that are comprehensible by humans.
The stuff that matters in capitalism, free trade, is known to be working for thousands of years. It's very simple, but it does not have to be.
What if we have the same result: reward for better product in a different way?
What if we use machine learning algorithms to establish the price of products? Eventually.
You are gleefully repeating the words of an idiot Leary complaining about "the language" why using the same propaganda language from the other side: "late capitalism"?
> One of the objectives of the experiment might be to bury such insights as the comment you referred to.
Slashdot system actually buries entropy bullshit quite nicely, all one needs to do is raise the bar above +1 when looking at comments.
But before that, it must somehow know what "destruction in a hostile environment" mean. It must have this "fear".
Realization of own mortality and a resulting fear of termination of the state "self" is one of the most fundamental and earth-shuttering moments in childhood (in a country with dominating, soul crushing atheism, of course) . That moment when suddenly it gets to you that there will be a time when you will be no more, that it will be an endless sleep from which you will never will wake up (I do not believe in that anymore, so my point is only historic) and the fear of this inevitable unknown is the source number one while people are able to believe in God. Death is a central point of religion. Religion is all about personal death.
In order to have this self-preservation (by the way, clearly children do not have enough of it, so it is not an evolutionary thing, it's a teachable moment) coded AI needs to achieve much more: the realization of mortality.
The whole thing makes it look impossible.
The comment your replied to in a very dismissive way is actually one of the best /. comments I have seen in a while. Clearly written, insightful. Solid +5 material.
Your definition of intelligence is clearly, if taken verbatim, your own achievement (I am saying this in positive way), given the google search.
The dictionary definition is
I am very curious about your modifications. They seem to be quite interesting to discuss. You added "novelty" and you added "initial", but you also reduce it to eliminate a learning loop ("acquire knowledge")...
Could you please comment on this? Thanks.
Thanks for your comment. I think it echos my more general thoughts on the nature of human learning, not only computer learning.
People nowadays are very scientistic, we are brainwashed to believe that science (at least, eventually) will be able to solve all problems. What people do not realize is that science does not deal with ALL material world around us, but only the one that exhibits some sort of repetition. Science does not apply to ALL phenomena, but only to REPEATABLE/REPEATING phenomena. That is connected to our nature: to learn, we have to repeat. Repetition is a fundamental inevitable part of learning.
We can't scientifically access "miracles" events that happen only once. If "miracles" happen on a regular basis they either become a matter of science and stop being miracles or we discover that they are result of the fraud.
A lot of events around us are part of repeating patterns starting from night sky (we were very lucky to have a sky that is not constantly clouded like on Venus, otherwise we would not have physics) and ending with all kinds of events that surround us on every day basis. Nevertheless some very important personal events, like personal marriage or personal death, or choice of the field, are unique in our experience. Sure, we can find patterns there as well, but not all of it and when the push comes to shove ("Do you take MAPKinase as your lawfully wedded husband?" "Yes" or "no") there is plenty of room for that irrational leap of faith that all of us must take.
There will be things, very important things, that will be left to our faith.
>organic brains combine patterns in new and different ways that AI researchers haven't been able to crack. Whatever it is, it's more than just matching patterns.
As article noted, current level of training of AI is no different from Pavlovian (I do not know why it is called Skinner) (Pavlov was wrong in the interpretation of his technique, but the technique obviously worked, but let's not quibble about this) and humans during their childhood development are trained in a similar way: we are rewarded by good marks if we solve problems correctly. There is even backpropagation when the teacher analyses our wrong output, finds a place in our logic where it fails and tries to come up with more exercises to train our logic.
But look how differently that works, in much more complex way, on much higher level even with children.
Very little children already have the ability to recognize faces with stunning (compared to AI) precision. Heck, even mammals can do that.
Noam Chomsky developed his theory of Universal Grammar that claims that we actually born with some predisposition to languages.
Unfortunately, it seems like it is not falsifiable (big sin in my book) theory (I wish scientists apply this hard look to many more theories like all theories of origin of all kind of stuff we observe, but that would make dozens of thousands of scientists jobless).
It is clear though that if we could find some internal lower level blocks of intelligence in humans from which we start our learning, we could try to emulate it in computers.
PS. It's hard to talk about unknown unknown. :-)
Exacto Mundo. Nothing to add here. /thread
You know why your question is rhetorical? Beause it's the only sane choice between blood boiling and rhetorical.
... or shut it the heck down.
Period. As a legal immigrant that came on O1 visa I hate the lazy asses who crawled into the first world from their shitholes as "fiances" or crawled under the fence.
From the other hand. Every single foreigner who decided "screw this shit, I am going to America" immediately becomes a spiritual American in many ways more American that people born here. He is courageous, he is enterprising enough to deserve a shot at the pursuit of happiness, to climb to that city on the hill.
That does not mean of course that we should just grant this shot to every single guy who is willing to move to US.
That's why we need a balance in the immigration. The selection. Selection means control. Illegal immigration is unchecked and uncontrolled. Mara Salvatrucha is a very real threat to American way of life.
SO:
Wall or GTFO.
My motto is: never subscribe to anything if there is an alternative way, so I always pick the Free Shipping option (usually arrives in 1-2 weeks).
Half of the time a very expected thing happens: it arrives significantly earlier.
The reason for that is that the delivery times for Free Shipping are artificially exaggerated to cover potential delays further than required by business.
Nobody is going to store your items longer than necessary because as Quentin Tarantino said: "This ain't storage for Amazon items"
Ditch Prime. Use free shipping when offered, use cheapest shipping always.
Are you sure you are getting enough feedbacks on your cards or gift wrap?
Actually, when I wrote my comment, I did not realize we are not talking about special toys that spy on kids for parents to make sure kids are saved.
They are just plain vanilla creepy spy toys for kids.
Well, thank you for the pathos, but besides the function you described do not forget the function written on the box.
Of all the things that spy on you the thing where spying actually does some good is certainly not the worst
Get lost, imbecile
You jumped at rent control, but I wrote:
>That's how rent control should work, not for every Monica's grandma, but for people who actually required to live in Upper East side by the nature of their job.
It is for me. Life is too short to spend on personal amusement.
No. Thats not how supply and demand works.
Demand of human residents is limited, demand of corporations is practically unlimited.
The way you described imaginary paradise in the inflamed brains of insane rabid libertarians works.
In the real world we have been living for 100 years, you always need regulations.
In thiis case, the regulations should be quotas for residents and some sort of rent control.
In older and saner times blue collar stuff lived on company or building premises.
That's how rent control should work, not for every Monica's grandma, but for people who actually required to live in Upper East side by the nature of their job.
The rest of blue collar should commute two hours a day like metropolitan areas in the rest of the world.
Dude, you should write for money. I envy to death people who can write so well.
What is practical application of this if not for cryptography