I made claims, you waved your hands dismissively without actually making a claim.
You didn't convince me that you understood my point, and you didn't convince me that you had an alternate point.
I'll program some understanding in C for you, as an example.
int foo = 0;
The code understands that there is a piece of integer data, and it understands that the value is 0. This is because the engineers who designed the computers built them to have operations specific to a defined concept called an "integer," and then the language designers used that same understanding to define the language. And the compiler authors also understand the defined concept of an integer, so when you compile the code above as part of an application, now your application has the understanding of that data value baked in. By the humans.
Stop engaging in mystical anthropomorphism when you see words like "CS."
When you see low GDP per capita, but also a low poverty rate, it usually means most of the people are successfully living a traditional rural lifestyle, not that they are in abject poverty.
Damaging the local environment for tourism risks destroying their traditional lifestyle, and generating massive poverty. It also risks urbanizing the poverty and creating deep suffering that lasts generations, and totally erases the local traditional lifestyle.
"Common sense" is code for, "shit I don't understand, but that I have a traditional received response for."
Of course computers don't have it, those are exactly the idiotic mistakes that computers are better at avoiding than humans. Why would human engineers design those behaviors into the system?
"Common sense" is certainly, unquestionably, not a synonym for "general intelligence." "Common sense" is where you don't even attempt to apply general intelligence, you instead apply a pattern known by rote and identified by sight.
If engineers wanted computers to have "common sense," they'd design them to. Everything a computer does is a logical pattern designed for it by humans. The computer is not a person, it does not have free will, anything it does is the act of human designers magnified by the machine they built.
When we learn to define and measure general intelligence, then we can start programming the computers to have it. It is really that simple once you subtract the mystical anthropomorphism.
Also, whoever is running this mess, it made me wait to post this correction even though I've only commented once today.
If you don't let us comment, you'll stop getting the page views, too. And you'll actually go to zero comments from the affected users on most stories, because if we forced to leave after a couple minutes using the site, it might be days before we make it back.
No, get real, if a shoe company or box company started losing money permanently do you think they'd stay open for giggles
If the shoes or boxes are in fact generating nationalist giggles, then yes.
That would remain true if their gross sales were actually low. If you put a camera in people's faces, do they pretend to like it? Then yes, easy call. They would do it.
Why is it usually a person who wants Virtue as a Math Person who doesn't understand what symbols mean next to numbers?
Oh, right, because that person only ever used math in school, and they never had to find out that the notation isn't actually standardized, it merely follows local convention, and actual use of math in the real world requires being very flexible about notation systems.
The joke would be a reasonable joke iff math notation was standardized. But it isn't.
This is not only what you should expect before you sign up for a subscription to a store (that is open to the public), it is also what you deserve for encouraging them to treat you this way.
If you want a quality computer, and you're ready to pay for it, buy a business computer, not a computer whose marketing targets your sense of Virtue as an Art'ist.
It sounds good, but what is actually locked in by it? You can't use the browser on other platforms anyway, so having OS hooks doesn't do shit to assist lock-in.
If you're so attached to one browser that you've locked yourself to it, that affects you the same regardless of how it is implemented.
Because when MS said that shit during their anti-trust trial, people didn't believe them.
People thought they just added some hooks that didn't do anything, so that they could say it. They didn't think they really believed it was a good idea, or that they were going to not only do it for real but still be doing it twenty years later.
It is funny because there are already recipes that require leftovers, like chop suey. The name is a westernization of "tsap seui" from Toisan, which means "miscellaneous leftovers."
The vast majority of the time, leftover ingredients can (and should probably be) made into a generic stir-fry or a bread, depending on if you have a bunch of flour or not.
The situation itself doesn't really call for a "recipe," it calls for a cooking technique that is flexible and a style of dish that is accommodating to a variety of flavor components.
"It" didn't imagine anything, but just as many things were still imagined. They simply gave credit to the machine, instead of the machine's builder. That is quaint and animistic, but it is also just a word game.
It isn't the case that in other cases of engineering the average person understands it was the programmers and engineers who "did" some task by building and programming a computer; instead they say the computer itself did the task!
So this is exactly the same indirection as if there was no AI.
Because go and chess have measurable complexity, so they can better gauge their progress.
Also, there are no externalities, so they can better measure their progress.
You want to put it to work doing something practical, you have to get some PHB to agree, and then that PHB will add externalities, and change both the instructions and the externalities as the results come in. That's all well and good for whatever they use they want to put it to, but it doesn't work for building the theoretical framework. And you want the programming libraries to be based on a theoretical framework.
Obviously, 1 + 1 = the programming libraries are still too difficult to work with for PHB-led projects. This is why it is used for practical stuff, but at the level of trade secrets; only the people with high quality teams and certain classes of problems are going to be doing this in practice already, and it still so hard to put together (from management perspective, using a big team that includes turnover) that it is just siloed. Once there is enough competition in those uses, then they'll start extracting their toolsets into libraries and leveraging that to become big players. Then it will become accessible to the masses.
Slashdot Mirror
I made claims, you waved your hands dismissively without actually making a claim.
You didn't convince me that you understood my point, and you didn't convince me that you had an alternate point.
I'll program some understanding in C for you, as an example.
int foo = 0;
The code understands that there is a piece of integer data, and it understands that the value is 0. This is because the engineers who designed the computers built them to have operations specific to a defined concept called an "integer," and then the language designers used that same understanding to define the language. And the compiler authors also understand the defined concept of an integer, so when you compile the code above as part of an application, now your application has the understanding of that data value baked in. By the humans.
Stop engaging in mystical anthropomorphism when you see words like "CS."
Please add some kind of content when you reply, don't merely rephrase a tiny subset of what I said.
If you didn't understand that I said that already, why are you even replying to something where you didn't understand the point?
In the US ~15% are under the poverty line.
Guam is 23%. Puerto Rico was 43% (2013-2017)
When you see low GDP per capita, but also a low poverty rate, it usually means most of the people are successfully living a traditional rural lifestyle, not that they are in abject poverty.
Damaging the local environment for tourism risks destroying their traditional lifestyle, and generating massive poverty. It also risks urbanizing the poverty and creating deep suffering that lasts generations, and totally erases the local traditional lifestyle.
"Common sense" is code for, "shit I don't understand, but that I have a traditional received response for."
Of course computers don't have it, those are exactly the idiotic mistakes that computers are better at avoiding than humans. Why would human engineers design those behaviors into the system?
"Common sense" is certainly, unquestionably, not a synonym for "general intelligence." "Common sense" is where you don't even attempt to apply general intelligence, you instead apply a pattern known by rote and identified by sight.
If engineers wanted computers to have "common sense," they'd design them to. Everything a computer does is a logical pattern designed for it by humans. The computer is not a person, it does not have free will, anything it does is the act of human designers magnified by the machine they built.
When we learn to define and measure general intelligence, then we can start programming the computers to have it. It is really that simple once you subtract the mystical anthropomorphism.
"food carts"
Also, whoever is running this mess, it made me wait to post this correction even though I've only commented once today.
If you don't let us comment, you'll stop getting the page views, too. And you'll actually go to zero comments from the affected users on most stories, because if we forced to leave after a couple minutes using the site, it might be days before we make it back.
According to the summary, the places discussed are still "full of food vendors."
And here in the US, food cards are still a growth niche.
Stupidest ad ever. "Hi, we didn't have a story, so we just talked about food and lied in the headline."
I can haz this year? You not finished yet?
Can I keep it?
It is an advertisement. So by "us" he means, people that matter. Real humans. Virtuous Citizens.
No, get real, if a shoe company or box company started losing money permanently do you think they'd stay open for giggles
If the shoes or boxes are in fact generating nationalist giggles, then yes.
That would remain true if their gross sales were actually low. If you put a camera in people's faces, do they pretend to like it? Then yes, easy call. They would do it.
An extrapolation is definitely not a statistic.
You might want to figure out what is going on before you decide on a pattern of aggressive verbal complaint.
Why is it usually a person who wants Virtue as a Math Person who doesn't understand what symbols mean next to numbers?
Oh, right, because that person only ever used math in school, and they never had to find out that the notation isn't actually standardized, it merely follows local convention, and actual use of math in the real world requires being very flexible about notation systems.
The joke would be a reasonable joke iff math notation was standardized. But it isn't.
This is not only what you should expect before you sign up for a subscription to a store (that is open to the public), it is also what you deserve for encouraging them to treat you this way.
It's an adjective. Not a noun.
You're welcome.
This is the problem with incels; most of them don't even know what a woman is. I'll give you a hint; they're not a type of French horn.
They're like human Ents; they're not even sure what the women look like, so they wouldn't know it if they did find them.
There was a time in the past when I could hail a free ride using a handheld CB radio faster than calling for a taxi.
And since it was real "ride-sharing," I only had to pay if I had some gas money. After all, we were just people using technology for sharing.
It improves the call quality, too, in most cases.
... "unlocked" ... loaded into the device that you can't remove.
Unlocked doesn't do anything for you unless you're going to replace the OS.
What else would it even mean?
If you want a quality computer, and you're ready to pay for it, buy a business computer, not a computer whose marketing targets your sense of Virtue as an Art'ist.
Ease back on the sauce, dude. You can't even tell if you're coming or going anymore, or if you took yourself with you.
That's what "it just works" always meant; it just works, or it doesn't, there is nothing you can do to help.
The phrase is more of a code about not being able to service it yourself than it is an actual claim about features or uptime.
It sounds good, but what is actually locked in by it? You can't use the browser on other platforms anyway, so having OS hooks doesn't do shit to assist lock-in.
If you're so attached to one browser that you've locked yourself to it, that affects you the same regardless of how it is implemented.
Your PC won't boot, leaving your basement pitch black.
You are likely to be eaten by agrue.
Because when MS said that shit during their anti-trust trial, people didn't believe them.
People thought they just added some hooks that didn't do anything, so that they could say it. They didn't think they really believed it was a good idea, or that they were going to not only do it for real but still be doing it twenty years later.
It is funny because there are already recipes that require leftovers, like chop suey. The name is a westernization of "tsap seui" from Toisan, which means "miscellaneous leftovers."
The vast majority of the time, leftover ingredients can (and should probably be) made into a generic stir-fry or a bread, depending on if you have a bunch of flour or not.
The situation itself doesn't really call for a "recipe," it calls for a cooking technique that is flexible and a style of dish that is accommodating to a variety of flavor components.
"It" didn't imagine anything, but just as many things were still imagined. They simply gave credit to the machine, instead of the machine's builder. That is quaint and animistic, but it is also just a word game.
It isn't the case that in other cases of engineering the average person understands it was the programmers and engineers who "did" some task by building and programming a computer; instead they say the computer itself did the task!
So this is exactly the same indirection as if there was no AI.
TLDR; Ur rong
Because go and chess have measurable complexity, so they can better gauge their progress.
Also, there are no externalities, so they can better measure their progress.
You want to put it to work doing something practical, you have to get some PHB to agree, and then that PHB will add externalities, and change both the instructions and the externalities as the results come in. That's all well and good for whatever they use they want to put it to, but it doesn't work for building the theoretical framework. And you want the programming libraries to be based on a theoretical framework.
Obviously, 1 + 1 = the programming libraries are still too difficult to work with for PHB-led projects. This is why it is used for practical stuff, but at the level of trade secrets; only the people with high quality teams and certain classes of problems are going to be doing this in practice already, and it still so hard to put together (from management perspective, using a big team that includes turnover) that it is just siloed. Once there is enough competition in those uses, then they'll start extracting their toolsets into libraries and leveraging that to become big players. Then it will become accessible to the masses.