I got a macbook pro without being a fanboy. I'd used macs because I worked in the print industry and someone offered to buy me a laptop, so I just went for an apple.
I think apple are incapable of distinguishing between their fanboys and their user base. Shit like this is going to alienate casual apple users and they are going to dip down to 1% market share again.
As I am just about to head to the apple store to demand a replacement for my fire hazard of a power adaptor (rather than pay £60 for a new one), I am inclined to agree. Once the shininess has worn off Apple products the fact they are shamelessly milking you for every penny they can is obvious.
All I see here is pretext. The notion I have heard expressed that hackers can do the same damage as nuclear weapons is absurd to the ears of anybody with an ounce of intelligence. Massively exaggerated threats can only mean one thing; a power grab.
They want to have spyware built into every piece of hardware and software out there. They want to turn every single bit of data processing equipment of any kind into part of their foreign and domestic intelligence network. They want to take the vast amounts of data generated by this network and feed it into a supercomputer that will replace trial by jury with data mining.
Your pitifully unfunny attempt to pin a Che Guevara t-shirt on anybody who isn't a Reaganite is pathetic. Just because you were a self-indulgent phony in the 1960s, don't project your pathetic weakness on everyone else.
Market forces create the upper class elite; they then convert their economic power into political power. They are capable of doing this under any western government, of any political orientation.
Conservatives are not supporters of freedom - its all a big lie. When they talk about 'freeing' the market they mean 'handing it over to their pals from Eton/business partners.' The debate over whether the state or 'private' enterprise should run things is completely irrelevant because, in the UK at least, the business and political elite are in collusion, and in many cases are the exact same people.
No argument will show you how wrong you are - please just try to code something similar. Or even a chat bot. Things like language processing and image recognition seem easy to humans because most of your brains activity is hidden from your conscious mind. Try making a computer do these things, and you will discover that what IBM is nontrivial.
Neither was selling calculating equipment to the Nazis either, like you said.
It's a good step forwards, and a more concrete target than the Turing test (which I suspect is going to be convincingly passed soon not due to machine intelligence but due to the increasing stupidity of Internet discourse). Despite sounding trivial, this is quite valid AI research - plus, of course, some good publicity for IBM.
Yup. Natural language processing is a piece of piss until you actually *try* it. Along similar lines, I once heard an anecdote that computer vision was first attempted when it was given to a graduate student whilst all the professional researchers were busy with board games. It hadn't occurred to anybody it might be difficult.
Being able to beat a human at Jeapordy is a fairly substantial subset of the Turing test sorted.
Natural language processing is an absolute and total bitch - take it someone who has studied it. One of my AI professors once explained it to me such; the human brain tricks you into believing the hardest tasks it accomplishes are the easiest. Stuff like language, walking, and so on take up far much more of your neural hardware than what you would consider 'thinking' - but it all happens subconsciously.
No, it isn't Artificial Intelligence per se - there is no real 'understanging' or 'intelligence' behind it -but it is a very serious technical challenge. There is a lot more to it than simply dumping Jeopardy questions into a standard search engines.
Don't take my word for it. Load up your favourite editor or IDE and start coding a simple chat bot. The difficulties that IBM must have overcome are best discovered through experience.
Fascism is just the position capitalism moves to when it feels threatened. Note the long list of American industrialists jumping into bed with Hitler and Mussolini in the 1930s
I have no problem with the nice maths in string theory - but until it provides testable predictions, it is nothing more than nice maths and not any kind of theory of physics. To be fair, it isn't entirely their fault we can't test their hypothesis - we dinnae have the power!
People want them judged? Not generally, no. Corporate interests want them judged. The vast majority of people simply can't equate the act of sharing something you like with the level of criminality a small minority of society is claiming it represents.
Loudmouth twat saying something is wrong != it being wrong.
The majority of people here (and in the real world) have enough intelligence to differentiate between file sharing and material stealing.
By the way, I am not being a 'selfish leech' - I am simply alarmed by the intrusion of freedom that is being demanded in the name of profits for a highly exploitative industry. Economic ambitions have warped into authoritarian political ambitions, and its an issue for everyone. You are too stupid to grasp the issues around piracy, and that means you are also too stupid to read my intentions. So shut the fuck up about them.
I stopped reading when you invoked natural selection as a political guideline rather than a scientific phenomenon.
Appealing to 'nature' is intellectually dishonest, illogical, and as history shows us - downright dangerous. Nature does a lot of things, doesn't mean we should imitate them.
Well one of the questions was 'IF the universe is expanding, where is it expanding from' and the other was 'What happened before the big bang' (I paraphrase in both cases).
Both had a tone in their voice suggesting they had some uber-clever question with which to catch out probably the greatest living British mind, and both asked questions that could've been answered by myself or any of the about 50 people from the physics department who attended the lecture. It angered me, I must say.
Slashdot Mirror
I got a macbook pro without being a fanboy. I'd used macs because I worked in the print industry and someone offered to buy me a laptop, so I just went for an apple. I think apple are incapable of distinguishing between their fanboys and their user base. Shit like this is going to alienate casual apple users and they are going to dip down to 1% market share again.
As I am just about to head to the apple store to demand a replacement for my fire hazard of a power adaptor (rather than pay £60 for a new one), I am inclined to agree. Once the shininess has worn off Apple products the fact they are shamelessly milking you for every penny they can is obvious.
Honesty?
And censorship of this... I don't see what is wrong at all with creating resources like this for helping small children cope with disasters.
Its not a trivial task for neural nets either. It took 4 billion years to get it right the first time.
All I see here is pretext. The notion I have heard expressed that hackers can do the same damage as nuclear weapons is absurd to the ears of anybody with an ounce of intelligence. Massively exaggerated threats can only mean one thing; a power grab.
They want to have spyware built into every piece of hardware and software out there. They want to turn every single bit of data processing equipment of any kind into part of their foreign and domestic intelligence network. They want to take the vast amounts of data generated by this network and feed it into a supercomputer that will replace trial by jury with data mining.
Don't let them.
Dear old reactionary twat,
Your pitifully unfunny attempt to pin a Che Guevara t-shirt on anybody who isn't a Reaganite is pathetic. Just because you were a self-indulgent phony in the 1960s, don't project your pathetic weakness on everyone else.
Market forces create the upper class elite; they then convert their economic power into political power. They are capable of doing this under any western government, of any political orientation.
I'm a computer scientist retraining as a physicist. Why the hell would I have to master the nuances of English?
Its possible, but most of the progressive types here aren't rabid Obama/Brown lovers. Randroids are a far more common (and annoying) sight.
Note to moderators; 'Troll' is not a synonym for 'Does not agree with my Atlas Shrugged worldview'
Conservatives are not supporters of freedom - its all a big lie. When they talk about 'freeing' the market they mean 'handing it over to their pals from Eton/business partners.' The debate over whether the state or 'private' enterprise should run things is completely irrelevant because, in the UK at least, the business and political elite are in collusion, and in many cases are the exact same people.
No argument will show you how wrong you are - please just try to code something similar. Or even a chat bot. Things like language processing and image recognition seem easy to humans because most of your brains activity is hidden from your conscious mind. Try making a computer do these things, and you will discover that what IBM is nontrivial.
Neither was selling calculating equipment to the Nazis either, like you said.
It's a good step forwards, and a more concrete target than the Turing test (which I suspect is going to be convincingly passed soon not due to machine intelligence but due to the increasing stupidity of Internet discourse). Despite sounding trivial, this is quite valid AI research - plus, of course, some good publicity for IBM.
Yup. Natural language processing is a piece of piss until you actually *try* it. Along similar lines, I once heard an anecdote that computer vision was first attempted when it was given to a graduate student whilst all the professional researchers were busy with board games. It hadn't occurred to anybody it might be difficult.
Being able to beat a human at Jeapordy is a fairly substantial subset of the Turing test sorted.
Natural language processing is an absolute and total bitch - take it someone who has studied it. One of my AI professors once explained it to me such; the human brain tricks you into believing the hardest tasks it accomplishes are the easiest. Stuff like language, walking, and so on take up far much more of your neural hardware than what you would consider 'thinking' - but it all happens subconsciously.
No, it isn't Artificial Intelligence per se - there is no real 'understanging' or 'intelligence' behind it -but it is a very serious technical challenge. There is a lot more to it than simply dumping Jeopardy questions into a standard search engines.
Don't take my word for it. Load up your favourite editor or IDE and start coding a simple chat bot. The difficulties that IBM must have overcome are best discovered through experience.
Fascism is just the position capitalism moves to when it feels threatened. Note the long list of American industrialists jumping into bed with Hitler and Mussolini in the 1930s
I have no problem with the nice maths in string theory - but until it provides testable predictions, it is nothing more than nice maths and not any kind of theory of physics. To be fair, it isn't entirely their fault we can't test their hypothesis - we dinnae have the power!
Oh please. How is pandering to corporate interests socialist? Its dictionary definition capitalism. Pull your head out your arse.
Killing people is actually beneficial for media cartels - finger wagging human interest stories about drunk drivers are ratings winners.
People want them judged? Not generally, no. Corporate interests want them judged. The vast majority of people simply can't equate the act of sharing something you like with the level of criminality a small minority of society is claiming it represents.
Loudmouth twat saying something is wrong != it being wrong.
The majority of people here (and in the real world) have enough intelligence to differentiate between file sharing and material stealing.
By the way, I am not being a 'selfish leech' - I am simply alarmed by the intrusion of freedom that is being demanded in the name of profits for a highly exploitative industry. Economic ambitions have warped into authoritarian political ambitions, and its an issue for everyone. You are too stupid to grasp the issues around piracy, and that means you are also too stupid to read my intentions. So shut the fuck up about them.
I stopped reading when you invoked natural selection as a political guideline rather than a scientific phenomenon.
Appealing to 'nature' is intellectually dishonest, illogical, and as history shows us - downright dangerous. Nature does a lot of things, doesn't mean we should imitate them.
You didn't hear these people. Their questions were hostile, and pretty fucking dumb.
Well one of the questions was 'IF the universe is expanding, where is it expanding from' and the other was 'What happened before the big bang' (I paraphrase in both cases).
Both had a tone in their voice suggesting they had some uber-clever question with which to catch out probably the greatest living British mind, and both asked questions that could've been answered by myself or any of the about 50 people from the physics department who attended the lecture. It angered me, I must say.