Provide free Uber (or similar) service and I'd get rid of my car today. But public transit to really too inconvenient and has the disadvantage of being filled with the dregs of society--even moreso once it becomes free.
Currently looking forward to the emergence of driverless taxis. I'll ditch my car and use them as I need them. Save enough on insurance and maintenance that the taxi wins out as the cheapest option.
Climate scientists have made the claim that we need to cut basically ALL net emissions to stop global warming (a claim which makes sense IF you swallow the notion that CO2 retains more heat than the average existent atmosphere, which it doesn't). This kills the human race. At least, in the absence of vastly increased investment in nuclear power, which I am absolutely for in any event.
How ever many it took, even if it was a hundred thousand of them, would be a much lower cost than shutting down the global economy like you idiots want to do.
Hell, moving coastal cities inland would cost less than you idiots want to spend (and destroy with your actions). But hey, ignore economics, gain a pristine planet, completely cleansed of humanity. Wouldn't that be nice? Get rid of all the evil, evil people.
I'd be happy to buy it at a discounted price (you DO believe it will be subsumed by molten lava next Thursday, right?). I'd even be happy to hold it for a few years so you can "punish" me for my heretical ideas. Then I will sell it in few years for market value and make a nice profit.
Even if it WERE real to the extent that ocean levels rose by a few meters, the cost of building seawalls and moving cities further inland, or raising the grade of bulidings as they did in Galveston after the 1900 hurricane would be far less than the cost of actually addressing the issue (absent sensibly addressing it by expanding use of nuclear power, which would have a net negative cost after a decade or so).
We could start a new ice age with a ten million dollar investment via climate engineering. Cutting the temperature a few degrees is easy. Marxists posing as environmentalists don't like this, and they have pull in western governments, so it won't happen.
You can always tell a marxist posing as an environmentalist from an actual environmentalist by whether or not they support nuclear energy. Nuclear can support modern economies and allow for their growth without putting out CO2, and do so SAFELY if regulations are loosened enough to allow upgrades from gen one and two plants to gens three and four (and five ie LFTRs).
No, you'd be better off using a real GHG, like methane or CFCs. CO2 is utter shit when it comes to warming, being slightly worse than the average of the atmosphere.
Vast majority used to be ag workers. Now almost none are, and everyone is better off for it.
Automation won't wipe out truck drivers overnight. Replacing trucks is a huge capital expense. More likely it would be phased in over ten years or so. What will happen is that companies will stop hiring, and drivers will mostly age out and not be replaced, so training probably won't be an issue. In the meantime, prices for EVERYTHING that is shipped by truck, or has components shipped by truck plummet. Just like food is super cheap today (you can buy a month's worth of rice or flour for $15), manufactured goods will be super cheap tomorrow. People won't really NEED jobs. Just a gig every now and then, until they get an artificially intelligent robot with access to cloud resources, at which point they won't need anything, because the robot can do very nearly anything for next to nothing.
And yes, you will be able to afford one, because they will be cheap, like smartphones today.
No, the times ahead are not dark. They are so bright you have simply been blinded by them.
Seems more like evidence that the climate isn't warming, and instead the southern regions of their habitats are more likely to have farms that use pesticides that kill them, or that there are parasites or diseases cropping up in those areas that can't survive further north.
But I guess every single negative thing that happens is caused by climate change, even when it is completely illogical (like them failing to expand northwards).
"don't have the flexibility of being contractors?"
What, exactly, is your malfunction? Uber requires that you take one trip once every 180 days to stay active. Not exactly suffering from a lack of flexibility there.
Now they do get to arbitrarily set rates, which I don't like. Which is why I don't drive for them.
"Everyone else". I do not think it means what you think it means. Rather, they will be providing transportation to hundreds of millions or billions of people for less than the current cost of owning a car. Those who are lose the work can and will find something else, and they too will benefit from decreased cost of living.
When coders are replaced by software, then we have reached the Singularity, and we can all sit back and relax or do whatever we want to do with the near infinite amount of resources made available by our 2,000,000,000 IQ robotic servants.
No no no. You finance a UBI by removing all other forms of welfare and getting rid of the bureaucracy associated with them. This means not only getting rid of SSI and SSDI, but also food stamps, the bureau dealing with minimum wage violators, etc.
Asking the Fed to print money to fund anything will by definition create inflation. It might take it a while to hit prices, but it would, and has. Since the Fed's inception, the purchasing power of the dollar has fallen 98%. Prior to that, it's purchasing power gyrated but rose over time.
Well, they were completing tasks for rewards, so probably not that bad. Worst of it is the electrode implants, which aren't really that bad. Lots of humans have stuff like that.
The linkage is reversable too. Really not that bad. What will be interesting is the human applications once we get non invasive nerve gear. Brain node on an ASI might be an interesting job.
"We don't know how" yet we have made artificial ones that interface correctly with real ones. There's some kind of logic error in there. I think it's a "No True Scotsman" sort of thing.
Who cares what's in the black box if you can perfectly replicate its outputs? That's like saying we didn't actually crack the Enigma code, when we actually knew everything the Nazis were saying to each other.
We don't know how a steel rod works either. You seem to want us to map out every atom of the thing over time to make sure that we know what is going on when we can bypass all the busywork with a little observation.
We don't know EXACTLY how birds work either. The knowledge we have is enough (for example, to build flying machines much better than birds), though. Saying we know NOTHING about them is just fucking stupid.
No, it isn't. Humans learn how to learn as babies.
And failing to differentiate between programming and machine learning automatically makes your opinion on AI completely invalid. That's like having someone who doesn't know the difference between a standard and an automatic giving you car advice. Extremely basic stuff that even normies should know.
I was thinking of making some louvers for my car, which mysteriously had all four missing when I got it. Buy one, scan it, and make the other three with the printer. Should be the perfect application, and would save me about $75, assuming the plastic costs nearly nothing.
mbeckman fails to grasp the core concept behind machine learning and AI. They aren't programming a computer to do things, they are programming a computer to learn things (or at a more advanced level, are programming a computer to learn how to learn things).
He dismisses the whole concept like it is some kind of mechanical turk, but it is real, and it is getting better every day.
Slashdot Mirror
Provide free Uber (or similar) service and I'd get rid of my car today. But public transit to really too inconvenient and has the disadvantage of being filled with the dregs of society--even moreso once it becomes free.
Currently looking forward to the emergence of driverless taxis. I'll ditch my car and use them as I need them. Save enough on insurance and maintenance that the taxi wins out as the cheapest option.
Climate scientists have made the claim that we need to cut basically ALL net emissions to stop global warming (a claim which makes sense IF you swallow the notion that CO2 retains more heat than the average existent atmosphere, which it doesn't). This kills the human race. At least, in the absence of vastly increased investment in nuclear power, which I am absolutely for in any event.
How ever many it took, even if it was a hundred thousand of them, would be a much lower cost than shutting down the global economy like you idiots want to do.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Hell, moving coastal cities inland would cost less than you idiots want to spend (and destroy with your actions). But hey, ignore economics, gain a pristine planet, completely cleansed of humanity. Wouldn't that be nice? Get rid of all the evil, evil people.
I'd be happy to buy it at a discounted price (you DO believe it will be subsumed by molten lava next Thursday, right?). I'd even be happy to hold it for a few years so you can "punish" me for my heretical ideas. Then I will sell it in few years for market value and make a nice profit.
Even if it WERE real to the extent that ocean levels rose by a few meters, the cost of building seawalls and moving cities further inland, or raising the grade of bulidings as they did in Galveston after the 1900 hurricane would be far less than the cost of actually addressing the issue (absent sensibly addressing it by expanding use of nuclear power, which would have a net negative cost after a decade or so).
We could start a new ice age with a ten million dollar investment via climate engineering. Cutting the temperature a few degrees is easy. Marxists posing as environmentalists don't like this, and they have pull in western governments, so it won't happen.
You can always tell a marxist posing as an environmentalist from an actual environmentalist by whether or not they support nuclear energy. Nuclear can support modern economies and allow for their growth without putting out CO2, and do so SAFELY if regulations are loosened enough to allow upgrades from gen one and two plants to gens three and four (and five ie LFTRs).
And before you idiots call me a conspiracy theorist: http://keywiki.org/index.php/C...
Yes, like not spending the entire world's GDP on something that most likely isn't even a problem.
No, you'd be better off using a real GHG, like methane or CFCs. CO2 is utter shit when it comes to warming, being slightly worse than the average of the atmosphere.
Vast majority used to be ag workers. Now almost none are, and everyone is better off for it.
Automation won't wipe out truck drivers overnight. Replacing trucks is a huge capital expense. More likely it would be phased in over ten years or so. What will happen is that companies will stop hiring, and drivers will mostly age out and not be replaced, so training probably won't be an issue. In the meantime, prices for EVERYTHING that is shipped by truck, or has components shipped by truck plummet. Just like food is super cheap today (you can buy a month's worth of rice or flour for $15), manufactured goods will be super cheap tomorrow. People won't really NEED jobs. Just a gig every now and then, until they get an artificially intelligent robot with access to cloud resources, at which point they won't need anything, because the robot can do very nearly anything for next to nothing.
And yes, you will be able to afford one, because they will be cheap, like smartphones today.
No, the times ahead are not dark. They are so bright you have simply been blinded by them.
Uhh, but I also cited disease in the first post. What you are doing is called "strawmanning". Stop it.
Yes, because there is no such thing as disease.
Seems more like evidence that the climate isn't warming, and instead the southern regions of their habitats are more likely to have farms that use pesticides that kill them, or that there are parasites or diseases cropping up in those areas that can't survive further north.
But I guess every single negative thing that happens is caused by climate change, even when it is completely illogical (like them failing to expand northwards).
"don't have the flexibility of being contractors?"
What, exactly, is your malfunction? Uber requires that you take one trip once every 180 days to stay active. Not exactly suffering from a lack of flexibility there.
Now they do get to arbitrarily set rates, which I don't like. Which is why I don't drive for them.
"Everyone else". I do not think it means what you think it means. Rather, they will be providing transportation to hundreds of millions or billions of people for less than the current cost of owning a car. Those who are lose the work can and will find something else, and they too will benefit from decreased cost of living.
When coders are replaced by software, then we have reached the Singularity, and we can all sit back and relax or do whatever we want to do with the near infinite amount of resources made available by our 2,000,000,000 IQ robotic servants.
No no no. You finance a UBI by removing all other forms of welfare and getting rid of the bureaucracy associated with them. This means not only getting rid of SSI and SSDI, but also food stamps, the bureau dealing with minimum wage violators, etc.
Asking the Fed to print money to fund anything will by definition create inflation. It might take it a while to hit prices, but it would, and has. Since the Fed's inception, the purchasing power of the dollar has fallen 98%. Prior to that, it's purchasing power gyrated but rose over time.
Well, they were completing tasks for rewards, so probably not that bad. Worst of it is the electrode implants, which aren't really that bad. Lots of humans have stuff like that.
The linkage is reversable too. Really not that bad. What will be interesting is the human applications once we get non invasive nerve gear. Brain node on an ASI might be an interesting job.
Yeah, I keep mine in a safe at all times. Much safer that way.
I like your handwaving. Perhaps you could get a flag and wave it around so you could be like the losers in high school who didn't make the cheer team.
The only purpose of a neuron is to interface, so it IS the same thing.
"We don't know how" yet we have made artificial ones that interface correctly with real ones. There's some kind of logic error in there. I think it's a "No True Scotsman" sort of thing.
Who cares what's in the black box if you can perfectly replicate its outputs? That's like saying we didn't actually crack the Enigma code, when we actually knew everything the Nazis were saying to each other.
We don't know how a steel rod works either. You seem to want us to map out every atom of the thing over time to make sure that we know what is going on when we can bypass all the busywork with a little observation.
Stop being so stupid.
We don't know EXACTLY how birds work either. The knowledge we have is enough (for example, to build flying machines much better than birds), though. Saying we know NOTHING about them is just fucking stupid.
"That is pure hope as well as circular."
No, it isn't. Humans learn how to learn as babies.
And failing to differentiate between programming and machine learning automatically makes your opinion on AI completely invalid. That's like having someone who doesn't know the difference between a standard and an automatic giving you car advice. Extremely basic stuff that even normies should know.
I was thinking of making some louvers for my car, which mysteriously had all four missing when I got it. Buy one, scan it, and make the other three with the printer. Should be the perfect application, and would save me about $75, assuming the plastic costs nearly nothing.
"no one knows how they work."
Shut up. We sure as hell DO KNOW how neurons work. We've even built artificial ones. https://hacked.com/swedish-sci...
mbeckman fails to grasp the core concept behind machine learning and AI. They aren't programming a computer to do things, they are programming a computer to learn things (or at a more advanced level, are programming a computer to learn how to learn things).
He dismisses the whole concept like it is some kind of mechanical turk, but it is real, and it is getting better every day.