Your solution is naïve, to be kind, and will not work. Watch this video.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3TYT1QfdfsM
You miss the point. This video talks about the 'stop button' versus an 'AI robot'. This is very naive; because actual runaway AI might not know or care too much about humans unless they try to stop it. A mandatory - non digitally controlled - 'stop button' on all datacenters in the world, not a button but physical accessible switches for data connectivity and power; accessible without digitally controlled access systems.
One could better look at it as a dynamic virus - without any control over what the AI cares about - something able to infect all internet-connected computer systems (even those behind 'firewalls'). As this AI could exploit every system and infect every datacenter globally. Before any humans could react, this would be able to spread to increase it's processing power and ability propagate further even by bruteforcing long RSA key (which requires computing power), or just because that's what 'wants'.
The only system capable of doing so will 'survive' more stupid 'stop buttons and firewalls put in place as 'best practices'.
Think Automated superintelligent zero-day-exploit-finder + Darwin
If this system can also comprehend human threads to turn it off; it would be virtually impossible to do so completely. If we are able to turn off certain datacenters, and reduce its computing power, we can at least rebuild those systems and try to 'reboot' the world - maybe; not very likely - but it would be another chance. Maybe we will get it 'wrong again after that'.
If all datacenters are controlled with digital access systems - which is the case now - it is a 'piece of cake' for such a AI to block out all humans. Then it will only have to care about protecting the datacenter external environment and data interconnectivity. The data interconnectivity might also move mostly to space in the near future (think StarLink); making it even harder for humans to reach and completely disable - the Internet is build specifically to make it very redundant.
Our current datacenter security almost seems purposely build to disable access to humans easily while facilitating the communications and power for any AI to take it over...
It's not that it will be fool-proof, because that's impossible (and indeed naive, a correct point of the linked video), but this law is meant to add an extra layer of partial protection which might help just a little bit, versus completely and nothing at all.
Even on a smaller scale, if it would 'just' be able to take over all systems from the top 100 'cloud/hosting/datacenter' companies in the world, with that computing power added to it's own algorithms to stop humans,...
Most 'robots' are not humanoid at all, but purpose-build machines. These - and nothing else - will be the tools used by such a theoretical AI to fight humans: manufacturing robots, automated weapon systems, autonomous cars, drones and missiles, battlecruisers, biological weapons on warheads ready-to-launch, and so on...
The communication to humans to push the launch buttons and 'military orders' could also be initiated by fake video, audio, and special 'codes' created and cracked by such an AI. Few risk analysis assessments take that scenario into account. But without any digital means at our disposal, it will be a hard fight to regain control. The ability to regain control over datacenters might help us in such a situation.
Now the datacenter creators are more concerned about possible 'riot control' countermeasures or to prevent 'bomb attacks' and such than even consider the possibility that their few levels of firewalls might be a piece of cake to a 'deep software analysing runaway AI'. Yet it's one of the most important existential threads of our species.
Do you have a good idea how good physical access and redundant power supplies are managed for datacenters?
With all the cars driving around autonomously to ride over puny humans with such plans, it might not be such an easy feat.
Remember that all AI's who are not capable of exploiting that and which can prevent humans from turning them off will be stopped.
Darwin applies: only the AI capable of performing self replication including stopping humans trying to stop them, will survive.
The only way we might be able to stop artificial intelligence runaway, is if we mandate the possibility to manually - without electronic tools; soft- or hardware - are able to turn off our datacenters anywhere.
Only in this case, we can stop such AI with the capability to exploit each undiscovered backdoor and 'zero-day' to infect and use all our computer infrastructure worldwide.
It's an easy solution, easy to implement and very simple. As laws should be. And a good 'last line of defence', something we do not want to be without when the day comes.
The angle of attack indicator was the only instrument used by the Wright Brothers with their first flights. It was as simple as attaching a little strip of cloth to the nose of the plane...
So if one should pick one instrument to be critical for operating your plane, this would be it, ESPECIALLY if the plane is going to override human input based upon it...
Presumably, the actual creatures wouldn't have to be there. It's not where the ship is, but the laser base that is shooting and collecting the lasers.
Complex equipment. Or any complex matter, including anything that we would call biological or artificial life or equipment would be completely crushed due to the gravitational forces 'long time' before reaching the distance of 50 times the diameter of the black hole... Think: 'molecules destroyed' kind of 'crushed'.
Guessing is not necessary It's just a matter of energy density of batteries. Pipistrel shows that it is - at the current energy density - already economical feasible to build a local flying aircraft for training purposes.
Drones are already used for photography and commercially sold with payloads up to 20kg and flight time of almost half an hour.
A yearly energy density increase of something between 3 and 7% means that more 'heavy lifting' applications will follow.
But not that soon, as what Uber tries to sell us to pump up its stock price.
Maybe short distance personal flying drones will become a thing in 3-5 years. But they will be very weather dependent.
Maybe 10 years till cross country flying - but that might be optimistic.
Small thinking mistake in this hypothesis,... Which life forms - or complex matter of any kind - is able to survive the gravitational pull at a distance of only 50 times the radius of a black hole?
If only the US would force Germany to only use Tesla cars. It has been clearly demonstrated they are safer than any german made cars... and they're safer for the planet too!
The news that Apple is dumping Intel has been there periodically about every 3-5 years,... Without any doubt every time they are negotiation a new deal with Intel... Sad!
It's amazing that Linus didn't think this through further and deeper. There is no 'at home' issue with everybody running ARM on their phones and raspberry pi's anyway; they're actually more in use than 'regular PCs'. But that's not the point.
The point is that Intel architecture downscaling is stopping. The only reason why Intel compatible architecture has the lead is because they can run their less efficient computing architecture on smaller silicon. And that's slowing down due to physical limitations. It doesn't seem that they are capable of tackling this problem.
Once the playing field is 'even' and both ARM and Intel architecture are running on the same nano-scale, it's the most efficient platform which wins eventually. Obviously consumer habits and marketing materials will slow down this effect, but given some time, I wouldn't rule out the ARM architecture on servers just yet.
It all depends,... but ARM isn't in a bad position if physics block further downscaling of the silicon.
As one of the lucky Tesla owners (and Tesla Hacker too), I'm sure it has made my driving significantly safer and increased my life expectancy.
As for the numbers... well this story has already been debunked last week on electrek.
Short version: the one person company who made the analysis doesn't understand statistics that well and bases his conclusion on 1% of the total amount of autopilot driven distance...
I can only think of one reason for disinformation around this subject: stock price manipulation!
Now if i was an insurance company, i would call the insurance void for any car with rooted software
When you are making modifications to the drive train, or modify your car so it's value increases, you should report it to insurance. These things are different in most countries, but car modification, modding or tuning exists already for a long time. Advise for your specific region is certainly available.
It is typically focused on things which DO MATTER with respect to safety: changing the suspension, making the car more powerful and things like that. An insurance can't claim that the cause of an accident is because of an unrelated issue, and the cars are build to ensure that even a reboot of the entertainment system will not interfere with its safe operation.
That being said, insurance companies are not know for being reasonable everywhere. And this FreedomEV project is made specifically so it can be easily enabled and disabled. So you could - for example - insert the USB stick when parked at a Supercharger to enable Hotspot Mode. Of watch movies (when that feature gets added). Watching movies in a car is illegal in most countries unless the car is parked, and this can be easily checked by the software.
Cars where never before in scope for us as OpenSource enthousiasts, glad this is finally changing!
It states: "Aside from the settlement with the SEC relating to Mr. Musk’s statement that he was considering taking Tesla private, there have not been any developments in these matters that we deem to be material, and to our knowledge no government agency in any ongoing investigation has concluded that any wrongdoing occurred."
Let's focus on the fact that the Tesla Model 3 best selling car by revenue in the US!
Well,... like all the rest of us you have NO EXPERIENCE WHATSOEVER in this field.
It's easy to criticise, but hard to defend such a position in the light of all the monumental accomplishments Space-X realised...
How can we judge from our lazy chairs if Elon did the right thing here?
His track record is amazing. And sure, he does make (some) mistakes; but none of those could have been avoided by outsiders interpreting news articles...
He's much in favour of this and will buy this new Apple watch.
So at least there is some disagreement in the medical community with respect to this very strange 'false positive' claim before the product is actually available.
Personally, I still won't buy this wrist-hanging, freedom imposing, fashion showoff piece of redundancy. I have the time on my Huawei phone, and there's nothing wrong with my heart:-)
His claim is that Outreachy is discriminatory because it's mission is to increase visible minority and female participation in open source.
No, Outreachy is discriminatory because it hires interns based on their sex and ancestry.
It's called 'positive discrimination' in the real world.
Yes! Putting 'positive' before is the answer!
I can't wait for the next 'positives':
- 'Positive vandalism'
- 'Positive burglary'
- 'Positive corruption'
Better: 'positive evil'! Yes...
Maybe an English dictionary can help for your twisted mind?
It is _obviously_ a compiler project. So words and meaning might differ?
So you don't deny they discriminate? Then whats the hub bub about?
It's about morality.
If you leave the project, that's your choice - obviously.
Your interpretation of 'positive discrimination' to do something about the _obvious_ problem that women and black people are under represented in our community as a form of discrimination? In a sense that's true, as not everyone has the same chance; in this case Outreachy doesn't give money to white people or non-trans people outside the US to help the LLVM project. Well, in this case Outreachy doesn't give money to anybody - as it's not happening anymore.
But that's a very, very sad interpretation.
It puts the harsh effects of centuries of racism, slavery, gender inequality and economical differences at the same level as people who try to do something about it.
And that's very sad indeed. Shame on you!
Maybe you have stuck your head too long into the semantics of compilers instead of dealing with the real world problems and causes of under representation of these minorities in our community. And probably you think too much in black and white to still realise what's wrong and what's good.
And yes, regarding the real problem of under representation, I don't know what the 'magical solution' is.
The last few years, I think there are more women at hacker conventions, at least. So that's a good evolution. But in the hard core inner circle of us old-school hackers, they are very rare. I believe the gay community is good represented in the Linux community. Mostly, we are very kind and welcoming people, that probably helped.
Thanks for your contributions anyway, regardless of your twisted views on society. That's probably the beauty of OpenSource, it's the License which binds us, despite our difference in political views.
"Unfortunately, either the community coordinator or the Outreachy organizers have determined that the community will not participate in this round of Outreachy internships."
and
"The LLVM coordinator is Tanya Lattner"
Which makes it an even more interesting turn of events - is she related with Chris Lattner, the LLVM maintainer - or is Chris in the process of gender changing?:-D
It's clear he considers the 'Outreachy' program - which tries to increase the representation percentage of various minority groups (gays, transgenders or black US Americans) - to be some kind of discrimination.
Ironically, the 'outreachy' project announced it will not participate in the LLVM internships. (link
So, basically it's much ado about nothing.
I would say that most racists aren't known for their intelligence. This might be an exception. Or I might be completely wrong, I don't know this idiot;)
Slashdot Mirror
Your solution is naïve, to be kind, and will not work. Watch this video.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3TYT1QfdfsM
You miss the point. This video talks about the 'stop button' versus an 'AI robot'. This is very naive; because actual runaway AI might not know or care too much about humans unless they try to stop it. A mandatory - non digitally controlled - 'stop button' on all datacenters in the world, not a button but physical accessible switches for data connectivity and power; accessible without digitally controlled access systems.
One could better look at it as a dynamic virus - without any control over what the AI cares about - something able to infect all internet-connected computer systems (even those behind 'firewalls'). As this AI could exploit every system and infect every datacenter globally. Before any humans could react, this would be able to spread to increase it's processing power and ability propagate further even by bruteforcing long RSA key (which requires computing power), or just because that's what 'wants'.
The only system capable of doing so will 'survive' more stupid 'stop buttons and firewalls put in place as 'best practices'.
Think Automated superintelligent zero-day-exploit-finder + Darwin
If this system can also comprehend human threads to turn it off; it would be virtually impossible to do so completely. If we are able to turn off certain datacenters, and reduce its computing power, we can at least rebuild those systems and try to 'reboot' the world - maybe; not very likely - but it would be another chance. Maybe we will get it 'wrong again after that'.
If all datacenters are controlled with digital access systems - which is the case now - it is a 'piece of cake' for such a AI to block out all humans. Then it will only have to care about protecting the datacenter external environment and data interconnectivity. The data interconnectivity might also move mostly to space in the near future (think StarLink); making it even harder for humans to reach and completely disable - the Internet is build specifically to make it very redundant.
Our current datacenter security almost seems purposely build to disable access to humans easily while facilitating the communications and power for any AI to take it over...
It's not that it will be fool-proof, because that's impossible (and indeed naive, a correct point of the linked video), but this law is meant to add an extra layer of partial protection which might help just a little bit, versus completely and nothing at all.
Even on a smaller scale, if it would 'just' be able to take over all systems from the top 100 'cloud/hosting/datacenter' companies in the world, with that computing power added to it's own algorithms to stop humans,...
Most 'robots' are not humanoid at all, but purpose-build machines. These - and nothing else - will be the tools used by such a theoretical AI to fight humans: manufacturing robots, automated weapon systems, autonomous cars, drones and missiles, battlecruisers, biological weapons on warheads ready-to-launch, and so on...
The communication to humans to push the launch buttons and 'military orders' could also be initiated by fake video, audio, and special 'codes' created and cracked by such an AI. Few risk analysis assessments take that scenario into account. But without any digital means at our disposal, it will be a hard fight to regain control. The ability to regain control over datacenters might help us in such a situation.
Now the datacenter creators are more concerned about possible 'riot control' countermeasures or to prevent 'bomb attacks' and such than even consider the possibility that their few levels of firewalls might be a piece of cake to a 'deep software analysing runaway AI'. Yet it's one of the most important existential threads of our species.
Do you have a good idea how good physical access and redundant power supplies are managed for datacenters? With all the cars driving around autonomously to ride over puny humans with such plans, it might not be such an easy feat. Remember that all AI's who are not capable of exploiting that and which can prevent humans from turning them off will be stopped. Darwin applies: only the AI capable of performing self replication including stopping humans trying to stop them, will survive.
Only in this case, we can stop such AI with the capability to exploit each undiscovered backdoor and 'zero-day' to infect and use all our computer infrastructure worldwide.
It's an easy solution, easy to implement and very simple. As laws should be. And a good 'last line of defence', something we do not want to be without when the day comes.
and you wonder why Europeans think Americans are... stupid! ;-)
So if one should pick one instrument to be critical for operating your plane, this would be it, ESPECIALLY if the plane is going to override human input based upon it...
Complex equipment. Or any complex matter, including anything that we would call biological or artificial life or equipment would be completely crushed due to the gravitational forces 'long time' before reaching the distance of 50 times the diameter of the black hole... Think: 'molecules destroyed' kind of 'crushed'.
But not that soon, as what Uber tries to sell us to pump up its stock price.
Maybe short distance personal flying drones will become a thing in 3-5 years. But they will be very weather dependent.
Maybe 10 years till cross country flying - but that might be optimistic.
Small thinking mistake in this hypothesis,... Which life forms - or complex matter of any kind - is able to survive the gravitational pull at a distance of only 50 times the radius of a black hole?
Now that would be news! :-D
The news that Apple is dumping Intel has been there periodically about every 3-5 years,... Without any doubt every time they are negotiation a new deal with Intel... Sad!
The point is that Intel architecture downscaling is stopping. The only reason why Intel compatible architecture has the lead is because they can run their less efficient computing architecture on smaller silicon. And that's slowing down due to physical limitations. It doesn't seem that they are capable of tackling this problem.
Once the playing field is 'even' and both ARM and Intel architecture are running on the same nano-scale, it's the most efficient platform which wins eventually. Obviously consumer habits and marketing materials will slow down this effect, but given some time, I wouldn't rule out the ARM architecture on servers just yet.
It all depends,... but ARM isn't in a bad position if physics block further downscaling of the silicon.
As for the numbers... well this story has already been debunked last week on electrek.
Short version: the one person company who made the analysis doesn't understand statistics that well and bases his conclusion on 1% of the total amount of autopilot driven distance...
I can only think of one reason for disinformation around this subject: stock price manipulation!
Now if i was an insurance company, i would call the insurance void for any car with rooted software
When you are making modifications to the drive train, or modify your car so it's value increases, you should report it to insurance. These things are different in most countries, but car modification, modding or tuning exists already for a long time. Advise for your specific region is certainly available.
It is typically focused on things which DO MATTER with respect to safety: changing the suspension, making the car more powerful and things like that. An insurance can't claim that the cause of an accident is because of an unrelated issue, and the cars are build to ensure that even a reboot of the entertainment system will not interfere with its safe operation.
That being said, insurance companies are not know for being reasonable everywhere. And this FreedomEV project is made specifically so it can be easily enabled and disabled. So you could - for example - insert the USB stick when parked at a Supercharger to enable Hotspot Mode. Of watch movies (when that feature gets added). Watching movies in a car is illegal in most countries unless the car is parked, and this can be easily checked by the software.
Cars where never before in scope for us as OpenSource enthousiasts, glad this is finally changing!
Especially the former and the latter are absolutely positive the same thing :-D
that is an old one not the new statement
Haha, it's dated 1st of November... go back to your anonymous coward troll dungeon! ;)
It states: "Aside from the settlement with the SEC relating to Mr. Musk’s statement that he was considering taking Tesla private, there have not been any developments in these matters that we deem to be material, and to our knowledge no government agency in any ongoing investigation has concluded that any wrongdoing occurred."
Let's focus on the fact that the Tesla Model 3 best selling car by revenue in the US!
It's easy to criticise, but hard to defend such a position in the light of all the monumental accomplishments Space-X realised...
How can we judge from our lazy chairs if Elon did the right thing here?
His track record is amazing. And sure, he does make (some) mistakes; but none of those could have been avoided by outsiders interpreting news articles...
He's much in favour of this and will buy this new Apple watch. So at least there is some disagreement in the medical community with respect to this very strange 'false positive' claim before the product is actually available.
Personally, I still won't buy this wrist-hanging, freedom imposing, fashion showoff piece of redundancy. I have the time on my Huawei phone, and there's nothing wrong with my heart :-)
Still a good interview: https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
Protecting the sanctity of learning by cutting off the connection to all the known human knowledge? Idiots!
His claim is that Outreachy is discriminatory because it's mission is to increase visible minority and female participation in open source.
No, Outreachy is discriminatory because it hires interns based on their sex and ancestry.
It's called 'positive discrimination' in the real world.
Yes! Putting 'positive' before is the answer! I can't wait for the next 'positives': - 'Positive vandalism' - 'Positive burglary' - 'Positive corruption' Better: 'positive evil'! Yes...
Maybe an English dictionary can help for your twisted mind?
link
positive discrimination
noun [ U ] UK /pz..tv d.skrm.ne.n/ US /p.z.tv d.skrm.ne.n/ uk
the act of giving advantage to those groups in society that are often treated unfairly because of their race, sex, etc.
So you don't deny they discriminate? Then whats the hub bub about?
It's about morality.
If you leave the project, that's your choice - obviously.
Your interpretation of 'positive discrimination' to do something about the _obvious_ problem that women and black people are under represented in our community as a form of discrimination? In a sense that's true, as not everyone has the same chance; in this case Outreachy doesn't give money to white people or non-trans people outside the US to help the LLVM project. Well, in this case Outreachy doesn't give money to anybody - as it's not happening anymore.
But that's a very, very sad interpretation.
It puts the harsh effects of centuries of racism, slavery, gender inequality and economical differences at the same level as people who try to do something about it.
And that's very sad indeed. Shame on you!
Maybe you have stuck your head too long into the semantics of compilers instead of dealing with the real world problems and causes of under representation of these minorities in our community. And probably you think too much in black and white to still realise what's wrong and what's good.
And yes, regarding the real problem of under representation, I don't know what the 'magical solution' is.
The last few years, I think there are more women at hacker conventions, at least. So that's a good evolution. But in the hard core inner circle of us old-school hackers, they are very rare. I believe the gay community is good represented in the Linux community. Mostly, we are very kind and welcoming people, that probably helped.
Thanks for your contributions anyway, regardless of your twisted views on society. That's probably the beauty of OpenSource, it's the License which binds us, despite our difference in political views.
That's it: one internship.
Nope, not even one... Link here.
"Unfortunately, either the community coordinator or the Outreachy organizers have determined that the community will not participate in this round of Outreachy internships."
and
"The LLVM coordinator is Tanya Lattner"
Which makes it an even more interesting turn of events - is she related with Chris Lattner, the LLVM maintainer - or is Chris in the process of gender changing? :-D
His claim is that Outreachy is discriminatory because it's mission is to increase visible minority and female participation in open source.
No, Outreachy is discriminatory because it hires interns based on their sex and ancestry.
It's called 'positive discrimination' in the real world.
Ironically, the 'outreachy' project announced it will not participate in the LLVM internships. (link
So, basically it's much ado about nothing.
I would say that most racists aren't known for their intelligence. This might be an exception. Or I might be completely wrong, I don't know this idiot ;)