The thing missing with many of the current AI techniques is they lack human "imagination" or the ability to simulate complex situations in your mind. Understanding goes beyond mere language. Statistical models and second-order logic just can't match a quick simulation. When a person thinks about "Could a crocodile run a steeplechase?" they don't put a bunch of logical statements together. They very quickly picture a crocodile and a steeplechase in a mental simulation based on prior experience. From this picture, a person can quickly visualize what that would look like (very silly). Same with "Should baseball players be allowed to glue small wings onto their caps?". You visualize this, realize how silly it sounds, and dismiss it. People can even run the simulation in their heads as to what would happen (people would laugh, they would be fragile and fall off, etc).

Europeans are sure sanctimonious about their "morally superior" culture considering that two World Wars have originated there the past 100 hundred years and it was the site of the Holocaust. And if you think that is ancient history, let me point out the Bosnian War.

The large amount of gun murders is the direct result of the failed drug policy of the US and mostly involves criminal-on-criminal murders that would not be affected by stricter gun laws. As proof, many of the cities with the strictest gun laws have the most gun violence. In general, the US's total crime rate is lower than many European countries: http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_tot_cri_vic-crime-total-victims

Saying "I hate Fox News, they are biased" doesn't scream out "I just want honest, balanced coverage". It screams out "I am a biased left-winger". Take one obvious example, NBC/MSNBC have had a rash of "selectively editing" videos recently. There was the 911 call in the Trayvon Martin case, the bogus sandy hook "heckling", and taking a Romney speech completely out of context.

The news gathering in the US is atrocious. Anyone who is not completely biased can see Fox is right-wing, MSNBC is left-wing, and the rest are center-left (although CNN seems to push more to the MSNBC side these days). They are all a bad combination of sensationalist ratings driven garbage combined with a huge agenda that rarely has the viewers' best interests in mind. If you don't view the news with a filter that considers the source, you are being deceived."

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/trayvon-martin-nbc-news-editing-911-call-306359
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/01/29/msnbc-caught-selectively-editing-another-clip-this-time-of-sandy-hook-victims-father/
http://blog.sfgate.com/nov05election/2012/06/19/msnbc-busted-for-editing-romney-comments-out-of-context-backtracks-sorta-video/

You have a house. Why not buy some gym equipment and setup an exercise area? Heck it would easily pay itself back considering how expensive gym memberships are.

Wait, urban business don't have cube farms? For me personally, living in a city would be like my entire life is Office Space. Work in a cube, come home to a cube of an apartment. Except that the cube of an apartment is ridiculously expensive.

Fascinating. I take the opposite lesson, that despite the all of the evidence for the moon landing there are deniers just 40 years after the event. I can imagine in 2000 years most people not believing the story of the moon landing. From their standpoint, how could a primitive technological society who just learned about spaceflight manage to get to the moon and back. And then for some reason just "stopped" going all of a sudden for 50-100+ years.

From a theological standpoint, if Jesus arrived today as in the BIble there would be just as many disbelievers 2000 years ago as there are today despite all of the video and news stories generated.

Peter Jackson managed to take the LOTR trilogy and make it a critical and popular success, winning both box office awards AND the OSCAR for BEST PICTURE. Let me repeat that--he took a trilogy of orcs, elves, dwarves, and hobbits and managed to win an academy award for best picture. That isn't just great film making--that is a freaking miracle

Well that eliminates every newspaper and publisher in the country. I'm sure that's what the Constitution intended.

Well not anymore. Actually, I think the only people left are sanctimoniousness jerks who live in an echo chamber.

I find it extremely sad that Slashdot has declined to the point where any random Christian-bashing is modded +5 Insightful, instead of off-topic. If you want to know why readership has declined significantly, here is an example.

I am very much pro-vaccination. I do have to point out it wasn't a "uneducated conservative" who started this mess, but Andrew Wakefield who was considered a "knowledgeable scientist and health professional". And there are thousands of examples where the scientists and medical professionals were wrong and/or completely changed their consensus (ex. breastfeeding bad/good). Someone breastfeeding in 1969/1970 may have been considered a ignorant, backwater redneck for choosing archaic breastfeeding over the scientifically developed, precision method of delivering nutrition that is Infant Formula.

1. Using the term wife and not spouse or partner is sexist and assumes that only men can create large value estates.
2. You cannot assume that a spouse or partner did not assist in the creation of wealth. In divorce proceedings, there is something called "Reimbursement Alimony" whereby the spouse is compensated for their contribution to the other spouse's career.
3. Thirteenth Amendment to the US Constitution abolished slavery. You do not "deserve" anyone else's money.

Do you realize if the "Move to Amend" passed, then what Google/Amazon/etc are doing could and would be illegal! Heck, this very Slashdot post would be illegal since it could be construed to influence an election and a forum could be argued as not meeting the criteria as "press".

Actually, the money is coming out of Social Security not the general budget. The argument for SS is that it is a government managed retirement fund and that what you get out is based on what you put in. Receiving SS benefits is equivalent to a 401k or pension in that you get what you earned.

Making millionaires contribute to SS is changing the meaning of what it is, from something I earned to getting other peoples' money. This actually makes it less secure because it takes away the moral aspect of receiving SS benefits. It goes from something I earned to wanting other peoples' money. Which makes it easier for politicians to cut benefits in the future.

Quote from Obama

"[On] Tuesday, we asked folks to tell us what would it be like to lose $40 out of your paycheck every week. "
Source: http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2011/12/22/president-obama-discusses-what-40-means-americans-families

A more important deception is that it is a reduction in the amount taxpayers pay into Social Security--NOT the general budget. This is more akin to reducing the amount of 401k withholdings than a tax break because you will have to make it up later one way or another--either through reduced SS benefits or increased SS taxes to make up for the deficit.