Comment Re:Knee-jerk... (Score 1) 256
That still doesn't explain why it should be public information.
Obviously police should be required to keep their own records of arrests, but why should it be public?
That still doesn't explain why it should be public information.
Obviously police should be required to keep their own records of arrests, but why should it be public?
If they have money to drink they can afford to pay for their own rehab. The taxpayers shouldn't have to shell out anything.
Exactly!
Instead of paying for rehabilitation in order to help ensure they don't re-offend, let's name, shame and ostracize them. That way we can pay even more money to prosecute/incarcerate them as their unwanted behaviors continue.
Brilliant!
Well thanks for owning up to the fact that it's all AMD's fault!
Given that fact, there is absolutely no reason for me to buy Far Cry 4 next week since my console and PC both use AMD processors.
As the problem is AMD's fault, I guess Far Cry 4 is going to be just as buggy.
$60 saved. Thanks again!
So based on this,the story is basically as follows:
- Google decides to lease an airfield from NASA for corporate jets
- NASA agrees to sell Google fuel at discounted rates (no state or local tax) in exchange for Google planes collecting climate data
- After 6 years of this, a NASA auditor notices ALL Google planes receive the discount, not just those carrying out NASA experiments.
- NASA stops selling them discounted fuel in September of 2013.
- Google now wants to renew the lease (without the discounted fuel)
- ???
- Therefore, evil!
I seem to be missing a step in Consumer Watchdog's logic here. Anyone able to fill me in?
If NASA was inappropriately selling discounted fuel, that is NASA's fault, not Google's. It should have nothing to do with renewing the lease now.
UML is not a fine wine or a vintage short-run production sports car.
Exactly. A vintage sports car or a fine wine are useful.
But if you really need UML, there are numerous plug-ins you can purchase for VS Pro that provide UML diagrams.
Ahhh....so basically:
- creating a new UI and standardizing it across platforms is evil. Riiigggghhhht.
- listening to your customers and reworking disliked features (XBox One / Windows 9) is evil
- Creating UX = Owning all of life.
Is there a magazine I can subscribe to in order to hear more of your views?
I have long ago concluded that on Slashdot success = evil.
You succeeded in posting, nice job.
And you succeeded in a snarky reply. Welcome to the Evil League of Evil!
We meet on Tuesdays.
However, the referenced NY Times article does indicate:
"As a result, the desert state of Dubai brings sand for its beaches all the way from Australia."
However, I can't find any good references to back this up.
Also, the NY Times article is an opinion piece from a history professor....additional evidence required.
How dare they try to protect themselves from theft...
Copyright infringement is not theft.
Stop referring to it as such.
Or the terrorists win.
That's all well and good, but if something can't exist that's unobservable; then the assumption must be made that our ability to observe the universe is absolute.
No, the assumption must be made that the universe only consists of observable things.
i.e. that unobservable things do not exist (note: unobservable, not unobserved)
That's the whole point. It cannot be turtles all the way down,
Why not?
at some point reality must have some base that is uncaused
Why must there have been a base? If that base could be uncaused, why couldn't the universe just be uncaused?
Should we wait to have these discussions until then, or should we be having these discussions now so that we can provide a good framework, some good philosophy, and some well thought out answers to the next generation?
Yes, damn those ancient greeks for not considering the plight of anthropomorphized global warming, or the tragedy of the commons!
If only they had been having these discussions, we would have some well thought out answers!
That's an exaggeration, but not much of one. We know so little about how intelligence works that answers we came up with would likely be laughably wrong.
We are a long way from creating an AI.
1) Computers don't have anywhere near the same processing power as the brain. They are many orders of magnitude better than us at one very specific task (moving numbers around). We have no idea to what degree "really fast number shuffling" factors into intelligence.
2) Why would we hook it up to the internet? We could easily provide access to whatever knowledge we felt it needed, but still leave it air gapped.
3) Why would it have an motivations whatsoever regarding humans unless these were programmed in? Our motivations are the result of billions of years of natural selection (things that want to survive are more successful than things that don't). A "created" AI would be motivated by whatever we had built into it.
4) Why would it necessarily be able to replicate? There is no reason to think it would understand any more about it's own intelligence than we understand about ours?
5) Why would be give it the access required to replicate? Unless we gave it permission and access to a text editor / compiler and execute permissions on the code it generated, and access to hardware to run it on, replication would be a problem.
Hollywood stories are all good fun, but stories about AI typically don't stand up to any sort of reasonable analysis. IMO, our first AI's will be like very intelligent friendly dogs, willing obey master in order to get the reward that satisfies whatever "need" we have built into them.
Treating it "poorly" is an interesting question. Is it unethical to "enslave" an AI if it has been designed to get the most satisfaction out of "enslavement"?
If AI is ever invented and reaches a self-improvement tipping point there won't be any stopping it
Remove power cord from socket.
How exactly is RP International not a credible source?
They are a fairly well-known charity involved in raising money for the research of eye problems & support of the vision impaired.
BLISS is ignorance.
