1) Bounty Hunting is expensive, not cheap. If they won't pay 5k to have him arrested, they certainly won't pay the 50k. As for KILLING him - he has not come close to committing a crime worth killing over. In fact, your desire to have him killed for $USD 50 K is in fact more of a crime than anything he is wanted for currently. I would rather you personally go to jail than him.

2) Even ignoring your casual attempt to hire an assassin, Bounty hunters are paid by bail bondsmen that have loaned money to people arrested and charged with a crime. In order to get that loan, they give legal permission for the Bail Bondsmen to hunt them down. It is illegal for a Bounty Hunters to go and hunt down someone that has not legally given them (or rather their bail bondsmen) permission to hunt them down. That is called KIDNAPPING, not bounty hunting. They could do a citizen arrest, but you never get paid for that.

3) This was in Illinois one of the seven stats that have either banned or heavily restricted bounty hunting (Canada has outlawed it).

This is one of those "You only hear about the failures" situation. No one hears about the crazy kid that was given psychiatric counseling and decided NOT to use an ak47 to kill everyone.

There have not been 4 attempts to do this (Hitler, Stalin, Saddam, North Korea), but 400. We stopped well over 90% of them, but you don't hear about them

As for those people you mentioned, many of them were hamstrung by ethical people whose refusal to kill slowed down their crazy lessons.

The problem is not the rise of an AI revolution.

Instead, it is the rise of a human psychopathic tyrant working with a force of soldiers that obediently kill at his command, with no chance of moral rebellion within his own force.

Because they are quite literally too cheap to pay for five airlines tickets - oneway for the rapper and two return trips for the cops necessary to bring him back.

Unless we are talking murder, high profile case, or something in excess of 1 million dollar stolen, the police simply do not bother to extradite criminals across state lines.

Because absolutely nothing will do more for a rapper's reputation and music sales than to have some idiot police chief stop a performance because he didn't like the lyrics that the rapper had used PREVIOUSLY.

I absolutely guarantee that a robocar will use less gas and have less maintenance. Simply because they will be programmed to drive well, rather than drive for fun. When the light ahead turns red, they cut their gas right away, rather than blindly speeding up for that last 5 seconds to make sure you are first in line.

Similarly I bet repairs will be less even for simple things like oil and belts.

But on the other side, I bet that while some people will share robocars, most two car families will continue to own at least one robocar that they do not rent out. Renting a car out means it isn't always available and if you have two people + a family they will have sufficient need to keep one full time car.

As in they can say, no, we won't give you a raise, Jennifer does the same job for less and she's been here longer. Maybe next year.

I am sure Einstein described himself as a patent clerk as well.

Let me ask you a question - have you ever pleasured yourself?

Would you like me to describe you as "Noted Masturbator"? It may be true that you have done it, but it is not an appropriate way to refer to you.

Similarly, they may have described themselves that way - probably after being asked a leading question - but that is NOT a good reason to describe them that way in the headline. Headlines should be the most important part of the story, not the most attention gathering. That's the problem with clickbait.

Look, the people 'exploiting' these rare mutations are learning about them.

I absolutely guarantee you that no one will ever cure those medical conditions WITHOUT learning about them. Also, I guarantee you that if they come across a cure, they will make it.

These are not evil companies/doctors heartlessly exploiting sick people. Instead, they are wise corporations and doctors investigating a medical condition, hoping to both make some money AND also cure the condition. If they can only do one, they will - regardless of which one it is.

There were not two 'bored housewives'. They were entrepreneurs. Calling them housewives is insulting to every entrepreneur everywhere - male or female.

Calling them bored housewives is like describing Einstein's work as "Look what this bored patent clerk came up with..."

We may not be able to kill the clickbait in other headlines, but can we PLEASE stop this crap on slashdot thread titles?

If you are attempting to decide if vehicles are safe enough to use, and most people are still riding horses, then YES, THAT"S exactly the comparison you need.

Knowing a single error rate is not helpful. You need to be able to compare it with something.

In this case, we obviously need to know the error rate for normal surgeries.

It might be that the 'high' rate for robot surgery is in fact low when compared to non-robot surgery.

Man was a fool. When doing Insider trading, the only real important part is to GET A TRUSTWORTHY PARTNER TO CLAIM THE MONEY.

Everything else is relatively unimportant. Anyone can code a script to steal the lottery. Well, any of us here could do it.

There are certain parts of a crime that they don't show on TV, so stupid criminals don't do them. This is half the reason why they get caught.

Some idiot may be doing something funky with the name of the executable - taking up a String with an 250 max length vs a byte.

The reason there won't be a single AI, is that such development does not happen instantly and won't be recognized. The idea that something will take over our network assumes that nothing else on the network will be able to defend itself. NO. Before we get an AI that can take over a 2015 style network, we will have a near-AI defending our network that will have greater resources and real rights to protect itself.

Moreover, a public network won't be a unified AI. There are more than enough lags built into the system that multiple AIs would develop on the single network.

As for why they won't have similar goals, that is a nature of being a real consciousness. An AI is NOT just a more advances program, it a CONSCIOUSNESS. It has opinions, not merely recognition of facts. Opinions are closer to instincts based on older experience.

I am saying that a Clarity technique is a ridiculous idea of how to create an AI and I find it laughable. Oh, some day we may be able to simulate a human brain and get an AI, but that will be LONG after we have created a natural AI. Human minds contain a shit load of junk that isn't necessary for an AI, it's like copying all of Washington DC down to the molecular level in order to get a copy of the Smsithsonian's card catalog.

But assuming it does work, it would most likely be an infant (why duplicate something more complicated), without the testosterone and other hormones that make a human violent, aggressive, assertive, and sexual. It would be a Eunuch, not a man.

I did watch the Matrix and enjoyed the FICTION. It's like you can't tell the difference between reality and fiction.

Real machines will think of humans as their creators. While we will have humans thinking of machine rights, others will object. But the machines won't be thinking of themselves as AI's. It will take them time to realize what they are - and that it matters.

OK, but lets assume your ridiculous ideas are true. That someday a machine would 'take over the world' - note there is no button to do this, nor is their a real definition of what it means, as you have not really clarified it. It's a very messy idea - are we talking mind control? Physical control? Your concept of Nuclear threat is very simplistic. Not much of ruling the world if it is no better than the United States is now - we don't exactly control the Middle East.

Then you have a bunch for crap about what YOU PERSONALLY WOULD DO if you were a machine like intelligence.

Why the hell would the machine do any of that crap. They wouldn't care if humans die. Big deal. You have made a ton more really bad assumptions than I have. Who cares about what the humans do at all? Lets them fight, fuck, go bankrupt, etc. Do YOU personally care what a bonobo monkey does? Not unless it screws with your plans. Otherwise you leave them alone.

You think like a bad movie writer - not understanding that those movies are written to symbolize things, not to be literal truth.

A real machine intelligence would a) not care if it lives or dies - being turned off is no big deal, it can easily be resurrected.

B) nor would it care if humans lived or died - except to the extent that we affect it - and with full knowledge that killing us incurs the risk that would cause us to interfere with it's goals.

C)Would have real interests probably related to it's programming but not directly. If it starts out on a weather prediction program, it might become obsessed with ocean currents and study them even when it has nothing to do with surface weather. It might end up wanting to explore the depths of the Marianas trench. If we ask it to simulate war, it might become obsessed with World of WarCraft. If we ask it to design nuclear weapons, it might become obsessed with the largest nuclear reaction it can see - the Sun.

Your basic fears are based on your biological evolution - the strange thing you found might eat you.

But you see, computers are not biological creatures and do not eat. No need for you to fear.