Except that Google isn't profiting from Android as a mobile search platform. They have acknowledged this in their quarterly reports.

How crazy do you have to be to file DMCA take-down notices with the website providers over your blog photo as your FIRST option?

You don't have to be crazy at all. That's what the DMCA allows for, so you don't have to get bogged down in a bunch of back-and-forth with multiple infringers. That's the very intent of the take-down notice portion of the DMCA.

If you don't want your site pulled down due to a DMCA notice, then don't use other people's content without permission. It's that simple.

No, that's not true ... that's not at all what is holding "general AI" back. What's holding "general AI" back is that there is no way at all to implement it. Specialized AI is actually moving forward the only way we know how with actual results. Without further research in specialized AI, we would constantly get no closer to "generalized AI" and I keep using quotes around that because it's such a complete misnomer and holy grail that we aren't going to see it any time soon.

When I studied this stuff there were two hot approaches. One was logic engines and expert systems that could be generalized to the point of encompassing all knowledge. Yeah, good luck with that. How does one codify creativity? The other approach was to model neurons in software and then someday when we have a strong enough computers, they will just emulate brains and become a generalized thinking AI. Again, the further we delved into neurons the more we realized how wrong our basic assumptions were -- let alone the infeasibility to emulating the cascading currents across them.

"General AI" is holding itself back in the same way that "there is no such thing as a free lunch" is holding back our free energy dreams.

We're so far from that, it humors to me to hear questions and any semi-serious question regarding it. It is not the malice of an AI system you should fear, it is the manifestation of the incompetence of the people who developed it that results in an error (like sounding an alarm because a sensor misfired and responding by launching all nuclear weapons since that what you perceive your enemy to have just done) that should be feared!

People are obsessed by the philosophical and financial prospects of an intelligent computer system but nobody's telling me how to implement it -- that's just hand waving so they can get to the interesting stuff. Right now, rule based systems, heuristics, statistics, Bayes' Theorem, Support Vector Machines, etc will get you far further than any system that is just supposed to "learn" any new environment. All successful AI to this point has been built with the entire environment in mind during construction.

Well after reading the article, I'm lead to believe that that is essentially what was done and that there were actually crew members hurt in the fire so the proposed strategy may have had to wait while they verified they weren't also trapping a human in there with the fire:

So, how have the big traditional space contractors like the Rockwell, Boeing, Lockheed, etc., of old, and now United Space Alliance and United Launch Alliance not delivered on their contracts? Saying that it might cost too much by some measure is one thing, but in terms of space launch to LEO you don't get a better record than ULA. Note, too, that SpaceX is using a significant amount of government infrastructure and personnel to launch and manage its space systems — not to diminish what they're doing one bit.

The point is that there is the difference between a job as a way to get something done, and a job just for the sake of paying some people. Both are a job, but one gets something done, the other is just a fancy way to redistribute wealth.

Then again, considering that half the private IT projects and probably three quarters of government ones are about as needed as the pyramids, it's probably no wonder that so many people on this site are unable to see the difference :p

Well, maybe not as we know it today, but the idea of building something useless, or which you don't really need, as a way to give a wage to the poor has been used before. E.g., the follies in the 19'th century.

What makes it effectively welfare from the point of view of the state is that you're not really getting anything you need either way. I mean, if you pay to have a bridge built over a river to relieve a busy ferry, you've bought something useful with that money. If you build a bridge in the middle of a field, just to pay some workers, that's really what you get when people don't want to just pay any loafer but still want to feed some unemployed who want to work.

What Imhotep as high priest came up with is hard to describe as anything else than a religious BS rationalization for why the pharaoh should do that. It wasn't jump from a mastaba tomb (simple rectangular house, so to speak, as a crypt) to pyramid AND the whole complex around it, but also a tradition that it's sorta bad luck to stop building SOMETHING at it. The great pyramid for example, because the Pharaoh still wasn't dead after a long time, ended up with tunnels dug under it to nowhere and stuff like that.

AP IMPACT: New light on drone war's death toll

AP IMPACT: New light on drone war's death toll

In the video, they recommend fighting this in a traditional manner like suicide bombing. First you tape up with explosives, then sit at a computer, then log into a US website visited by millions of users daily and detonate your vest -- thereby sending all of those heathenish packets of Western information to hell.