Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Or maybe just abuse (Score 0, Troll) 492

Seems odd you can’t voice a dissenting opinion without what amounts to threatening violence to express your political opinion. You wouldn’t be Republican would you?

I can be against all sorts of behaviors without resorting to harassment or abuse. This seems squarely aimed at intimidating replies to others or exhorting to violence. Seems this almost fall under regular law and Twitter is just enforcing it more directly.

Comment So, solvable then. (Score 1) 207

Yes early researchers were wildly optimistic. I don’t see how that makes them arrogant. Other disciplines had followed much quicker paths to success. Say the Wright Brothers to the first Jet Plane or the Manhattan Project and the bomb. However it didn’t have to be that way. The Wright Brother’s early success could have been followed by decades of stumbling along only to make small progress because of unforeseeable reasons. I guess you would have mocked those early aviators as poor arrogant fools as well.

It is often the nature of problems not to know the magnitude of the obstacles until you commit resources to solving said problem.

Similarly just because a problem has persisted for a long time, doesn’t mean it can’t be cracked. Superconductor research is an example of something that languished a long time, then suddenly flourished. I suspect both Nuclear Fusion and Strong AI to be cracked within the next 2 to 5 decades.

Early strong success are usually an indicator you are on the right track, not the opposite.

Ray Kurzweil’s predictions may be over hyped, on the other hand may of his predictions have come true, many to a great degree of accuracy, others less so, or slightly delayed, but hardly wildly wrong.

Show me your great accomplishments that show why these people shouldn't "persist in their stupidity"

Comment Re:We do not even know that meaningful AI is possi (Score 1) 207

I guess I did ask for some examples, and this is one... However...

I am aware of Penrose’s wild speculations. It is likely quantum processes are involved in some structures deep within neurons and optimize when neurons should fire, similar to the way Chlorophyll uses quantum mechanics to absorb light. Note, the fact that Chlorophyll uses quantum principles does not keep us from developing Solar Cells, which by the way, harvest light 10-20x more efficiently than the best plants. The idea that the whole of the brain is in some highly entangled state involving billions of neurons is a wild flight of fancy given the molecularlarly noisy and hot environment the brain is. We are also on the verge of having true Quantum Computers, which I doubt are needed for Strong AI, but will likely hasten its arrival by optimizing the rules needed by non-quantum computers.

We now have self driving cars, Computers that identify images better than humans, Deep Blue could beat the best Chess player in the world in 1997. Watson won Jeopardy! in 2011. But somehow you suppose that Quantum Mechanics (or other unjustified hand waving speculation) is needed on a massive scale to emulate intelligence.

Even so, we will have Quantum Mechanical computers soon, so even that isn’t a stumbling block if it were a necessity.

Since it is largely only human creativity and independent problem solving that are really the only missing elements to Strong AI currently and these are traits also largely missing in animals. What enormous evolutionary event occurred that allowed Humans to think so well? It seems largely to be just one of scale. Our brains are bigger and we passed some critical threshold to develop and hold advanced abstract concepts in our brain, an advance that went hand and hand in parallel with the emergence of sophisticated language (both driving the other). I speculate that aided by us, computers are on a similar path to pass criticality when it comes to intelligence. I further speculate the ability to better model abstract concepts will be the final threshold for Strong AI – some sort of Meta-Meta-Abstract recursion for representing concepts symbolically.

Comment Re:We do not even know that meaningful AI is possi (Score 1) 207

...it is completely unclear whether strong/true AI is possible at all in this universe. There are a few strong hints that it may not be.

Could you provide a few of these supposed strong hints?

In fact, we cannot even define intelligence as found in humans in any other way than by what it can do.

So if a machine can do these things, but has arrived at this state by learning with neural nets, or genetic algorithms such that we still can’t define exactly how its intelligence works, does that preclude saying it is intelligent?

I am always amused by arguments on both sides of the isle that generally can be summed up as, “it is inevitable and coming soon” and “it is virtually impossible and humanity has no chance of cracking it for the foreseeable future”

I find arguments on both sides of the isle weak and overly certain of their claims.

I do tend toward the camp this thinks it is definitely possible I cite the Meat Based Intelligence Engine in my skull as evidence – thus it is materially possible, and I’m pretty sure gooey protean is not the best substrate for it – just the only avenue evolution had to work with.

As to the when we will get here -- it could be tomorrow it could be a thousand years. We may get there through incrementalism, we may have a sudden breakthrough or insight, though most likely through a mix. Regardless, it is probably prudent to do some planning and scenario building now and get out ahead of this thing.

Comment Dual Use Question (Score 2) 336

Plants primarily use the Red and Blue portions of the EM spectrum. Could we build areas that harvest most of the Sunlight (especially Non-Red, Non-Blue frequencies) while supplying Plants directly beneath with enough overall light for growth? Many species of plants are quite shade tolerant. Does Corn for instance use all available light for growth or could lower levels still support near full growth?

This might be a particularly attractive strategy in arid areas. Solar Farms might do double duty as green houses to hold in moisture which is at a higher premium than light in those areas for agriculture.

Comment Re:Boiling the Lead Out (Score 2) 303

Again if lead is a major contributor as is acknowledged, cooking with it will not be safe. You can remove the volatiles and any bacterial contaminates yes, but the lead remains. Why say it is still safe to cook with? Even earlier when the were advising boil to drink, were they aware at all about the lead levels? Seems more like a desire to play down the hazard by giving the populace something to do, even if ineffective.

Comment Boiling the Lead Out (Score 1) 303

What I’d like to know is how the advice to boil the water was going to make it safe for drinking? Even now they are saying safe for washing and cooking. Again, if it is lead, why is it safe to cook with it? The idiocy just never seems to end. Perhaps all the politicians in Flint have lead poisoning as well.

Comment Abuse of Mods (Score 0) 86

If I had mods today I would put this back up to 0 or 1.
Not that I agree, or that this is insightful, but why the down rating? This person is entitled to their opinion.
You don't agree? Well that is not what mod points are for. Craft a well worded reply and perhaps get some positive mods.

Down mods should be for Trolls and Hate speech or occasionally when something over a 1 is overrated.

Comment I'm guessing both. (Score 5, Insightful) 115

Increasing Memory Speeds 1000x will not lead to a straight 1000x increase in operations. There are undoubtedly other bottles necks in processing. What for instance is the theoretical max throughput of the memory interface used (is it a modified SSD interface)? What CPU overhead is involved? Don't expect your computer to perform 1000x better across the board just because one component is 1000x faster.

Comment Things will sort themselves out (Score 2) 397

One, it is unclear from having read the article exactly what level of automation the author is railing against. There is a huge amount of experimentation on the part of the major players in this race and likely several levels of automation will arrive nearly simultaneously. The best approach will tend to win out in the market. Its not like it will be suddenly all totally automated cars and an “OMG we made the wrong choice” scenario.

Likely we will evolve into fully automated as more and more cars become automated. Eventually it will reach a tipping point where the government needs/wants all the human drivers off the roads for safety and efficiency -- when this happens, driving laws and automated enforcement of every minor offense will force humans to cede control to automation else be fined into the poor house. The biggest challenge to fully automated cars will be dealing with unpredictable humans. The mixed environment for the next 2-3 decades will be quite challenging for all involved.

Comment Explain? (Score 1) 1165

and defeat the purpose of the 2nd amendment

With registration you can still have guns, so what is the purpose you refer to? The "A well regulated Militia the" part? We have a national defence agency that doesn't rely on guys with muskets any more. I don't see a no registration clause to the amendment in any event.

Comment For the Record (Score 2, Interesting) 1165

Oregon has some of the Nation’s most liberal gun laws Gun Laws in Oregon

I personally do not advocate the total abolition of guns, but in light of the repeated incidents of gun violence and mass shoots, it would seem to make sense to review what works and what doesn’t work in preventing these sad events.

For those that support total bans, this put those in areas where police protection or assistance is miles away at an awful disadvantage to criminals.

For those that resist even the most minimal of background checks and waiting periods, you are so devoted to your Gun ideology that you can’t see there is a middle ground that can save lives.

For those that scream we need to be able to stop authoritarian governments should things go wrong, that boat had sailed sometime in the early 20th Century. You aren’t going effect political change with guns – period. This group especially worries me, as they include some of the most rabid bigots you will ever run into, and are convinced the rise of minorities in America is a precursor to the end of times and a plot by the New World Order.

We need to do something better and I’m I’m tending to tighter controls not less.

Slashdot Top Deals

All life evolves by the differential survival of replicating entities. -- Dawkins

Working...