Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:100% effective in FIVE monkeys (Score 1) 129

by JJJK (#32396998) Attached to: New Ebola Drug 100% Effective In Monkeys

You are right, they still need to test it on humans - and the death rates really make the "cure" thing seem unimportant.

But five monkeys aren't that few if you consider it was 30000 times the lethal dosage. Sounds to me like testing bomb-squad armor by dropping an atomic bomb on it - five times.

I doubt that we'll see this being treated as the breakthrough that it is without calling it something that it isn't yet.

Comment: Re:You know what this means (Score 1) 318

by JJJK (#30774068) Attached to: IE 0-Day Flaw Used In Chinese Attack

At least those Google employees who are responsible for getting stuff displayed in browsers need to use all major browsers. QA people probably even use all the browsers plus most versions of those browsers. Sure, those setups will probably be automated and sandboxed, but at least up until now I don't think it seemed necessary for each developer to be that paranoid about using the latest IE for quick tests.

I'm sure that for normal browsing (not for testing purposes) most of these people use chrome.

Comment: Re:Oh for the love of god ... Throttlegate? (Score 1) 314

by JJJK (#30276422) Attached to: Dell Defect Turning 2.2GHz CPU Into 100MHz CPU?

Every time some name becomes a noun (or a noun becomes a verb), a meme becomes mainstream, or anything slightly changes its meaning to settle in a niche, there will always be a lot of ranting from people who find this annoying or lame, making it something of a scandal.

I'll just call that "GATEGATEGATE".

Comment: Reselling (Score 1) 258

by JJJK (#29625403) Attached to: PSP Go Debuts, Disappoints

This is what bothers me the most. Of course Sony doesn't want someone to play a game and then resell it - they don't get a cut. This and piracy are the biggest reasons for the change (battery life? sure, they care sooo much how long you can play with their console). But what about the people who simply don't have the money?

As a kid, the amounts of money I had pretty much made me choose: buy the hardware to play games or buy games. Couldn't afford both. So I chose the hardware. With consoles, I bought used games or new ones (to sell them later). Also there's rental. Unless you do these things, games are way too expensive (at least to a kid). On the PC I just pirated whatever I wanted. Didn't feel right, but I kept telling myself that I only download/copy whatever I couldn't afford anyway.

But now as an adult I do buy games. I don't play as much as I used to, so I can afford it (although I do usually wait until the price drops). But thanks to my reselling/renting/pirating childhood, I'm pretty much a gamer for life. If we had ebay back then, I'd also be much more used to buying games.

When I do buy a new, full-priced game, I still like to think it's no that expensive, because I can still sell it on ebay. I usually don't, but it does make it easier to buy something without thinking much about it. With an app store, I know that I don't really own that game. What I bought is the privilege to play it almost immediately (with no fear of scratched DVDs), as long as the company that sold it to me exists. That's it. App stores that sell games at retail price are complete insanity. Some even use bittorrent, so there's not even much bandwidth to pay for.

But you know, the market will decide. According to sony that means "new psp go owners", not "people with old psps who bitch about being ignored" and they're probably right.

This is the world we live in: buy a product, be dead to the company that made it - unless you have some sort of support contract.

Comment: Re:Why not the PS3? (Score 1) 101

by JJJK (#29401811) Attached to: Parallel Processing For Cardiac Simulations Using an Xbox 360

Or use OpenCL and choose any GPU vendor that supports it (ATI and nVidia already do - in beta)

I must admit that CUDA is pretty easy, you'll understand the basics and make a simple application in less than one day. I have some experience with programmable shaders and I know how GPGPU works, but that's a lot more complicated than using CUDA. I'm not sure what kinds of features the xbox provides, but I doubt it's easier than that. And OpenCL is almost the same concept, it's just using a compilation method more similar to what shader programmers are used to.

Comment: Re:There is no way an AI can build a cleverer AI. (Score 1) 482

by JJJK (#29368283) Attached to: Why Motivation Is Key For Artificial Intelligence

Let me guess, you had one course / book about CS theory or something and now you just throw half-understood concepts at us. (I'll try that too!)

The problem is that it is not that easy to understand the implications of things like the halting problem. It is very important for the general concept of computation, but it does not mean that there is not a significant subclass of programs for which the halting problem is decideable. void main(){} halts, void main(){while(true);} does not and it is easy to see for us (or a computer) why that's the case. Similar thing happened to limtxt-learneable languages until pattern languages came along. Just because you found out that you can't do something in general doesn't mean there isn't a huge number of useful instances where you still can.

That's why you shouldn't limit cleverness like that. Also, why does HAL-2 have to solve all the mathematical problems that HAL solves instead of just "more"? What if HAL uses a evolutionary algorithm and makes HAL-2 by "informed accident"? And how many mathematical problems can bacteria solve? Based on your theory, all ancestors of humans (including bacteria) should be able to solve at least as many as we do.

I'm guessing that the truth about how intelligence developed from non-intelligence is hidden somewhere in the concepts of evolution and emergence. If you don't fully understand these things (I know I don't), don't make predictions about what intelligence can or cannot do, and that includes the creation of cleverer AI.

Comment: Re:Flying Car (Score 1) 712

by JJJK (#29285135) Attached to: Has the Rate of Technical Progress Slowed?
I think the author made pretty much the same mistake. If you measure progress in "number of unrelated things that blew my mind per decade", then that rate might be (temporarily) going down. If you mean overall progress in all fields that support small incremental changes, then that rate is going up. Way up.

Comment: Re:The article's author is confused (Score 1) 712

by JJJK (#29285033) Attached to: Has the Rate of Technical Progress Slowed?

I too think that the author used the wrong yardstick - you could make a similar argument counting the number of "fields of science". Just because not that much completely-unheard-of things get invented doesn't mean the overall progress, or complexity as you've said, doesn't continue at the same or higher rate. The biggest change has already been introduced with computing, and since most future changes will somehow be related to that, they will look smaller in comparison. Strong AI could be considered a "game-changing" invention or something - if it came unexpectedly instead through small increments.

It's hard to keep track of the state of science today. I read a lot of science news, try to stay informed... but Kurzweil's books (K. tends to write a lot about advances in many different fields) and TED conferences still surprise me and make me wonder how I could miss all these new things. So if the author wants that "big advances each decade"-feeling of the 20th century, he should probably go live in a cave for ten years and then check back. The little increments seem to ruin perception.

At work, the authority of a person is inversely proportional to the number of pens that person is carrying.

Working...