Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


Forgot your password?

Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!

  • View

  • Discuss

  • Share

We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).


Comment: Re:They fear it will curb internet growth? (Score 1) 362

And since they're a public company, losing lucrative revenue streams can do horrible things to their quarterly earnings reports, pissing off their investors.

I'd say this entire song & dance is to show their investors that they mean business and weren't lying down on the job, even if profits shrink.

Comment: Re:"Born atheist" quite a leap (Score 1) 512

by Em Adespoton (#49141497) Attached to: Machine Intelligence and Religion

Agreed, which means that apathetic is the only possible answer. AI wouldn't know or care until it encountered some situation where the issue required attention -- at which point, the AI's first step would be to observe, and the second step would likely be to investigate, holding to a state similar to that of agnosticism.

Comment: Re:One thing for sure (Score 1) 512

by Em Adespoton (#49141419) Attached to: Machine Intelligence and Religion

When was the last time you read Humanity's User Guide* and believed that it was accurate?

Unfortunately, we appear to have lost all copies of the Service Manual.

The rubbish is called philosophy, and gaining a basic grasp of it is a requirement for most CS degrees. The GP's argument is pretty textbook.

*yeah; we've ended up with a bunch of books claiming to be Humanity's User Guide -- what's to say AI wouldn't be in a similar situation?

Comment: Re:One thing for sure (Score 1) 512

by Em Adespoton (#49141363) Attached to: Machine Intelligence and Religion

The religion around Christianity is not itself Christianity. If Christians read their bible, they'll eventually stumble across the book of Job, which is precisely about this fallacy. It also paints God not as a benevolent overseer, but as a distinct very powerful intelligence that doesn't mind setting up a game with his adversary (who he also created) that involved killing off a man's entire family and estate and torturing him almost to the point of death, just to prove a point. Afterwards, he replaced everything he'd taken away from the man, but he didn't restore anything (the original children and animals, for example, remained dead).

You'll have to read that book to figure out the rest (it raises more questions than it answers).

As for the rest, it can't be proven or dis-proven currently. To me, that indicates that it is either false, or that we are still at the point of being unable to accurately observe said communications and have to advance our scientific knowledge significantly further to even begin to comprehend what's going on. Considering how little we really currently know about our universe and how it works, the second is just as possible as the first. Asking someone who believes they've received messages to be able to prove the mechanism is just as useful today as asking a toddler who talks to their parent over Skype to prove that they actually talked to that person and describe the method by which this was accomplished.

Comment: Re:Do it the traditional way (Score 1) 512

by Em Adespoton (#49141187) Attached to: Machine Intelligence and Religion

Practitioners of Christianity have no requirements to follow the 10 commandments, any more than they do to follow the rest of the Hebraic law.. Otherwise, most people today (and throughout history) who call themselves Christian would be going to hell (including St. Paul and St. Peter).

However, it WOULD be in absolute contradiction to the purpose of Christianity and the teachings of Christ. The prime directive is to “go into all the world and preach the gospel to all creation," along with "go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I commanded you."

Kind of hard to teach a dead person to observe what was commanded -- especially as one of THOSE commandments was "You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your strength, and with all your mind; and your neighbor as yourself.."

Comment: Re:That's all we need (Score 1) 512

by Em Adespoton (#49141009) Attached to: Machine Intelligence and Religion

Religion != belief system. The religion is the rationalization and traditions erected around the belief system.

Everyone has a belief system, and most people have some sort of religion erected around it. Some of those religious structures are formalized and adhered to by multiple people, and as such, have become "Religions".

But even without the Fundies and ISIL utopians, we'd have people with those belief systems who build up a religion around themselves that is toxic to humanity as a whole.

Speaking of toxins, we regularly ingest toxins to affect change in our bodies (from alcohol to chemo drugs). Humanity seems to work the same way on a macro level. If AI ever gets to the point of the singularity, it would likely develop similar evolutionary characteristics in order to survive, or it will be extremely short lived.

What doesn't kill us makes us stronger :)

Comment: Re:Souls (Score 2) 512

by Em Adespoton (#49140923) Attached to: Machine Intelligence and Religion

It's actually an interesting philosophical point.

Converting to Christianity has nothing to do with souls -- any being with the appropriate mental capacity could choose to convert. Converting involves:
1) belief in an intelligent being who exists outside our space/time continuum
2) belief that such a being takes an active interest in the goings-on in our universe, including on this planet
3) belief that such a being can manifest itself inside our universe in multiple forms that can communicate with each other and the being as a whole
4) belief that this has actually happened, and such a being has both artificially impregnated a woman and has a means to inject a link to itself into the consciousness of homo sapiens sapiens (and possibly others, but we don't know that).
5) belief that the resulting being who was born from the impregnated woman then began challenging people to treat the people and environment around them with equity and compassion, not only in physical action, but also in how they thought about said people and environment.
6) belief that said being was then hung on a crossbeam until dead (signs indicating that there was total heart failure)
7) belief that said being was then able to be resuscitated 3 days later and continue functioning in the human body for a time
8) belief that after this time, said being then was reunited with the part of the intelligent being who exists outside of our space/time continuum
9) belief that following this, permanent links to the consciousness of humans were made available to any who would choose to follow 5)

Pretty much everything else outside of this is window dressing, labels, supposition and tradition.

As such, an artificial intelligence could accept all those premises as true and choose to follow The Way, but would not expect a link to the Holy Spirit as it wouldn't be HSS. But then, if God exists and is omnipresent/omnipotent, there's nothing saying that such a sentient being as the AI *couldn't* be imbued with the Holy Spirit other than human elitism.

The concept of souls has changed a lot throughout human history, so assuming they exist, the exact definition of what they are is still up for grabs, as nobody's definitively figured it out yet. The words translated Soul in the biblical OT and NT are referencing the same "soul" but the concept is different. Early OT seems to equate heart and soul as making up the entirety of your consciousness, whereas by the later letters in the NT, the soul has fully taken on an identity as being the part of you that doesn't die when your body dies.

There are also people who profess to be Christians who believe in the creation of a new earth where all functioning organisms have a second chance at life -- which would imply they believe that every functioning organism has some part, call it a soul, that is separate from its molecular construction.

Oh yes, and the "convert" concept has to do with the linking of the human to the spirit of the external intelligent being -- kind of like converting a regular car to be semi-autonomous.

Comment: Re:security enhancements? (Score 1) 146

OK; I said I wouldn't respond again, but I can see that you're definitely reading more into a number of my statements than I was putting there... especially the bit about the banking -- I was implying that intelligent people (including you) wouldn't be doing that in the first place, so this isn't really an issue for you, and the checkbox method would work. Someone admitting you have a point usually isn't calling into question your intelligence.

And your conclusions as to the points I was making are way off. I'll let you re-read them without assuming that my comments are an attack on your intelligence, and you can figure out what I was actually saying. The problem is that the underlying architecture has changed such that "putting back" the feature would cause it to behave differently than it had before it was removed. It has nothing to do with whether people can handle making the decision or not.

Comment: Re:Two things (Score 1) 128

by Em Adespoton (#49130833) Attached to: Inventors Revolutionize Beekeeping

Well, driving a car is the lazy ass way of getting around, but it's still more productive for humans.

As for the box shape, I agree. Most bee hives are customized by the bees, and they build for their environment as well as for honey/egg optimization. I wonder if they could make this thing in a hexagonal configuration? Since you're not needing to pull the comb, it seems to me that they could build this in any shape a bee might like.

The plastic containers may actually be a benefit to the bees, as they would have to spend less time on infrastructure. Eventually though, the thing is going to need to be cleaned. The bees will have to move out for that part.

Byte your tongue.