Forgot your password?

Comment: is still programed by humans (Score 1) 199

"a computer that can program itself"

is a computer that has been programmed by a human with parameters and a system specifically made by humans for it to take defined variables and combine them in pre-programmed parameters

all pounded out by a dumb monkey

'teh singularity' is a tautology

you can't make a new thing by calling the same thing a different name

Comment: teh singularity (Score 1) 199

we haven't managed to make machines until now that are smart at all. Artificial intelligence isn't synthetic intelligence: It's pseudo-intelligence. This really ought to be obvious. Clocks may keep time, but they don't know what time it is.

so glad to see published articles where they say this plainly

'teh singluarity' needs to go to the dustbin of history b/c it's wasting *billions* of research dollars

Comment: **bad idea** not "big idea" (Score 1) 84

by globaljustin (#48443837) Attached to: How "Big Ideas" Are Actually Hurting International Development

we have to blame the business people here

the problem is that the people with money don't know the difference between a *good* tech innovation and *bullshit* marketing gussied up as tech innovation

the problem is ignorance of the decision makers, not our ideas

there are plenty of good ideas to be had floating in the ether...

Comment: punishing Dice with griefer bots? (Score 4, Interesting) 143

by globaljustin (#48442749) Attached to: Judge Unseals 500+ Stingray Records

these extreme trolls are complex enough that they might mean something

i wonder what organization (and their PR wing) would be pissed that Slashdot published this story

it could be that if they can't keep it from being published then they systematically subvert it by putting racist/homophobic stuff as first post to make it obnoixious

in other words, sockpuppet griefers

Comment: tautology ontology (Score 1) 63

by globaljustin (#48442653) Attached to: Upgrading the Turing Test: Lovelace 2.0's all based on a tautology...a faulty ontology. The Computability Function is not a computing paradigm, it's reductive.

'AI' is complex machines following instructions. That's what it is. The rest is people projecting their own emotions onto inanimate objects.

When I say "it's a tautology" what I mean is, it's based on linguistic distinctions only. Not actual, functional distinctions.

A tautology says, "If people think a pile of shit is a steak dinner, then it becomes a steak dinner"

That's an extremem example, but it's actually not that far off from what 'teh singularity' crowd are doing with 'ai'

I'm a telecommunications engineer and MS is in Information & Comm Science and I'm ABD in System Science

I'm working on promoting the *Cybernetic* ontology as the foundational paradigm for computing.

Cybernetics for computing would be a combination of Claude Shannon, Norbert Weiner, Lovelace, and others...

In the cybernetic paradigm, the Atanasoff-Berry Computer is the prototypical advancement.

ahem...i'm tweeting about this using the #cybernetics's my way of trying to promote the idea

Comment: Lovelace is great, test is dumb (Score 1) 63

by globaljustin (#48442631) Attached to: Upgrading the Turing Test: Lovelace 2.0

The Turing and Computability Function paradigm for computing is (finally) being rightly and fully criticized (ironically, as we get a Turing hollywood movie)

Ada Lovelace's theories ***do indeed*** provide the theoretical ground work (along with others like Claude Shannon) to cleans ourselves of Turing Test nonsense

However...this TFA is not the test.

It's just a variation on the Turing test that still has the same's a test of fooling a human in an artificial, one time only environment...which has nothing to do with actual computing

We need to stop pretending we can make a machine that thinks like we do...

It's a tautology and a waste of resources.

Machines follow the instructions we give them via code. End.

Comment: "very telling" indeed (Score 4, Insightful) 145

by globaljustin (#48431813) Attached to: Greenwald Advises Market-Based Solution To Mass Surveillance

Just asking this question (in a serious context) is foolish and ruining America:

Greenwald's argument is very telling: that society can rely on corporate interests for protection. Is it true that representative government is a lost cause and that lawmakers would never knowingly yield authority?

The enemies of freedom want us to be asking fsking moronic questions like this!

**of course 'representative government' isn't a lost cause**

The fact that we are even putting this on /. is the thing that is actually "very telling" shows people have forgotten the basics of being a free individual

What the world *really* needs is a good Automatic Bicycle Sharpener.