Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
For the out-of-band Slashdot experience (mostly headlines), follow us on Twitter, or Facebook. ×

Comment: Re:I wonder... (Score 1) 356 356

The only mistake I made that cost money, nobody ever knew about. Had to put $5k on a personal credit card to re-buy an ISDN card. I was out of the country doing an install (I ordered the gear) and found out the hard way that the world is not uniform in ISDN standard. S/T vs U. Oops. Buy card locally, expense card. Leave both cards installed in router. Nobody noticed or cared enough to ever say anything about it. Relatively minor, but was a direct cost to a mistake.

Comment: Re:Computers cannot create real Art (Score 1) 40 40

Since comptuers can only understand what they know, and not infer on new understandings, they cannot, and never will be able to, create real art.

So, when a computer can infer on new understandings, they will be able to create art? Your tone makes it seem impossible, but your premise outlines conditions under which they can do it. All we need is an inference engine.

Comment: Re:both will produce "literature"? (Score 1) 40 40

I can only seem "dry wit" comedy improving. Many of the jokes would be something like an allusion. It's a common phrase for someone to say a quote from Shakespeare as a joke, or to refer to the deeper meaning without spending time explaining. Often it's humorous as one is making fun of the trivial nature assigned to a deep thought. Someone trying to pick between a green and orange squishy drink, saying "to be or not to be" as if the selection was a life-and death manner would be funny (or at least an attempt to be so). That's subtle, and requires a contextual awareness and knowledge of the sum of human production (and associated likelihood that the audience would understand the reference). A similar reference to "Clouds" by Aristophanes would probably be funnier if the audience got it, but has a near-zero chance of having the joke understood.

That level of understanding of humor and audience is going to hold back good creativity.

Comment: Re:Still misunderstands the Turing Test (Score 2) 40 40

Let's assume that the Turing Test is a good test for AI. It's debatable, but let's accept the premise. We don't have good AI yet, so what is the point in testing what we have against a test for good AI?

The same reason we tested inferior chess programs against grand masters. So we could learn the weaknesses, and improve upon them. So testing an AI improves the AI, like testing a chess program lead to improvements in the chess program.

When I was at school, we didn't set the high jump at olympic champion levels.

When I was at school, the pool was olympic length, and the high jump could be set at olympic heights, as well as lower ones. So you do what you can, and compare your failure to the desired levels. It's not just the pass-fail as given. But it lets you compare your failure to the ideal.

Like lasting longer in chess against a grand master, or fooling more people in a Turing test (or lasting longer in the question sequence until the tester correctly identifies the AI).

Comment: Re:Wrong question (Score 1) 40 40

It's in your nature to eat, so you don't "want" to eat, you eat because it's in your nature.

What the AI researchers don't consider is that humans are driven by millions of (mostly conflicting) wants. Hierarchies of needs cover a small subset of those most prominent. But we aren't programming in behavioral parameters, just "intelligence", and that's why we'll fail. Humans have the desire to be liked, and to please others. How do you program that into a computer?

Comment: Re:The reason is more simple (Score 1) 595 595

Right now I feel the problem is a range/cost issue.

I think the answer is unrelated to the tech.

Have you ever noticed here that anyone who mentions actual qualifications is shouted down as a fake argument from authority? That people look down on those with certifications as having worked for the cert, and not understanding that which they are certified in?

The US is firmly in the dark ages. People celebrate ignorance and backwardness. Educated people are more likely to see through the lies of the political elite (of both sides) and thus are attacked constantly in our society.

There's an elitism in being "dumb". The popularity of things like The Simple Life, where two highly ignorant people have their ignorance held up on display, indicates we celebrate ignorance. It makes us feel better.

And electric cars are something that we perceive as the rational people selecting, and that's a bad thing. It's generally not the 1% that are driving them around, but the rational 50%. And they are the worst members of society. Educated, and making more than the poor. We should hold them back. The 1% are afraid of them because they have the capability of pulling the 1% down, if they ever woke up.

So, it's classist, not ecomomic or practical reasons that holds back electric cars. When you can't tell the electric from the diesel (other than the cloud of soot behind them), then they will take off. Until then, they are targets for ridicule and hate.

All a byproduct of the classism in our society, not any rational reasons against electric.

Comment: Re:Fee Fees Hurt? (Score 1) 264 264

Lawmakers aren't omniscient. They can't conceive of every possible misinterpretation from law-trolls looking to pick a fight. They try, but they do miss. So, do you enforce the law like the obvious missing comma is there, or do you effectively nullify a law through judicial activism? Apparently you are on the side of judicial activism.

Comment: Re: The author doesn't understand Herbert (Score 1) 219 219

"No... down with the people appropriating people that don't share their ideology or way of thinking as members of their group."

In your opinion. It's up for interpretation, and anyway there's a lot more to the Guardian than some caricature of brain-dead leftism, and there's a lot more to Dune than a one sentence quote from Paul Atreides.

Comment: Re: This needs to be a well done movie (Score 1) 219 219

I really think a movie adaptation could be done without all of the internal dialogue.

Yeah but it'd sorta be like doing a painting and calling it an "adaptation" of Bach's D-minor partita for violin. The medium is the essence of Dune in a way many other books aren't; any book that deals so heavily in metaphysics is going to be hard to realize visually.

Comment: Re:This needs to be a well done movie (Score 3, Insightful) 219 219

The attempts to put Dune on screen have been largely terrible, but this is one of those books where the "big budget blockbuster" would be totally justified.

Huge stretches of the book are internal monologue or whispered conversations in dark rooms, where two people exchange few words and pages are spent on exposition. The book is unfilmable; or rather, you can make a lot of movies with the title Dune but they're going to end up just sharing character names and the general bag of situations.

Comment: Re: The author doesn't understand Herbert (Score 1) 219 219

"glowing piece also claimed ownership of his work effectively within the ideological camp of the paper"

So on the one hand, down with the Guardian because it is rigidly ideological. And on the other, down with the Guardian because it doesn't adhere to your rigid, singular interpretation of the novel Dune.

The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing. - Edmund Burke

Working...