I din't have time to reply to your full post at the moment, sorry.

However I'm wrong in terminology on dankula, what they did do is Demonetize his ENTIRE CHANNEL recently, regardless of the video content.

Which is frankly, bullshit

The listed devices are KNOWN to be affected.
Others are also affected, but haven't been tested and proven vulnerable. A reboot is probably a good idea for any router - won't hurt anything.

Problem with words like "AI" and "Cloud" they convey no more useful information than saying "that thing". They can mean anything by themselves. It is only with qualifying context can useful information be exchanged.

Default mental picture of what they represent varies so wildly by individuals as to be a total write off. It's counterproductive to bother to invoke them at this point.

Language belongs to everyone not just yourself or the people who write dictionaries. What languages means depends on what society says it means at any point in time.

The fact is "AI" has become an empty meaningless term.

My disagreement was with regards to the claim that the bureaucracy only took 3 days. I understand where the 3 days came from as a reference, and I also agree with your assessment about the potential dangers in giving the Chinese a reason to invest in their own chip tech, but the implication of those previous statements was clearly inaccurate.

Ok. The censorship here is way too much. But it eased over the last couple of years. The only thing that I miss now is the ability to play against real nazis as no publisher tries to challenge that unconstitutional ban. The self-censor-committee of the gaming industry recently admitted that the old ruling for wolfenstein 3d would not stand once challenged, as the reality has sunk in that games and movies are comparable now and that the art exception could no longer withheld from computer games.

The antifa is not responsible for game censoring. It was the mass media and established politicians. Get your facts straight.

On the other hand, while I would not ban the game I still find it tasteless. Going postal was dark humour. This is meant as a simulation without the comic relief. Wonât buy wonât play. Did play any Wolfenstein game though, uncensored...

I'm sorry that English is not your first language. If something SHOULD be done and HAS been done, then it is not meaningful to harp on the idea that it SHOULD be done, because it already was. Thus, the implication is that you believe it has not. That's assuming you are trying to say something relevant to the discussion. Perhaps that is my error?

Here's an analogy -- "you should not type your comments in all upper-case". Hey, you didn't do that! Why do I need to lecture you about that if you didn't do it? The IMPLICATION is, when I tell you not to do something, that you were doing it. Why would I tell you what you should NOT do unless you were doing it? So, why is it hard to understand that when YOU say that something SHOULD be done that you are implying that it was not?

Yes, it would. But you said that it would be difficult for the phone to ask for confirmation, and that's what I replied to. It is not hard for the phone to ask once, twice, or ten times. It is a program. The phone will do what it is programmed to do, and there are already programs on the phone that ask for confirmation before continuing. It's a design element in the Android UI. It is not difficult at all for the phone to ask.

Now you're trying to debate how many times it should ask. If it is so amazingly difficult to do, why would you suggest it do it more than once?

I'm stating a fact as it was known at the time this discussion began. We do not know that Alexa did not ask for verification. I don't know that we still don't know whether it did or not.

You have already admitted that asking for verification on dialing a cell phone would not stop all butt-dialing. But somehow, asking for verification on sending a message using Alexa would stop all such events and make it a "non-story".

We already know that Alexa heard something it thought was its wakeup word. We also know that Alexa heard something that sounded like "send a message to ...". It is not out of the realm of possibility that Alexa could also have heard something it interpreted as approval when it asked for verification (just like a false press on the "ok" verification for butt dialing.)

It would have meant that the owners would have said something that was misinterpreted as approval, just like they already said things that sounded like a command to wake up and a command to send a message. Why do you think that this makes them "complete retards"?

Here's a trivial example of how this could have happened. HIM: "We need to get some new flooring." HER: "Your cousin Alex is a dealer, maybe he can help?" HIM: "No, let's call Frank at FloorWorld, we've dealt with him before ..." HER: "Yes, that's a good idea."

Sorry, but no, we don't know any such thing.

Wait, didn't you just waste everyone's time telling me you hadn't actually said it did not ask, and now you are telling me that it did not ask? WTF? Which is it?

what make school shootings any different than any other shooting? Is it because in a school shooting mostly white kids are shot? In the grand scope, the number of people killed outside a mass-shooting situation, in a single year, will dwarf every school shooting since the beginning of time. Unfortunately the overwhelming majority of shootings in the US are black-on-black crime. This often goes understated. Its an epidemic that deserves just as much attention as any other incident like a school shooting. But why bother, right? I mean its just 2 black people killing each other right? Who cares? (intentional sarcasm).

The reason people are reluctant to 'follow the masses' about what they claim will solve the problems, is they recognize when they're being herded like sheep. When you _actually_ want to do something to reduce a epidemic, you start with the moves that have the largest effect first. First you look at murders, ALL murders, and figure out what the greatest common denominator is among them. Then you work on solving that. When that has an effect, then you whittle it down to the next item. Deciding to start with ban on something that is responsible for less than 1% of all murders in any given year is putting lipstick on a pig. Start with things that logically will actually have a real impact, not some pat-yourself-on-the-back legislation that will have zero effect in the long term.

If you had a trillion dollars and were told to invest it in medical research, do you spend it all investing in a treatment for progeria? Or do you invest it in heart disease? which one is going to save more lives? No one is going to argue that watching the 12 kids die per year of progeria is a terrible thing, but by the same token, every year a quarter million people die from heart disease.

There is no question, we in the US have a problem with the culture of violence. Removing one weapon really isnt going to solve anything. Its only going to resort in a temporary pause until violence regroups and finds a new way. Just look at london. They were so convinced they solved crime with a ban that prevented just about everyone from having a gun. Eventually their murder rate still exceeded NYC. Because evil is just going to be evil, even if they have to find a new way. So england's solution is tantamount to the violation of our 4th amendment right to be free of illegal search and seizure. Now they stop and frisk everyone, treat them like criminals, and arrest them for anything they happen to find.

to stop school shootings, or any shootings, you have to tackle this from more than one approach. Do you really think, that if you could snap your fingers and make every gun disappear tomorrow, that somehow, all the violence in the world would just end? There is way too much glorification of violence. The media makes excuses for it in some cases, and condemns it in others. Thats a very confusing signal to a pre-adult whose brain is still developing. What makes the sick and discusting violence by groups like Antifa OK but other forms of practically the same thing, not OK? Thats Hippocrasy at its finest. The Columbine kids, we later learned, had made custom FPS maps of their school and would constantly fantasize about shooting up the school. One day they acted on those fantasies.

Everything in moderation. Sometimes things just cross a line. I have the same theory about porn. Fantasies are fine, they give you this excitement about the edge of your comfort zone. But what happens when you act out and fulfil that fantasy? Its not as exciting the second or third time. So you replace it with something even more edgy, something darker. If you keep acting out on your fantasies and filling it with something darker, eventually you're not going to be aroused unless youve got a hot pepper shoved in your ass, vice grips on your nuts, and a dead racoon at the foot of your bed (obviously an extreme exaggeration). Sometimes fantasies should stay just that. Its important to keep boundaries and live by the idea of moderation.

AI has no feelings, doesn't cry, isn't likely to laugh at the million jokes that can it can memorize, and would put a bullet through you and wouldn't think twice.

This is because there are those that would abuse AI who can't start with a kernel that mandates the above emotions-- not the murderous ones.

I wouldn't trust Schmidt for a second. He blew it at Sun, then Novell, then turned Google from a Do No Evil into Do What's Good For Shareholders and keep sucking your privacy with a big straw.

Musk is a BS artist, but when his promises finally arrive, they work after a while, and faster than Bill Gate's promises ever worked. Expecting corporate executives to have a soul these days is asking too much..... same goes for politicians.

AI will confer an ever greater first mover advantage than Trinity. It is also very easy to dress up in a friendly manner (at least relative to nukes). With AI, once the genie is out of the bottle, it's never going back in. Unless you're a guy like Schmidt, you *should* be terrified of it. You might get better navigation in your self driving car; but at what cost? And are the benefits even remotely distributed among society as a whole?

Basically, entrusting private companies like google with something of this magnitude is irresponsible bordering on insane.
We've reached a point in our technological evolution where every single human being on this planet could easily live a life of middle class security, with much left over. All AI is going to do is FURTHER concentrate wealth and power into a very select group of hands (and speaking of hands, i think Schmidt is showing his here). The rise of AI should be seen as an affront to human agency and dignity. We have two related trends: the growth of a knowledge economy, and the rise of automation. Gee, i wonder what the outcome will be?

Herbert was right, even way back when in 1965.

sigh, the second god damn time this week i've had to say this:

AC! STOP MAKING SO MUCH GOD DAMN SENSE!

will you people ever learn?

I think both of them are wrong too, but for other reasons.
The problem I see is that the smarter our helpers get, the dumber it allows us to be. Just look at computers for a good example of that. As they became ubiquitous and smarter on the inside, with user interfaces dumbed down for "everybody" to use, there was no longer a need for people to learn anything. Or calculators - people don't feel they need to understand even simple maths anymore, because there's a calculator (or calculator app, or google's built-in calculator) to do everything for them.
I truly fear that as the helpers get smarter, we get dumber. Only a few people will need to be smart enough to program them, but even that is dumbed down with higher and higher levels of abstractions.

Only if you don't set your default application correctly.

Again, this may be more of a issue of shitty OS than the fault of the browser per se, because if I remember correctly, it is because Windows 10 changed how default application handling worked, so if the handlers are set "incorrectly", they can get reset back to what Windows thinks are the "proper" defaults at a later time, usually upon reboot. Edge uses what Windows 10 thinks is the "right way" to set file extension handling, so that's why after running Edge, the defaults will keep going back to Edge.

I have Acrobat DC and Edge on my Windows 10 PC and Acrobat is configured as the handler for all PDF files. It does not get reset back. The problem is an OS configuration issue, not a browser one.

Which is very bad news for Tesla because they have been selling full self driving capability since 2016. Musk is saying 2020, but then there are regulatory changes needed too.

So by the time people actually get this feature their leases may have finished or they only get a few months use.

Plus it looks like Tesla might have to roll back on some of the promised features anyway.

youre exactly my kind of cynic. love it.

Honestly, I'm a little surprised that Elon Musk has taken such a F.U.D. attitude towards A.I. when at the same time, it's exactly what he's trying to achieve with his cars that keep evolving towards self-driving capabilities.

The first time anyone tries letting a Tesla pilot itself, they feel some fear .... some uncertainty... and a little doubt. That's all part of exploring something that works a different way than what you're used to.

But technology needs to progress, without trying to hold it back out of fear of what negatives MIGHT come from it. So many negatives already come from not having improved technologies.

Humans are good at adapting to change, once we get over those initial fears and doubts. I think we'll figure out ways to cope with automation and A.I. and whatever else we can come up with. It may not be pretty while things are in transition. That's to be expected too. But you can't put genies back into bottles .... You may as well keep trying to move forward.