Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop


Forgot your password?
DEAL: For $25 - Add A Second Phone Number To Your Smartphone for life! Use promo code SLASHDOT25. Also, Slashdot's Facebook page has a chat bot now. Message it for stories and more. Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! ×

Comment Re:The usual media spin (Score 1) 207

>We are at least 50 years off from strong AI as in human level common sense about the world.

There's no way you can justify this number. From your assessment of the status quo, you aren't keeping up with what's being researched on the frontier, so don't make these statements. It might be 10 years or less that we have strong AI, might not. We need to come up with algorithms to sort out the NP-complete problems of entailment and better knowledge representation, but whatever.

Common sense isn't spooky, it's a certain set of patterns and principles that are not readily codified, because the higher-level implications our reality are hard to derive without just seeing and sensing them. It's unlikely there is a database with an exhaustive set of facts such as "If A is next to B, then B is next to A" but this sort of thing is readily derivable with senses, because we always see the co-occurrence of (A next to B) then (B next to A), and so common sense principles come about by reinforcement. It's not inconceivable to devise a machine to learn billions of common sense rules about the world, given some good algorithms and senses.

Comment Makeup (Score 1) 76

I've seen the classifications of other algorithms and they fall prey to the distortions of makeup. For example an average looking woman with makeup accentuating features, particularly dark eyebrows and eyelashes, will score higher than a beautiful woman without. The fact that the score can be affected by image quality suggests it's using the same sort of NN features. Better features for beauty are symmetry, facial width to height ratio, unblemished skin, bone structure, etc. ANNs tend not to understand morphology without deliberate preprocessing (e.g. by someone deciding it's a network feature worth calculation), so many of these things can be missed.

Comment Re:for all this talk... where is it? (Score 4, Insightful) 129

You want to make something out of (name any substance)? There are only a few special cases where any government approval is required, and patents are NEVER required.

If you want any capital to operate with, you need security in the profitability of producing it. Patents are this security, and so are always necessary unless you want to throw money away. So no, you don't want to leave out steps that will quickly leave your company bankrupt. And all business sectors have codes, standards, and regulations by which you need to abide.

Comment Re:for all this talk... where is it? (Score 4, Insightful) 129

There are a hundred steps in between the lab and the open market. You need a lot of funding, development and approval of patents, the approval from applicable government agencies, prototyping, mass production, marketing, and then if all that is successful, market penetration. This doesn't happen in a year. Hopefully it's highly profitable too, or its time on the market will be short-lived.

Slashdot Top Deals

Stinginess with privileges is kindness in disguise. -- Guide to VAX/VMS Security, Sep. 1984