Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive


Forgot your password?
Get HideMyAss! VPN, PC Mag's Top 10 VPNs of 2016 for 55% off for a Limited Time ×

Comment Re:Consciousness is not the same thing as free wil (Score 1) 279

Integral Calculus isn't "tangible", but the human brain can store information about it in tangible constructs. Likewise, my bank balance. But the storage isn't the actuality, and the bank account information in my brain is no more the actual account than the bank account information on my hard drive is, even though that is likewise represented in tangible and measurable form.

I don't posit self-aware Quantum mechanics and I have no idea how you drew such a wild conclusion, You seem to take a delight with confusing the levers with the driver.

And how, pray tell can a neural network "see" what's at the controls of a bulldozer if the driver no more visible to man or computer than cosmic rays were to the Babylonians? On top of which you seem to be assuming that we have neural networks that can accurately conduct a Turing Test. As I recall, the original test specifically required a human as the test instrument/reference.

Comment Re:Consciousness is not the same thing as free wil (Score 1) 279

You exist because your cells want you to exist and consciousness is just a byproduct of that collective, the collective of cells.

Or, consciousness finds it convenient to control a vehicle that has self-preservative characteristics.

The cells of even primitive life-forms "want to exist", but that doesn't mean that they have consciousness.

Comment Re:Consciousness is not the same thing as free wil (Score 0) 279

The electro-chemical signals flowing through the complex network of your brain are quite tangible. You can track them with physical probes, you can track them with radiation scanners, you can track them with passive external monitors.

"Spiritual" could be one theory, but why be so limited in your philosophy, Horatio? We have perfectly respectable scientists arguing for rolled-up micro-dimensions. We have quantum mechanics doing spooky things - and just maybe doing them at a macro scale in biological systems if a recent article I read is on the right track.

One thing I've learned about science is that it's never "done". We get finer and finer approximations until it all seems to boil into fuzz. Then we try something different and maybe learn something new.

If my world-view was all metal and lubricants, would I see the human in the seat of the bulldozer? Or be able to tell it from a ghost? A computer? An orang-utan?

Comment Re:Somebody didn't get the memo... (Score 0) 279

That's probably been true since the end of the days when science was conducted primarily by the nobility, wealthy idle businessmen and others who didn't have to "work for a living" doing science. Or worse, show "results" in time for Quarterly Earnings or the next scholastic year.

Then again, some would have applied the term "sciency" to Germ Theory, DNA, and other applecart-turners until enough data came in to take a wild idea and make it serious.

Comment Re:Who? (Score 1) 153

I think your spell-checker got you. It was Southern Pacific Rail Internal Network Telecommunications. I'm fairly sure that they were running as a long-distance carrier before the Internet became a big thing, and even today they're known as a phone service, not as an Internet service (they left that part to Clear, mostly).

WiPro still has its before-tech name, though. Sprint started out as the Brown Telephone company, and telephony is still a core business for them.

Comment Re:Now you too can make Google's analytics more mo (Score 1) 57

It gets better. I "bought" a book through Google Play. All that actually downloaded was a 150-byte decryption key. The book itself only downloads to their Play reader and for all I know, only the parts you are actively reading at the moment.

"Own it" indeed.

Slashdot Top Deals

Everybody likes a kidder, but nobody lends him money. -- Arthur Miller