Absolutely. Most people don't like the idea of living that many years in poor health, limited and frail. But the current situation is we patch the problems that come with age and keep people alive.

On the other hand, if you look at the SENS strategy (http://www.sens.org), what they are trying to achieve is to revert the damage that age inflicts on people, so you live in good health and active and strong. What is important here is to increase the "healthspan". If lifespan is increased it is good too.

Please support SENS.

Now they need to create jails for cars, and tribunals with car/human translators so cars can defend themselves properly!!!

Do you realize you are talking about persons, right?

By your logic, if you make a mistake, we should stop giving you medical procedures?

Please mod parent up

My feeling is that this is a PR stunt. Basically they give the opinions from 17 people at MS that happen to belong to a "minority" group (in IT). They want to show the world that they do have female researchers.

Problem is, the headline says "MS researchers offer predictions..." where it should read "MS female researchers offer predictions...". Why? because if you just say "researchers" people will assume the selection criteria to be "top researchers".

Its like you ask to "offer predictions" to those MS researchers born on a day that happens to be a prime number. The result will not be as solid as if you ask the "top researchers", right?

I think the answer is to not have an UBI that allows for a comfortable life and then remove the minimum wage.

People will still work if they can, unemployment will go down and those that cant really work for a reason, at least will not live in absolute poverty.

So I would say an initial UBI of $200 and then lower the minimum wage by $200. This will get most people even. But it will make living conditions a little easier for the bottom income segments.

Then we can start raising it up.

It is not about how much money is going around, but how the value is distributed.

UBI requires new taxation. It is pretty much like the existing welfare system that requires taxation. The main differences are:

1. This will require extra taxation on top of what we have now. And this is reasonable because with the current taxation system the income gap is increasing and the gini coefficient is escalating.
2. This money will be distributed to everyone without the government or the bureaucracy controlling it. Same amount to each one, so no power play will be available for the different factions in power to co opt it on their favor.

Simple and effective.

Sorry to be politically incorrect, but you forget religion.

The best path for Greece would have been to leave the eurozone, default and move to its own currency. They would start from scratch and eventually be better off. They were told that this would not be allowed. They are hostages.

So the streaming client that runs with edge is better than the streaming client that runs with Chrome. Good. What about browsing the internet?

Even if you talk about watching videos, it will be different depending on what codecs are used. Maybe you don't get the same result if you watch VP9 encoded videos. Are we really talking about the flash player? is edge using hardware decoding?

Absolutely.
What this news tell us is Intel could have sold 10 million cores but was forbidden from doing so. The money that could have gone Intel's way have been used to improve Chinese chip manufacturing and the USA has failed to achieve the goal of stopping China from building a supercomputer more advanced than the best one in USA.

Hilarious

Please mod parent up.

So AlphaGo is not so far away from a Dan 9 human player.

My guess is that the mistake AlphaGo made on move 79 will be analyzed and a new version will be created, stronger than the current one. Maybe this analysis will point to a whole class of mistakes that will be fixed.

It is a bit like when Google's self driving cars make a mistake. This mistake is used as input for the next release of the software so it doesn't act the same way next time. With this process, one car making a mistake results in a change in behavior of all of the cars, because with AI it is possible to communicate new knowledge to the rest of the cars. All of them improve, unlike humans for whom transmitting the new knowledge involves a lot of work or may not even be possible.

Winning at a game that cannot be brute forced and is played through strategy and pattern matching is a step towards AI. Having a part of the skills coded by programmers while another part of the skills is learned by the system by playing is a step towards AI.

Exactly. The fact we don't understand how our brains work means we tend to attribute supernatural powers to them. But what about the only thing they do is statistical inference, montecarlo, pattern matching... That would mean that as we approach the processing power of a brain in your typical $1000 hardware, we would be able to implement artificial intelligence without developing new ideas or techniques. This is unlikely, but the success of neural networks of lately is the result of having more processing power thrown at the problem. Not the result of big theoretical advances.