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


Forgot your password?
Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! No Flash necessary and runs on all devices. ×

Comment Re:Those who something, something (Score 1) 289

So you think the majority of Muslims are politicians that run countries? With that level of insight, it is a wonder if you can put your pants on by yourself,
Here is a hint: "Leaders" are bad _anywhere_. Just look at whom the US recently voted into power...

Comment Re:Those who something, something (Score 1, Flamebait) 289

Indeed. Next step is that Muslims will have to wear a crescent moon visible on the top clothing and then it is concentration camps and gas chambers. Whatever you think of Trump otherwise, this idea alone disqualifies him from wielding power of any kind, he just does not understand the concept of ethics and has no insight into human history. Especially as a majority of Muslims are decent people that place respecting others above their religion. Of course, with any large group of people, even if there are just a few bad apples in relative numbers, it can be a large number in absolutes. It is however completely unacceptable to punish the decent majority for the bad minority.

Comment Re:"Middle class" (Score 1) 387

Indeed. A solution needs to be found. What solution that will be will decide how history will remember this time. The range is unfortunately pretty broad and starts (at the lowest moral end) with internment camps for those that cannot earn money (in doubt, just put barbed wire and mine-fields around entire city-parts) and goes up to a guaranteed reasonable share of the wealth of society for everybody and a lot of offers for self-improvement, education and arts, all not driven by a desire to make more money.

Personally, I think the only way to prevent the dystopic scenario is some form of UBI that is significantly above the poverty-line.

Comment Re:Hawking is Incorrect (Score 1) 387

You confuse automation and AI. AI worth that name might never happen, as it is not even on the distant horizon (i.e. there are not even credible theories how it could be implemented at this time). Automation is limited in what it can do. In particular, excluding brute-force effects, automation can generally only do less than its creators as it has no understanding of what it does. That does not make it useless, but the, say, 10% of all jobs that require the highest level of understanding and insight are completely inaccessible to automation. That is not really an issue, as many of the people doing these jobs would do them for free, if cost-of-living was provided to everybody. But for the average person, there will soon mostly only be jobs left that require a person to do it, because it is a service rendered to other persons. This includes things like teaching things people do for fun (where teaching is required, e.g. private piloting), and things like waitressing or cooking. These jobs will however not be enough to give everybody a job and most certainly will be unsuitable as way to distribute wealth. The other challenge will be what people that currently fall back to watching TV and drinking when they have free time will do with their lives. You can only drink and watch TV so much before it becomes problematic.

Comment Re:Losing jobs isn't the problem (Score 1) 387

Well, we do not know that. It is reasonable to think that eventually people will learn to cope with not having that job to fill their time, but it is just a guess. I do fully agree that everybody eventually needs to have the wealth required for living reasonably available unconditionally. There are a few hurdles on the to that though. One thing is that the human races is still expanding and this absolutely must stop. Another is that there are a lot of people that are deeply into elevating themselves above others on material wealth. Many of those actually have no worthwhile skills and hence will oppose anything that gives anything for free to people they perceive as beneath them. Yes, that involves a strongly inaccurate self-perception, but there are a lot of those people around. There are other problems.

Comment Re:I, for one, welcome... (Score 1) 387

There are no underpaid "very smart guys" in India or China, because all of these are either not in India or China anymore or are not underpaid. Fact is, the only application for high-quality off-shoring is if you literally cannot find a qualified expert any other way. It is also universally either more expensive than a local expert or a scam that does not perform on the claimed levels.

Comment Re:Not Just The Middle (Score 1) 387

You greatly overestimate what "AI" can do (what is used is not really AI, it is pretty dumb automation and statistical analysis). Strong/true AI is not even on the distant horizon. Do not forget that Prof. Hawking has not clue about the real state-of-the art in AI research. What he does (like most other non-experts) is look at what "AI" can fake doing and then deduces that the amount of intelligence if doing this non-faked is present. That is not the case. The outcome is similar, but the process is not. None of the "AI" available these days or that can be created in this universe on what is currently known is "general". These are all special-purpose only automation, and each one needs to be created separately. That does not mean they are not useful. But they are also not "AI" in any meaningful way.

The actual state is that we do not know whether true/strong AI (i.e. one with actual understanding what it does and some generality as a consequence) is even possible in this universe and we have quite some indicators that it may not be. Still, there are a lot of jobs that do not require much insight or understanding, and many of those will go away in the next decades and that will be a very serious problem.

Comment Stating the obvious much, Prof. Hawking? (Score 1) 387

Seriously, this is not news or surprising. It also does not need true/strong AI (which is not even on the distant horizon, despite what non-experts like you claim). Simple automation with some dumb learning capabilities is quite enough. The problem is that many middle-class jobs do not require much sophistication.

Maybe you should stick to physics, where you have proven to be a brilliant mind, instead of saying redundant and frequently wrong things about a field you are not an expert in?

Comment Re:Beware public charging stations... (Score 1) 173

No problem at all. These do not have data-lines and 220V is not enough to jump any relevant distance. (Don't you love the general stupidity of the vandalist mind-set?) Carrying one of these into an airplane may get you a few years behind bars though, as they are close in design to a stun-gun.

Slashdot Top Deals

Remember, even if you win the rat race -- you're still a rat.