Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 



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

Comment Re: I thought state and religion were separate in (Score 1) 1435

But swearing oaths on the Christian Bible, printing "In God We Trust" on our money, declaring Christian holidays such as Christmas to be national holidays . . . these aren't personal religious observances, these are state-sponsored endorsements of Christianity.

There are other examples. I assure you, it can be difficult to be a non-Christian in the US.

Comment Hell, I can do that without a machine. (Score 2) 62

I'm not even a dog owner or dog lover and I can usually tell the difference between the "hi, let's play" bark and the "hi, I'm going to eat your face for lunch" bark. Oh, and the bark while looking at the door usually means "I need to go bend a biscuit", while hanging around the dinner bowl while barking generally translates as "feed me you ignorant bastard". That bark whenever the doorbell rings generally means "Danger, Will Robinson. Danger"!

Comment Re:How is CBS and Paramount harmed by fan fiction? (Score 2) 139

Because now CBS/Paramount can't independently come up with that idea. Not that they would've, but if they had the could no longer do it without suffering comparisons to the fanfic.

Had Alec Peters kept it non-profit, there's a really good chance CBS/Paramount would've ignored him. Hell, they may even quietly have been grateful to him for pumping more life into the Star Trek franchise. Star Trek Continues is a fine example of such a not-for-profit venture. For the record, JJ Abrams made some interesting space opera movies, but they were decidedly not Star Trek.

Comment You need to do a bit of research. (Score 4, Interesting) 139

My research indicates that Alec Peters was violating nearly every guideline set out by CBS/Paramount in a for-profit venture. His good work will therefore go to waste (as it should). This is why Axenar is now subject to injunctive limitations.

Star Trek Continues also violates those same guidelines (high-quality props/sets/uniforms instead of toy-store quality items, professional acting/directing/scriptwriting, episode length and continuity, etc.) and so could well be sued. However, Trek Continues is creating this content in an explicitly not-for-profit context. Trek Continues therefore is holding high hopes that CBS will choose not to exercise their legal rights against them.

Since CBS/Paramount and the Star Trek franchise are not demonstrably hurt by the Trek Continues production (and suing them might well result in such damage), the people associated with Trek Continues have said publicly that they intend to create the full eleven episode run which they originally set out to publish - intended to fill the gap between the episode Turnabout Intruder and Star Trek: The Motion Picture. They've also pointed out that just because CBS/Paramount can sue them doesn't mean they will sue them. They've said that they have sufficient funding and resources to complete and publish the remaining four episodes. While there's a lot if if coming off this, I share their hopes. CBS/Paramount would do vastly more to harm their interests by suing than they might gain from injunctive relief in this case. But - yes, Alec Peters tried to stick his fingers in the cookie jar, so to speak, and risked ruining a lot of great fan fiction for all of us.

Comment Re:AI does what AI is programmed to do (Score 1) 144

Whoosh.

The program, is the machine learning conditional framework. The training is data that influences program execution. The program is what the machine follows, the behavior exhibited by the program is determined by the training data.

The problem, as you correctly put, is that we dont really have good feedback on what elements of the training data it is weighing on reliably.

The actual program is what defines the conditional framework at the lowest level. It does this faithfully. The emergent properties? That's another story. That is related to the data the AI has collected.

Comment Re:That is correct (Score 1) 144

Again, the danger is not "skynet deciding humans are obsolete", the danger is in "For some reason, our predator drones suddenly started mass murdering our own citizens when winter hit, and people started wearing full face balaclavas." -- Because the training they gave the predator drone in the middle east made it select for people wearing full face covering attire, because that was one of the easier metrics to weigh for.

Comment AI does what AI is programmed to do (Score 5, Insightful) 144

It does exactly what it is programmed/trained to do, nothing more, nothing less.

The DANGER of AI, especially when integrated into weapons systems, is that the people pushing for it, dont understand that the risks of the AI deciding a friendly is an enemy because of their wearing the wrong colors, (or, enemies getting free passes for the same) IS VERY REAL.

Similar with putting AI in charge of certain kinds of situations, where its programmed methodologies would result in horrible clusterfucks as it maximizes its strategy.

No, AI in a killbot *IS* very dangerous. Just not in the "Kill all humans(install robot overlord!)" way. Instead it is more the "human does not meet my (programmed impossible) description of friendly, and thus is enemy combatant, Kill the human" way.

Comment Re:already exceeding expectations (Score 1) 1435

Few if any pundits said "Obama is sitting president of a very divided nation", when the fact is, he was. Just as GWB was before him. And so on.

It is also true that Hillary didn't get 50% of the vote, so more people voted against her than voted for her (same with Trump). Again, so what? None of that matters, and is just noise.

The Left in this country has always had problems with motivating people to get them to the polls.

That's because it is hard to get dead people to vote ;) :-D

Slashdot Top Deals

"It's what you learn after you know it all that counts." -- John Wooden

Working...