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

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment 3 laws (Score 0) 79

The 3 laws of robotics are paramount when considering the definition of an AI that understands the world. Without this logic layer, an artificial intelligence will not have the capacity or logic to meaningfully cooperate with the "world" it is subjected to.

A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm.

An AI must not have the ability to injure a human, or humanity. This is the fundamental building block of an ethical AI. An AI will not be able to understand who is a good guy and who is a bad guy. It must put all humans on an equal playing field, and it must put only humanity as the only thing above that in the hierarchy of importance. If an AI is to come into existence, the only responsible way to do it is my limiting its ability to harm. Something that has the ability to learn, grow, and affect the world must not have the ability to do harm. Since this thing will essentially have super powers, it must only use those power to help, not hinder. Humanity must be ready to accept its anti-weapon state before an AI can truly exist. Any AI without this ability is either not an AI or is so irresponsible it can only result in one side of the equation being destroyed. Remember, an AI is a fundamentally different life form. An "AI" that predicts shopping habits is not an AI, it is a new blip, a clever algorithm that increases a company's stock price.

A robot must obey the orders given it by human beings except where such orders would conflict with the First Law.

The AI must be able to understand natural language and process it into a function. The AI must be able to logically discern who is and is not a human. The AI must have a fail-safe that is either this or like this. A true AI has the ability to learn and (assuming) the ability to connect with and communicate with computers. An internet connected AI would then be a tremendous gateway to disaster if the proper decision making ability is not truncated. We see how humans use their powers of intelligence and cognition to make evil things happen, the AI must not have this ability.

A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Laws.

This means the AI must be self-aware and place value in its existence. I don't know how a human can make this in programming, but this in and of itself would be a significant accomplishment. I do not believe any current AI endeavors are even pursuing this fundamental cornerstone of intelligence, but would like to see examples of it if it exists.

United States

US is World's Most Competitive Economy for First Time in a Decade (wsj.com) 290

schwit1 shares a report: The U.S. is back on top as the most competitive country in the world, regaining the No. 1 spot for the first time since 2008 in an index produced by the World Economic Forum [Editor's note: the link may be paywalled; alternative source], which said the country could still do better on social issues. America climbed one place in the rankings of 140 countries, with the top five rounded out by Singapore, Germany, Switzerland and Japan. All five countries' scores rose from 2017, with the U.S. notching the second-biggest gain after Japan's. [...] The Global Competitiveness Report this year assessed 140 countries on 98 indicators that measure business investment and productivity. The indicators are organized into 12 main drivers of productivity including the nations' institutions, tech savvy, infrastructure, education systems, market size and innovation.
Google

Google Unveils Pixel Slate, Its First Laptop-Tablet Hybrid in Three Years (engadget.com) 73

In addition to announcing new flagship phones today, Google took the wraps off a new premium tablet called the Pixel Slate. It's a Chrome OS-powered slate with a 12.3-inch display that's supposed to be the sharpest in its class. Google claims this isn't just a laptop pretending to be a tablet or a phone pretending to be a computer. From a report: It has a resolution of 3,000 x 2,000 -- i.e., a pixel density of 293 ppi, which Google says is the highest for a premium 12-inch tablet. For reference, the Surface Pro 6 and iPad Pro (12.9 inch) come in at 267 ppi and 264 ppi, respectively. Google was able to make the screen so sharp because of an energy-efficient LCD technology called Low Temperature PolySilicon (LTPS), which let the company pack in more pixels without sacrificing size or battery. In fact, the Pixel Slate is supposed to last up to 12 hours on a charge, which is impressive for its skinny 7mm profile. [...] What stands out about the Pixel Slate is the version of Chrome OS it runs. When docked to a mouse or a keyboard accessory with a trackpad, it runs the regular desktop interface most people are familiar with by now. Disconnect peripherals, though, and it switches automatically to tablet mode, which is optimized for touch. In this profile, the home screen features icons for installed apps, much like the app drawer on Android phones. You can split the screen between up to two apps or drag and drop browser tabs to place them side by side. The Pixel Slate will be available with an Intel Celeron or Core M3, i5 or i7 processor, and 4GB to 16GB of RAM at a starting price of $599. The keyboard will cost an additional $200, should you wish to buy one, and the pen accessory will similarly cost $99.
Google

Google Pixel 3 and 3 XL Announced With Bigger Screens and Best Cameras Yet (theverge.com) 74

Google on Tuesday unveiled the Pixel 3 and Pixel 3 XL, its latest flagship Android smartphones. "For life on the go, we designed the world's best camera and put it in the world's most helpful phone," said Google's hardware chief Rick Osterloh. From a report: The Pixel 3 starts at $799 for 64GB, with the 3 XL costing $899. Add $100 to either for the 128GB storage option. Core specs for both include a Snapdragon 845, 4GB RAM (there's no option for more), Bluetooth 5.0, and front-facing stereo speakers. Also inside is a new Titan M security chip, which Google says provides "on-device protection for login credentials, disk encryption, app data, and the integrity of the operating system." Preorders for both phones begin today, and buyers will get six months of free YouTube Music service.

The Pixel 3 and 3 XL both feature larger screens than last year's models thanks to slimmed down bezels -- and the controversial notch in the case of the bigger phone. The 3 XL has a 6.3-inch display (up from six inches on the 2 XL), while the regular 3 has a 5.5-inch screen (up from five inches). Overall, though, the actual phones are very similar in size and handling to their direct predecessors. Google has stuck with a single rear 12.2-megapixel camera on both phones, continuing to resist the dual-camera industry trend. But it's a different story up front. Both the Pixel 3 and 3 XL have two front-facing cameras; one of them offers a wider field of view for getting more people or a greater sense of your surroundings into a selfie. [...] A new Top Shot option will select the best image from a burst series of shots. Like Samsung's Galaxy Note 9, it will weed out pictures that are blurry or snaps where someone blinked. Super Res Zoom uses multiple frames and AI to deliver a sharper final photo even without optical zoom.
There's another interesting feature on the new Pixel handsets: To help you avoid calls from scammers, Google is adding Call Screen to the Pixel, a new option that appears when you receive a phone call. Whenever someone calls you, you can tap a "Screen call" button, and a robot voice will pick up. "The person you're calling is using a screening service, and will get a copy of this conversation. Go ahead and say your name, and why you're calling," the Google bot will say. As the caller responds, the digital assistant will transcribe the caller's message for you. If you need more information, you can use one of the feature's canned responses, which include, "Tell me more," and "Who is this?" There is an accept and reject call button that's on-screen, so you can hang up or take the call at any time.
Cloud

Microsoft Announces Project Xcloud For Streaming Games To PCs, Consoles, and Mobile Devices (theverge.com) 80

Microsoft has unveiled "Project xCloud," its new game streaming service designed to work across consoles, PCs, and mobile devices. "Scaling and building out Project xCloud is a multi-year journey for us," explains Microsoft's cloud gaming chief Kareem Choudhry in a blog post. "We'll begin public trials in 2019 so we can learn and scale with different volumes and locations." The Verge reports: Microsoft has built custom hardware for its datacenters, as The Verge previously exclusively reported, so that existing and future Xbox games will be compatible with the services. Games will be streamed to devices, and Microsoft has been testing the xCloud service with Xbox wireless controllers connected to consoles, mobile devices, and PCs. Microsoft says its research teams are "creating ways to combat latency" via advanced network techniques combined with video encoding and decoding. This should make game streaming viable on 4G networks, too.

Comment Re:Unrealistic Customer expectation. (Score 1) 110

You're not talking to your ISP you're taking to an outsourced staffer who is paid to answer the phone. Your ISP would prefer you didn't call. They don't have access to the customer database or the IP/Modem tracking system. They have a GUI with like 5 options, 1 of which is "escalate" the other 4 lead them to call ending scripts.

Comment Re:Unrealistic Customer expectation. (Score 3, Interesting) 110

This, and the originating service or product likely has "scripts" for the outsourced individual to read. This type of thing is fucking awful for call centers. Scripts don't solve problem, they create more problems due to pissing both the caller and the call-center-staffer off. "customer service" is just that - performing a service. Whether or not the call center staff member says please and thank you, pretty sure nobody gives a fuck. They're not calling for someone to be nice to them they're calling for a real reason - to conduct business perhaps, or to solve a problem they're having. Sure being nice is an added extra bonus, but you know what? It is totally not necessary. Perhaps the nicest thing would be to: 1.) be very brief, yet as transparent as possible under constraint of brevity; 2.) never ask open-ended questions like "is there anything else I can help you with?" - the customer called for the reasons they already mentioned. stick to that. 3.) Launch your required business processes instantly. I don't give a fuck about the problem statement if you're not going to listen and then ask for my XX number or my YY username or some shit. Ask up front, guide the caller through the process, don't let them control the conversation; and 4.) don't apologize that's so fucking annoying and we know you don't care/mean it. Empathy Otter understands us and knows exactly how we feel, you the call center staffer should realize that we're not actually communicating with you and you don't have to care about us. You just have to do the job you were put there for, quickly, quietly, efficiently. Explain your actions before you take them, then take them, then explain the results. No cheery "smile while you talk" no needless empathy statements - wasting my time and your breath. Perhaps the best call center I talk to is the *gasp* state run health benefits exchange. No IVR menus, no robots to talk to, just you call and they answer.
Communications

Entire Broadband Industry Sues California To Stop Net Neutrality Law (arstechnica.com) 293

Four lobby groups representing the broadband industry today sued California to stop the state's new net neutrality law. From a report: The lawsuit was filed in US District Court for the Eastern District of California by mobile industry lobby CTIA; cable industry lobby NCTA; telco lobby USTelecom; and the American Cable Association, which represents small and mid-size cable companies. Together, these four lobby groups represent all the biggest mobile and home Internet providers in the US and hundreds of smaller ISPs . Comcast, Charter, AT&T, Verizon, T-Mobile US, Sprint, Cox, Frontier, and CenturyLink are among the groups' members. "This case presents a classic example of unconstitutional state regulation," the complaint said. The California net neutrality law "was purposefully intended to countermand and undermine federal law by imposing on [broadband] the very same regulations that the Federal Communications Commission expressly repealed in its 2018 Restoring Internet Freedom Order." ISPs say the California law impermissibly regulates interstate commerce. "[I]t is impossible or impracticable for an Internet service provider ("ISP") offering BIAS to distinguish traffic that moves only within California from traffic that crosses state borders," the lobby groups' complaint said.

Slashdot Top Deals

I think there's a world market for about five computers. -- attr. Thomas J. Watson (Chairman of the Board, IBM), 1943

Working...