Future will be quite interesting. How will be the human being of the
future? For sure not a human being in the way we know.
http://m.eltiempo.com/tecnosfera/novedades-tecnologia/peligros-y-avances-de-la-inteligencia-artificial-para-los-humanos-117158
===
So, I read this the other day:
The Promise of LSD Microdoses and Other Psychedelic "Medicines"
https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/cross-check/the-promise-of-lsd-microdoses-and-other-psychedelic-medicines/
and was reminded of Frank's dare to read:
The Analysis of the Self
http://press.uchicago.
Lol I misread the title as promised stuff off the shelf
On Aug 7, 2017 12:25 PM, "glen ☣" wrote:
> So, I read this the other day:
>
> The Promise of LSD Microdoses and Other Psychedelic "Medicines"
> https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/cross-check/the-promise-of-lsd-
> microdoses-and-other-psyc
On 8/7/17 12:24 PM, glen ☣ wrote:
So, I read this the other day:
The Promise of LSD Microdoses and Other Psychedelic "Medicines"
https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/cross-check/the-promise-of-lsd-microdoses-and-other-psychedelic-medicines/
and was reminded of Frank's dare to read:
The Analy
Glen,
In Smalltalk and Objective C "self" is an alias for any receiver object from
the point of view of that object.
E.g. if someone tells me to "jump" I can implement that by sending them a
"howHigh" message, or I can send that message to my(self)!
self is a handle to the stuff in me, espec
Am I the only one that notices that Slate and Salon are prone knee-jerk
editorial responses to things?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superdeterminism
From: Friam on behalf of glen ☣
Sent: Monday, August 7, 2017 12:24:57 PM
To: friam@redfish.com
Subject: [FRIA
All you've done is pass the buck from "self" to "me". And given the hijinks
Roger pulled with Swarm, self might respond to "jump" one day, but throw an
error the next ... just like, say, today I can throw a baseball with my right
arm. But if I break that arm, tomorrow I might not be able to th
FWIW, B.C.Smith, that fount of wisdom, references "flex and slop" and cites
Hume as inspiration for the idea. It's a tangle of reasoning that boils down
(I think - this is my own nonsense, not Smith's) to the idea that there *must*
be misunderstanding for communication to exist. (This is an e
Glen wrote:
"All you've done is pass the buck from "self" to "me". And given the hijinks
Roger pulled with Swarm, self might respond to "jump" one day, but throw an
error the next ... just like, say, today I can throw a baseball with my right
arm. But if I break that arm, tomorrow I might no
All:
Perhaps some of you will be interested in these links describing how
journalists -- well, at least ONE journalist -- used AI, and
specifically the "Random Forest" algorithm, to uncover government agency
surveillance activities at home and abroad. See especially the first and
the last link.
Tom,
The random forest method is kind of unsatisfying to me. It says that one can
train many simple experts, trained on subsets of a dataset, to vote and thereby
predict as well or better as one big integrated expert. One might hope this
could be a mechanism of democracy... A property of rec
It seems to me that there are many here in the US who are not entirely on
board with Asimov's First Law of Robotics, at least insofar as it may apply
to themselves, so I suspect notions of "reining it in" are probably not
going to fly.
On Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 1:57 AM, Alfredo Covaleda Vélez
wro
Here in the US there are many human animals to reign-in first. Sentients will
need to stick together and accept the help they can get!
Sent from my iPhone
On Aug 7, 2017, at 9:54 PM, Carl Tollander
mailto:c...@plektyx.com>> wrote:
It seems to me that there are many here in the US who are not
The notion of AI's as necessarily sentient seems a bit of a jump.
However, I see a difference between an AI augmented sentience (a la a
spiffy AR) and a bunch of possibly sentient AI's flying in formation (a la
a murder of crows or a pack of wolves).
Going further out into Niel Stephenson's D.O.D
That sounds right, Carl. Asimov's three "laws" of robotics are more like
Asimov's three "wishes" for robotics. AI entities are already no longer
servants. They have become machine learners. They have actually learned
to project conditional probability. The cat is out of the barn. Or is it
that
15 matches
Mail list logo