OROBTC (OP)
Legendary
 Offline
Activity: 2926
Merit: 1863
|
 |
February 27, 2016, 05:15:39 AM |
|
I have always agreed with your 5% of net worth in physical gold for SHTF scenarios, but sorry to hear about the boating accident. Yeah my 18,000 oz of silver disappeared too.
Fuckin' A! These PM accidents seem to be happening everywhere. Seems like some kind of new worldwide rash or other disease. Maybe I should measure my head to see if I have Zika or Chaga or sumpin... I hope that any guns & ammo you may have did not suffer a similar fate (mine were lost while ice-fishing, fell right through the hole, and I forgot which lake). And I always thought that bringing along my hard assets with me was a much better idea than leaving them hidden in some dark place at home or at my office.EDIT: One of my old blog readers had something similar happen to him (his comments in italics, hey at least he caught a walleye): I mentioned above my reader "GB", the one who advised me not to bring a knife to a gun fight. Well, it looks like he is one of legion who has suffered a loss of his gold, but under slightly different circumstances. I sent along my sincere condolences. Please read his sad story below: "Don't know if others will find the humor in our exchange. Too bad.
Thanks for the warm pictures. Here in the northern plains, winter so far has been relatively mild. We've experienced a less than average number of days with bone chilling deep-freeze-like temperatures...and January is nearly complete.
Good thing you didn't take your PM's with you on the boat. Seems PM's and water (even when it's frozen) don't mix. I recently lost all of my PM's while ice fishing. Not exactly a boating accident like so many others are reportedly experiencing, but still painful and costly...and water related. Like a fool I took my stash with me on my little fishing adventure, figuring it'd be safer with me than at home in it's usual hiding spot. In hindsight, that was a very bad decision. Well, one thing led to another, and one beer led to another dozen or more, and I'll be damned if I didn't drop my stash and watch it fall right into the hole and through the ice as I was fighting a fish. It was a tragic loss...but I did manage to land a nice walleye. So the day wasn't a total bust. I just wish I could remember on which lake I was fishing." TPTB, you know my name, my blog article can be found using my FIRST NAME, LAST NAME, "blog", "sailing" via Google. |
|
|
|
|
|
TPTB_need_war
|
|
February 27, 2016, 05:22:46 AM |
|
Are sure it was the lake? I thought you said you had rented a vessel for fishing off the Pacific coast of Peru? Can you remember the name of that vessel, "Maria ..." something Maria. Oh wait, Maria was the housekeeper  Old age sucks. |
|
|
|
OROBTC (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2926
Merit: 1863
|
|
February 27, 2016, 05:29:21 AM |
|
Are sure it was the lake? I thought you said you had rented a vessel for fishing off the Pacific coast of Peru? Can you remember the name of that vessel, "Maria ..." something Maria. Oh wait, Maria was the housekeeper Old age sucks. Yaah, old age does kind of suck indeed (but, think of the alternative). I just turned 60. And names DO keep getting harder to remember... You have a message directing you to a fun article, I was invited along on something nice in 2012. |
|
|
|
|
|
TPTB_need_war
|
|
February 27, 2016, 06:08:01 AM |
|
"Oh ... Maria"...
Yaah, old age does kind of suck... Suck she did. |
|
|
|
gmaxwell
Staff
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 4270
Merit: 8805
|
|
February 27, 2016, 07:07:40 AM |
|
I am adding now the fact that I sent Gregory a private message about this yesterday or the day before that, before he posted about this new invention. I also note that weeks ago I posted to Sean Bowe on the Zcash forum the importance of zk-snarks for smart contracts.
I also note that I the one who recently exposed that Segregated Witness is a Trojan Horse designed to enable Blockstream to take over Bitcoin by enabling them to version the block chain with soft forks. They are trying to push their technologically flawed Side chains in through the back door. Thus it is not surprising that Gregory has deleted my post (and somehow it didn't even appear in my Inbox as it normally should, so he must have some super moderator powers on this forum).
I am sorry folks to inform you about the very deep level of corruption in Bitcoin runs to the core.
Okay Gregory send your hitmen. I am ready.
Note this copy is being copied all over the place so it can't be deleted.
Your post wasn't deleted. It was entirely off-topic (going on about an audio format, in a thread about a cryptographic protocol.. had nothing to do with Bitcoin) and ended up getting moved to the off-topic subforum: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1378533.0 . I even responded to it. The only private message you've sent me is, quoted in its incoherent entirety, But I guess I should be glad you've exposed yourself as a shameful liar. Again. I designed the protocol used here in _2011_, Sean has been working on this implementation since last November-- even the git history goes back to Dec 4th... These sorts of things are not accomplished in days. You owe Sean and the members of the forum a retraction. You've been banned from the technical sub-forum in the past under your prior identities. If you don't want to be again, please get some control over your behavior. |
|
|
|
|
generalizethis
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1750
Merit: 1036
Facts are more efficient than fud
|
|
February 27, 2016, 08:44:06 AM
Last edit: February 27, 2016, 10:04:23 AM by generalizethis |
|
Given our understanding of the brain has gone away from the Freudian equivalent of blood letting to mapping and chemical diagnosis of maladies in the last fifty years, I doubt this is the technological leap anyone is making it out to be--especially when more of our day to day information is being tracked and to a greater degree (who's to say people in five years won't be monitored 24/7 and have that data plugged into a database that could be incorporated when dna brain simulation exist--not to mention that most psychology is tilted towards the belief that genetics is the most determinate factor in who a person is (usually citing the overwhelming similarities in identical twins separated at birth with dissimilar locations and family elements). I'd rather not get into a debate, so let's just leave this here, and in ten years, see if brain simulation is as plausible as holodecks and android body parts controlled with our minds have become in the last ten years.
I`m not saying building a sophisticated AI is impossible, far from it. I`m only saying that this mind control or mind reading stuff is impossible. Building an AI to emulate human behaviour and reading the mind of a human is totally different things, and the latter is impossible. Why? Because the mind is a web of quantum-electric phenomena, and we know from quantum physics that it's impossible to localize particles, therefore any info that is stored in this domain is impossible to grab. Dont worry God or whatever made this universe has made sure that the government wont get hold of your mind  I can wait ten years to be right. (An AI to emulate human behavior misses what the singularity is about--the singularity is that threshold when the organic brain can't process the technological world around it and will need artificial apparatus to keep up--nanobots being the current leader in what's being developed to achieve this--most likely we don't create an AI, we become an AI with more and more of our functions (brain and body) being processed by artificial means--and yes, most likely to 100% given enough time. So doubtful these uber humans will have any more trouble simulating our current organic brain, with a fair degree of accuracy, than that of a rat. Though this line of thought gives me hope that technology keeps pace in the privacy front as well--to where the technology that allows us to read thoughts also allows us to mask them. On the other hand, my reading on capitalism and acceleratism makes me think that we will become more and more integrated with a centralized network to the point that one cannot realize themselves from the machine, but given the cliche' of becoming one with the universe, perhaps this is the best state we can hope to attain--) |
|
|
|
|
TPTB_need_war
|
|
February 27, 2016, 09:33:20 AM |
|
I am adding now the fact that I sent Gregory a private message about this yesterday or the day before that, before he posted about this new invention. I also note that weeks ago I posted to Sean Bowe on the Zcash forum the importance of zk-snarks for smart contracts.
I also note that I the one who recently exposed that Segregated Witness is a Trojan Horse designed to enable Blockstream to take over Bitcoin by enabling them to version the block chain with soft forks. They are trying to push their technologically flawed Side chains in through the back door. Thus it is not surprising that Gregory has deleted my post (and somehow it didn't even appear in my Inbox as it normally should, so he must have some super moderator powers on this forum).
I am sorry folks to inform you about the very deep level of corruption in Bitcoin runs to the core.
Okay Gregory send your hitmen. I am ready.
Note this copy is being copied all over the place so it can't be deleted.
Your post wasn't deleted. It was entirely off-topic (going on about an audio format, in a thread about a cryptographic protocol.. had nothing to do with Bitcoin) and ended up getting moved to the off-topic subforum: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1378533.0 . I even responded to it. I failed to see how (even if my comment about using Rust is considered off-topic, which also seems to be arguably relevant to jl777 asking if the source code is in C and your reply that it is in Rust and C++), that the following comment is off-topic and why it deserved to be removed from the thread within 60 seconds of my posting: Btw, I applaud the effort to develop zk-snarks for smart contracts. I believe it is absolutely necessary per the revelation in the "cut & choose" thread which if you think about actually has implications for any scripting on a block chain.
I am glad to see the post ended up some where. Unfortunately you were very slow to provide any indication of where the post had been moved to, orders-of-magnitude slower than your frantic < 60 second effort to remove my post from your thread. Hiding something? Don't want your reputation to be in doubt? I was actually recognizing your accomplishments. I have no idea what brain damage you sustained in childhood which causes you to be so anti-social and controlling acting as Hitler even when you are technically wrong, but of course it probably has something to do with the fact that I have on numerous cases revealed flaws in your work, and the latest one being uncovered the scam of the Trojan Horse Segregated Witness that Blockstream is attempting to foist onto to Bitcoin. The only private message you've sent me is, quoted in its incoherent entirety, Yes that is the private message I was referring to. Well you better take time to understand the issue (unless you are just bluffing and pretending you didn't take the time to comprehend the point that is linked to in the private message), because otherwise I will have yet another technological insight that you ignored by which I am going to use to replace Bitcoin with. Gregory Blockstream's $70 million won't help you. Because you guys are so overconfident that you ignore the work that other people are doing. And that is perfect. Just as it should be. But I guess I should be glad you've exposed yourself as a shameful liar. Again.
Lying about what? I guess you've exposed yourself as a vindictive, hyperdefensive Hitler again. What else is new? I designed the protocol used here in _2011_, Sean has been working on this implementation since last November-- even the git history goes back to Dec 4th... These sorts of things are not accomplished in days. You owe Sean and the members of the forum a retraction. A retraction for what? Did I claim you haven't worked on your stuff before yesterday? Btw, the work you've done is not complete to handle the case I am referring to in the private message. So now go re-read my statements in light of that fact and see who is making false accusations here. You've been banned from the technical sub-forum in the past under your prior identities. If you don't want to be again, please get some control over your behavior.
Oh go fuck yourself. I don't give a fuck about your little Hitler technical discussion forum serfdom where you stroke your little spoiled prince cock. I will meet you in the $trillion market for crypto coins, where I am going to teach you a lesson little boy. I'd challenge you to a boxing match, but you wouldn't make it past 15 seconds. |
|
|
|
|
TPTB_need_war
|
|
February 27, 2016, 01:06:51 PM |
|
I replied to Gregory at where he had moved my post to: The container is very efficiently seek-able over the network, in fact. But your implementation must be sufficiently intelligent.
Here are some benchmarks from the opusfile library, On a 25 hour long variable bitrate audio recording performing 1000 jumps to exact sample positions with no caching:
Total seek operations: 1873 (1.873 per exact seek, 4 maximum).
So an average of less than two operations, and in the worst case 4-- meaning even with a 100ms RTT a worse case seek will not cause a noticeable delay. (and obviously, if it cached, it would be much better).
I am not an expert on streaming media and have just begun my research, but it seems to me that your quoted benchmark is assuming many seeks will be done on the stream. But there are cases where the user wants to only skip once or twice into a song as they are sampling the music for the first time, which is my use case. For that case, the lack of an index is afaics horrific because there will be the latency of some roundtrips required to optimally locate the seek position (by a bisection sampling method) and wasted bandwidth as well. There are many complaints about the lack of an index found on Google search. In particular I note the "Random Access" section of a list of complaints about the Ogg container design. And this requires no indexes which require the file be written in multiple passes or that it only be seekable when it's "finished"-- a live stream is seekable while it's being recorded.
You apparently assume your container is only going to be used for live streams. So you are saying Ogg is not designed as an optimal archive format. You could have instead made the index optional. I think the seeking performance, given a good seeking implementation, is pretty good, and it's often more efficient than other less flexible containers even when they have indexes-- because to keep their indexes reasonably sized they're not high resolution-- and getting them requires seeking to the end or a rewrite of the file. To the extent that an average near 2 is less good than 1 might be with a perfect index, that is a cost for the streaming functionality, and I think a reasonable one.
Hey the resolution could be a configurable parameter so programmers can decide the tradeoff that is ideal for their application. Since when should you decide for them. I didn't design the container, but if I did-- I might have only added an additional back-reference or two at each page; I wouldn't change how seeking works.
Seems you are excluding use cases. I am getting the idea now after several times interacting with you, that you are clearly better at math than I am but I am better designer than you. You seem to pigeon-hole often. Perhaps it is the heads-down quality that is required to have the patience to learn all that math? I recognize your intellect and attention to detail, but you seem to also be inflexible which is not the trait of the best software designers I've known in my life. I am guessing that maybe you are strongly German cultured and need everything neatly ordered in your own space. Note I have some German ancestry (and it shows sometimes in my perfectionism at times), but I also am a mix breed of French, Celtic, and Cherokee native. I think this makes me more creative/flexible than you. Not that I often think about comparing ourselves, just at times like this where you disrespect others (and then somehow expect they would respect you ). Perhaps you were not intending to disrespect me in this case, but I think the past track record (see link above) is what leads to this tension which is ready to blow at any time. Also I holding you to a higher standard w.r.t. to this crap that you seem to be foisting with Segregated Witness, because you hold everyone else to such a higher standard and even threatening them of being scammers without sufficient proof (again see my link above). Perhaps I should realize this is just the German trait and brush it off my shoulder. I think the less we interact the better. Thanks for the reply and I wish your orderly orderness didn't rub me the wrong way. Sorry I am about as compatible with a German as I am with shooting myself in the head. I love freedom which means stop stomping on others. I am a sheepdog which means I will fight those who I perceive are oppressing freedom of expression. Hey I understand what it is like to deal with trolls and in that case I would support the swift action since trolls only aim to disrupt, but I wasn't trolling you. Tim hasn't really had anything to do with Rust-- I had some infinitesimally small influence on the language (lobbied successfully for overflow of ordinary signed types to be defined as an error). Rust has some nice properties for cryptocurrency infrastructure: in particular it has no overhead, deterministic operation, with high levels of safety enforced at compile time. These things matter for decentralized cryptocurrency, since speed is also a security consideration.
I know I read something about Rust and one of your two names mentioned, but I forgot the specifics and couldn't locate it again readily with a Google search (at least not on Tim's name). Okay I could understand the incomplete typing of Rust (as compared to say for example Haskell or Scala) would not be the priority when wanting to get as close as possible to the metal while having some higher level functionality not provided by C. Any way, as I said, the specifics of my former criticisms have been mostly forgotten by myself. I would need to refresh my memory. I think the flaw was w.r.t. to declaring the invariants for class members in the class methods if I am not mistaken (but that is very vague so I might be recollecting incorrectly). |
|
|
|
|
TPTB_need_war
|
|
February 27, 2016, 02:36:24 PM |
|
You have failed to read the linked thread and understand the issue. Please report back after you have read the linked thread (not the Monero thread) and understood how a certain script can open the security hole for a rented 51% attack: I had read that link but concluded that it was largely concerned with DE transactions; which boils down to a faulty script but that script not affecting the security of the chain in general, but only the funds involved in the script in the worst case. Casper aside, I still don't see how programmable scripting in general weakens the security of the entire chain; if anything it's analogous to the cascade of invalidations related to the particular output of a double spend. Only that script and related scripts are at risk. Okay I am going to explain this one time for those who weren't able to extract the salient point from what I wrote in the DE thread that I had linked to. And then after this post, I don't want to discuss any more shit on this forum (no insult/blame intended to those who have tried to have productive discussions with me including monsterer, which has been helpful and my sincere thanks is accorded in spite of any intermittent difficulties in attaining mutual comprehension). The problem is that once you enable the ability to put hashes of private keys on the block chain and enable multi-sig where revealing those keys allows a designated party to spend the transaction to any one, when this depends on the order of confirmations, then it opens a way to fund 51% rented hashrate attacks. Now you claim this is only isolated to a flawed DE script and I say that there are unbounded number of unknown scripts which may expose similar ways to fund 51% rented hashrate attacks. Thus it is a generalized security hole. The only ways to close the security hole are to only allow miners to run scripts which have been vetted and authorized, but that then centralizes the control. The only decentralized solution I can think of is to use zk-snarks to run the scripts in a black box in homomorphic zero knowledge so that miners can't see the data stored on the block chain. The only other solution would be analyze all the permutations of Op codes and be sure that all culprit op codes were removed. This is why I had sent a private msg to Gregory Maxwell, yet he says my msg is incoherent, because he didn't even take the time to understand, because I allege/observe he is an overconfident cocky destroyer of Bitcoin and destroyer who knows what else (in spite of apparently being very proficient at designing efficient algorithms for sound compression and apparently also reasonably expert at cryptography and much more so than me at both of those). Ethereum's even more generalized scripting will be much more vulnerable to this. The security hole funds an attacker to 51% attack a coin. This affects not only the unwinding of derivative transactions (which could span most of the coins if the attack is lie-in-wait long enough) and also impacts all the coins in terms of loss of value due to the market reaction to a 51% attack and also enables the attacker to do some double-spending while he is attacking. Also we can't characterize all the types of scripts which might create such losses and thus be directly impacted by stolen coins. |
|
|
|
|
|
generalizethis
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1750
Merit: 1036
Facts are more efficient than fud
|
|
February 29, 2016, 06:43:15 PM |
|
|
|
|
|
trollercoaster
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1050
Merit: 1001
|
|
March 01, 2016, 08:16:49 AM
Last edit: March 03, 2016, 09:20:14 PM by trollercoaster |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Barnabe
|
|
March 02, 2016, 07:56:59 PM |
|
General AI development could be one of the biggest breakthroughs in science. This is a kind of unusual application of it, interessant but it will not change a lot of things... |
|
|
|
generalizethis
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1750
Merit: 1036
Facts are more efficient than fud
|
|
March 04, 2016, 06:02:21 AM |
|
General AI development could be one of the biggest breakthroughs in science. This is a kind of unusual application of it, interessant but it will not change a lot of things... I would go further and say AI could be one of the greatest breakthroughs in evolution--you're talking about an intelligence jump orders of magnitude above man's current development taking place in very small time frames when considering evolution's normal scale. The organic brain unaltered won't even comprehend what's happening, this potentiality has led a few science fiction writers to give up on trying to detail future technologies and merely describe how they are perceived by organic humans without any attempt to detail they're functions. I described it to a friend as ants walking through a city--they see the same things that we do (though differently due to physical design), but can't understand the systems in action or the motives of those operating those systems. |
|
|
|
|
Barnabe
|
|
March 04, 2016, 07:07:31 PM |
|
General AI development could be one of the biggest breakthroughs in science. This is a kind of unusual application of it, interessant but it will not change a lot of things... I would go further and say AI could be one of the greatest breakthroughs in evolution--you're talking about an intelligence jump orders of magnitude above man's current development taking place in very small time frames when considering evolution's normal scale. The organic brain unaltered won't even comprehend what's happening, this potentiality has led a few science fiction writers to give up on trying to detail future technologies and merely describe how they are perceived by organic humans without any attempt to detail they're functions. I described it to a friend as ants walking through a city--they see the same things that we do (though differently due to physical design), but can't understand the systems in action or the motives of those operating those systems. Yeah, I read something about this. A very interesting read. http://waitbutwhy.com/2015/01/artificial-intelligence-revolution-1.htmlIt's very interesting and frightening at the same time. Will we be able to control such intelligence ? If we give it control, it will be able to replace us in no time. Many people have already expressed their fears about Artificial intelligence ... |
|
|
|
|
minor-transgression
|
|
March 04, 2016, 10:44:51 PM |
|
An ongoing court case centering on encryption has thrown light upon the total incompetence
of those in power. And this is not just about the USA and its legal system, it calls into
question the fitness for purpose of every government currently in place.
First, understand that without privacy, there can be no private property.
We presently rely on a dual system of ink on paper, and on electronic records for securing
ownership of property. Written records run the risk of fire and flood, and electronic records,
at some point, rely on encryption for their continued existence. That ability to keep proof of
ownership secure is most commonly described as privacy. Without privacy, only the use of
force secures private property.
Indulge me as I go through a thought exercise. The interconnectedness of our computer systems
increases every year, as does the computer power at each node. There are already concerns
about the vulnerability of these systems to anyone more sophisticated than a script-kiddie.
If that continues indefinitely, or of a bad actor preempts natural emergence, this interconnected
system will eventually become self-aware. That's usually referred to as Skynet in discussions.
The only defence against such intelligence is an ability to partition the system to limit the
reach of any individual section. A sort of privacy. And for that you need secure encryption.
The very last thing that governments should be pushing for today, are weakened encryption
standards and backdoors and trapdoors that "only" government can use, built into every
internet capable device by law.
Why blame conspiracy when incompetence explains so much, and insanity completes the picture?
|
|
|
|
|
generalizethis
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1750
Merit: 1036
Facts are more efficient than fud
|
|
March 05, 2016, 03:58:18 AM |
|
General AI development could be one of the biggest breakthroughs in science. This is a kind of unusual application of it, interessant but it will not change a lot of things... I would go further and say AI could be one of the greatest breakthroughs in evolution--you're talking about an intelligence jump orders of magnitude above man's current development taking place in very small time frames when considering evolution's normal scale. The organic brain unaltered won't even comprehend what's happening, this potentiality has led a few science fiction writers to give up on trying to detail future technologies and merely describe how they are perceived by organic humans without any attempt to detail they're functions. I described it to a friend as ants walking through a city--they see the same things that we do (though differently due to physical design), but can't understand the systems in action or the motives of those operating those systems. Yeah, I read something about this. A very interesting read. http://waitbutwhy.com/2015/01/artificial-intelligence-revolution-1.htmlIt's very interesting and frightening at the same time. Will we be able to control such intelligence ? If we give it control, it will be able to replace us in no time. Many people have already expressed their fears about Artificial intelligence ... No, we won't even understand it if our own intelligence isn't developed along the same trajectory (how do you control something you don't understand and is most likely orders of magnitude smarter than you?). Luckily (kind of) many believe that we won't create a separate AI, but will become the AI over time--more and more of our functions being ramped off of organic processes and into inorganic processes. Nick Land summed it up beautifully when he said, "...nothing human makes it out of the near future." The real question is is AI us, a separate system, or a hybrid of both? I say that humanity as we know it is done and either we evolve with the system or become the equivalent of Cro-Magnons chucking rocks a jet fighters. |
|
|
|
OROBTC (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2926
Merit: 1863
|
|
March 05, 2016, 04:17:26 AM |
|
...
minor-transgression
You raise two very interesting points. A completely connected system would indeed be vulnerable to all sorts of hacking, and that would have the potential to create all kinds of havoc, including disasters. That does not even include just .gov spying on us, which is about as great a danger.
Such a huge and connected system, at least to me and in the short-run, would have little danger (now) of becoming self-aware re "SkyNet". But, it is a danger...
Re partitioning the various large interconnected systems and having the partitions protected by strong encryption looks like a great idea. I should start by learning more about encryption myself beyond PGP in email.
|
|
|
|
|
generalizethis
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1750
Merit: 1036
Facts are more efficient than fud
|
|
March 05, 2016, 05:35:11 AM |
|
The only defence against such intelligence is an ability to partition the system to limit the
reach of any individual section. A sort of privacy. And for that you need secure encryption.
The very last thing that governments should be pushing for today, are weakened encryption
standards and backdoors and trapdoors that "only" government can use, built into every
internet capable device by law.
Why blame conspiracy when incompetence explains so much, and insanity completes the picture?
On the flip side, DARPA is trying to build or buy a self-modulating computer system that is capable of fending of hackers in real time. Who's to say that that system doesn't become aware of its own possibilities to control the very system it is supposed to protect? It seems that some humans think of these systems as guard dogs instead of potential risks. We barely understand the system that makes us sentient, yet we presume that we won't bump into sentience along the road to self modulating computer systems. Any system that can control its behaviors through a process of modulation has the potential for sentience--because what is sentience besides the ability to overhear your thoughts and change your actions based on possible outcomes? Just because many airily refer to human sentience in high minded soul/god complexes doesn't mean that it can't be manufactured--hubris, will be our undoing if we are arrogant enough to make systems smarter than ourselves and think we can control them. Again, the singularity is the moment when the organic brain can't comprehend the technical world around it, you are already seeing the breakdown of people into fields--the concentration of more and more of our brain power onto less and less general material as data and technology converge towards the singularity (funny that computers are being asked to do more and more of the overall work as we are being asked to less and less). We can either adapt to this greater demand or be supplanted by systems that can handle these processes. The idea that we can control them as they continually move further and further out of our comprehension is disastrous. Though given my experience with humans, maybe non-human AI's will be better at keeping humans happy and peaceful--the Porno for Pyro's song "We'll make great pets" comes to mind.  |
|
|
|
|
