July 24, 2015 at 10:57 am
GBimberg (7/24/2015)
SkyNet could have been very buggy and not self aware. How many times have we confused a bug with an indented feature of the program?:Whistling:
LOL, lots of times. :w00t:
July 24, 2015 at 10:59 am
Eric M Russell (7/24/2015)
I'm not concerned about robot overlords exterminating mankind in the future, but I do believe that artificial intelligence has created a sort of soft tyranny here and now. Think about how consumer credit scoring impacts your life, how automated trading impacts the stock market, and how a web search can put your name on a terror watch list.
I'm not sure this is AI as much as it is (poor) pattern matching and data mining with algorithms that are less about helping us and more about helping one side of a transaction more than others.
July 24, 2015 at 11:01 am
jckfla (7/24/2015)
Amen to the not buying "smart" devices/products. I avoid smart TVs and stuff like the plague. It's bad enough hackers get into my insurance company, medical provider, dad's retirement at OPM, et al. They don't need to hack my TV too.
I'm all for Smart devices, but they have to work. Far too many are slapped together on the code side, with little regard for security. Until that gets fixed, this is a silly way to build products.
July 24, 2015 at 11:02 am
GoofyGuy (7/24/2015)
Is Skynet coming?Computers are only as smart as the people who program them.
So we have nothing to worry about.
😉
That's what got me thinking. :hehe:
July 24, 2015 at 11:04 am
Chris Harshman (7/24/2015)
...
Think about the times on Jeopardy (it was only a few but still) where the response required some kind of reasoning, common sense, or other ability greater than fact retrieval and Watson came up with odd answers that made the audience laugh. I view these kinds of systems more like a preschool aged child, capable of learning many things, being able to retrieve that knowledge, and even come up with some application of that knowledge, but not really understanding that knowledge or being able to reason with it beyond a rudimentary level.
...
Perhaps Watson hasn't been programmed to respond with a reply like: "Gee, that's a goog quesion, but I just don't know the answer to that one". Generally speaking, humans are smart to know that when the best ranked answer still has a very low probability of being correct due to lack of data; then it's best not to toss out a wild guess.
"Do not seek to follow in the footsteps of the wise. Instead, seek what they sought." - Matsuo Basho
July 24, 2015 at 12:10 pm
Steve Jones - SSC Editor (7/24/2015)
jckfla (7/24/2015)
Amen to the not buying "smart" devices/products. I avoid smart TVs and stuff like the plague. It's bad enough hackers get into my insurance company, medical provider, dad's retirement at OPM, et al. They don't need to hack my TV too.I'm all for Smart devices, but they have to work. Far too many are slapped together on the code side, with little regard for security. Until that gets fixed, this is a silly way to build products.
So what you're saying in short is...I'm right 😛 lol
If the device was actually "smart", I might buy one too. But, seems to me that "smart" devices are about as smart as the people who make them are diligent to make them well...which is, in most cases, not at all.
Besides that...I need a TV to watch TV programming or movies from a replay device of my choice...not other stuff.
I think of it this way: if you have a web surfing device, a built-in streaming device, and a TV...all in one...and that makes it "smart"...when the built-in streaming device goes bad...you send it to get repaired...you lose it...and the web surfing device...and the TV.
How smart is that? :laugh:
That's why I have a Roku...and an AIOPC (not HTPC...because I can watch movies from it I have stored or play games...it's All In One 😉 )...hooked to my TV.
But to me, a lot of the "smart" gizmos tacked onto a product now is just added cost that offers me features that I don't need, won't use, and could care less about. So why pay for extra things?
It's like with Windows 8, 8.1, and 10. They want me to have a touchscreen PC. Why would I want to move my hand all the way up to the monitor from the keyboard and mouse that are located in closer proximity to me? Then move them back to the keyboard to type? Why pay more for a monitor with touch-capability when I don't need it? Or pay more for a laptop with touch when I don't need it and have no use for it??
I can get a new keyboard at Big Lots for $10. A new mouse for $8. The price difference in 24" non-touch vs. touch monitors is about $200 for similar features. I think for that much difference...I'll stick with K&M and forego touch input. I don't need to be the cool, trendy kid using all the latest gadgets.
Essentially, added function doesn't make a product better, more productive, or more useful automatically. One of the reasons why I've been slowly steering away from Windows for at-home use. Microsoft doesn't seem to be focused to making my experience as a home PC user any better...unfortunately.
If I do get to where I can only buy smart products, the one's I'll look to buy are the ones with the option to totally disable each feature I don't need. I just fear they won't make devices that "smart" either. 🙁
But...i'm waiting for value and purpose with "smart" devices. Like I said...when they make a quality AI wife I can get...I'll probably be a happy man lmao :laugh:
July 24, 2015 at 12:14 pm
if I didn't drop a zero somewhere, the 7 billion in population would fit into the state of Colorado if we all lived in the density of the country of Macau S.A.R.
And that is only the second densest society we know about. The first was the Japanese Mining Colony of Hashima that had 3 times that density until 1974.
July 24, 2015 at 12:31 pm
jckfla (7/24/2015)
It's like with Windows 8, 8.1, and 10. They want me to have a touchscreen PC. Why would I want to move my hand all the way up to the monitor from the keyboard and mouse that are located in closer proximity to me? Then move them back to the keyboard to type? Why pay more for a monitor with touch-capability when I don't need it? Or pay more for a laptop with touch when I don't need it and have no use for it??
Dang kids! In my day, we didn't have these pretty pichers and icons, all we had was binary! And we didn't even have zeros, we had ohs! I once wrote an entire operating system in ones and ohs! And we liked it!
You must have missed the identical griping when Micro$oft told everyone that they had to buy a mouse back in 1993, then a CD drive in 2000. MS was right back then, I am pretty sure they are right today.
July 24, 2015 at 12:56 pm
rclark-1124819 (7/24/2015)
if I didn't drop a zero somewhere, the 7 billion in population would fit into the state of Colorado if we all lived in the density of the country of Macau S.A.R.And that is only the second densest society we know about. The first was the Japanese Mining Colony of Hashima that had 3 times that density until 1974.
Imagine 7 billion people packed into a mining colony the size of Colorado ...
... And the world will live as one
... la la laaaa
"Do not seek to follow in the footsteps of the wise. Instead, seek what they sought." - Matsuo Basho
July 24, 2015 at 1:37 pm
jckfla (7/24/2015)
Essentially, added function doesn't make a product better, more productive, or more useful automatically. One of the reasons why I've been slowly steering away from Windows for at-home use. Microsoft doesn't seem to be focused to making my experience as a home PC user any better...unfortunately.
If I do get to where I can only buy smart products, the one's I'll look to buy are the ones with the option to totally disable each feature I don't need. I just fear they won't make devices that "smart" either. 🙁
But...i'm waiting for value and purpose with "smart" devices. Like I said...when they make a quality AI wife I can get...I'll probably be a happy man lmao :laugh:
MS is pretty clearly going for a completely integrated OS between the mobile, tablet, laptop and desktop systems. Windows 8.1 is entirely usable as a home PC without a touch screen, the start menu might work a little differently but that's a matter of familiarity, but the OS is clearly designed to integrate with the windows cloud in general and there is value.
Plus in a few years touch screen monitors will just be the baseline monitor at no extra charge, just like LCD's are now.
July 24, 2015 at 2:37 pm
Efficiency doesn't make customer service better, it destroys it. The more we depend on machines, the less we depend on our human abilities. We get lazy and dummer as we let the machines do it. I have dealt with three customer service nightmares in the last six weeks. All based on over dependence on technology. In each case, a breakdown in training led to an oversight and a bad customer experience. Looking at how the situations were handled, it is guaranteed that they won't put more personnel or better training in place. They will look for more technology as the solution. Look at the driveless car as the standard solution to every problem.
With that in mind I can safely make a bet that some corporation will let loose an AI Darlek in pursuit of a solution or profit in the next few years. It might not be full intelligence, but the damage will be considerable.
July 24, 2015 at 2:47 pm
Improved efficiency by definition makes more resources available. What you do with those resources is a business problem, not a technical one.
July 24, 2015 at 2:59 pm
Divorcing the problem is the problem.
July 24, 2015 at 4:20 pm
I know that there is a lot of concern and even some fear about the capabilities of AI, however I don't think that we have to worry about it for a very, very long time if at all. Even the most sophisticated AI currently employed requires massive computing capability and teams of developers employing heuristic algorithms, complex data structures, and very clever programming just to SIMULATE a minute portion of intelligence. And yet, with all that, most AI systems are not as intuitive as an ant when it comes to problem solving, dealing with new situations, and learning. And an ant didn't need a human programmer!
Don't get me wrong. I do enjoy the effort of AI research and love the sci-fi books and movies that result from it all. In the end, I do believe that it's all worth it because in the process of trying to make computers more human-compatible, we learn even much more about ourselves.
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/sqlrv
Website: https://www.sqlrv.com
July 24, 2015 at 4:20 pm
jckfla (7/24/2015)
So what you're saying in short is...I'm right 😛 lol
Yes and no. There are issues with devices now, and always will be with some, but the advances are nice for some things.
...
But to me, a lot of the "smart" gizmos tacked onto a product now is just added cost that offers me features that I don't need, won't use, and could care less about. So why pay for extra things?
The extra things are useful to some people. It's not about "you", but about the market. I think many features are useful to a slice of people, but another slice thinks the same feature is useless.
Keep in mind that not everyone shares your perspective. Some like integration, some like separation. Some like a certain convenience that others don't care about.
It's like with Windows 8, 8.1, and 10. They want me to have a touchscreen PC. Why would I want to move my hand all the way up to the monitor from the keyboard and mouse that are located in closer proximity to me? Then move them back to the keyboard to type? Why pay more for a monitor with touch-capability when I don't need it? Or pay more for a laptop with touch when I don't need it and have no use for it??
No reason if you don't like it. My wife really likes her laptop touch screen and uses it constantly. I use mine sporadically, depending on what I'm doing. When I read a longer piece and need to scroll, I like the touch screen way more than the pad or mouse.
Essentially, added function doesn't make a product better, more productive, or more useful automatically. One of the reasons why I've been slowly steering away from Windows for at-home use. Microsoft doesn't seem to be focused to making my experience as a home PC user any better...unfortunately.
Highly opinionated. I think if it doesn't for you, then don't use it or pay for it. That's a really, really generalized statement that I think doesn't fit for many people or products.
Also, cost is relative. Some people pay more for a keyboard because they appreciate or want to. Nothing wrong with that. Nothing wrong with an $8 keyboard if you like it.
Viewing 15 posts - 31 through 45 (of 68 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply