1010 réponses à ce sujet

[Cainhurst Crow]

David7204 wrote...

The point that has been attempted is that making AI is stupid because technology is sometimes imperfect and dangerous, and we should never gamble our lives with it.

I clearly has no merit.

[AresKeith]

David7204 wrote...

The point that has been attempted is that making AI is stupid because technology is sometimes imperfect and dangerous, and we should never gamble our lives with it.

That point clearly has no merit.

Except that there is a thing called "Too big of a gambit"

[David7204]

Humanity as a whole has clearly decided flying presents an acceptable risk.

And yes, modern planes do indeed depend on software. And accidents have indeed occured as a result of software glitches.

Modifié par David7204, 20 octobre 2013 - 03:39 .

[Deathsaurer]

David I'd think the conflicting opinions on whether AI are alive that occur on this very forum would be an amazing indicator as to why making a sapient computer is a very bad idea.

[Cainhurst Crow]

David7204 wrote...

Humanity as a whole has clearly decided flying presents an acceptable risk.

And yes, modern planes do indeed depend on software. And accidents have indeed occured as a result of software glitches.

And this is why I try to use air travel as little as possible in my life.

[David7204]

I would suggest a few courses in statistics.

[Br3admax]

Darth Brotarian wrote...

David7204 wrote...

The point that has been attempted is that making AI is stupid because technology is sometimes imperfect and dangerous, and we should never gamble our lives with it.

I clearly has no merit.

That may be what you are debating, but I'm not. 

[Steelcan]

David7204 wrote...

I would suggest a few courses in statistics.

And I'd suggest a  few courses in biology, anamtomy, and debate, and history because history is fun

[Jeremiah12LGeek]

I almost posted before. But didn't.

I will, anyway.

I don't think there are many people happy with the ending, regardless of what they chose. I think the basic premise of the OP's question is enormously flawed. I chose Synthesis originally, and was crushed by the ending, like the vast majority of people.

I felt slightly happier when I converted to destroy.

If by "slightly" I mean infinitesimally less disappointed.

Modifié par Jeremiah12LGeek, 20 octobre 2013 - 03:44 .

[spirosz]

Steelcan wrote...

David7204 wrote...

I would suggest a few courses in statistics.

And I'd suggest a  few courses in biology, anamtomy, and debate, and history because history is fun

Come at me Industrial Revolution.  

[AresKeith]

Steelcan wrote...

David7204 wrote...

I would suggest a few courses in statistics.

And I'd suggest a  few courses in biology, anamtomy, and debate, and history because history is fun

And for him to play more video games

[KaiserShep]

David7204 wrote...

I would absolutely want a car that can decide to go faster or slower depending on what's appropriate. In fact, that's pretty much a necessity for driverless cars. And I would be happy to have a microwave that adjusts itself depending on what it's cooking.

No, you don't want a car that does this without being aware that it can. If you bought a vehicle, or an appliance, you want to know about its capabilities. Being able to automatically adjust its speed depending on the situation is something you'd want to be aware of, and you'd want to be aware that your appliance adjusts its cooking time or temperature based on what's in it. You don't want to press 20 seconds, and have it go for any longer than that.

[dreamgazer]

My microwave knows how long to cook popcorn.

AM I IN THE FUTURE?!

[Steelcan]

spirosz wrote...

Steelcan wrote...

David7204 wrote...

I would suggest a few courses in statistics.

And I'd suggest a  few courses in biology, anamtomy, and debate, and history because history is fun

Come at me Industrial Revolution.  

[David7204]

I would suggest you get used to the reality of your life depending very directly on software. Driverless cars are going to start popping up here and there within a decade. And they'll become commonplace not long after. And as you know, cars are everywhere. And they will be accidents. And people will die. And there will be opposition, but it's not going to last.

Modifié par David7204, 20 octobre 2013 - 03:48 .

[MassivelyEffective0730]

David7204 wrote...

I clearly has no merit.

Clearly

Modifié par MassivelyEffective0730, 20 octobre 2013 - 03:48 .

[Br3admax]

dreamgazer wrote...

My microwave knows how long to cook popcorn.

AM I IN THE FUTURE?!

Kill it, before it kills you. 

[spirosz]

I'd still rather depend on my own instincts, regardless if I'm in a vehicle or not.

[Br3admax]

David7204 wrote...

I would suggest you get used to the reality of your life depending very directly on software. Driverless cars are going to start popping up here and there within a decade. And they'll become commonplace not long after. And as you know, cars are everywhere. And they will be accidents. And people will die. And there will be opposition, but it's not going to last.

We can't all be as prepared for certainty as you are David. I look forward to these cars that we have no control over. 

[Steelcan]

David7204 wrote...

I would suggest you get used to the reality of your life depending very directly on software. Driverless cars are going to start popping up here and there within a decade. And they'll become commonplace not long after. And as you know, cars are everywhere. And they will be accidents. And people will die. And there will be opposition, but it's not going to last.

You are starting to smell a little...lupine

[MassivelyEffective0730]

David7204 wrote...

I would suggest you get used to the reality of your life depending very directly on software. Driverless cars are going to start popping up here and there within a decade. And they'll become commonplace not long after. And as you know, cars are everywhere. And they will be accidents. And people will die. And there will be opposition, but it's not going to last.

It's completely awesome how you have industrial insider knowledge. 

[Deathsaurer]

Driverless cars I'm perfectly fine with. A computer that can have an intelligent debate with me I am not.

[MassivelyEffective0730]

Steelcan wrote...

spirosz wrote...

Steelcan wrote...

David7204 wrote...

I would suggest a few courses in statistics.

And I'd suggest a  few courses in biology, anamtomy, and debate, and history because history is fun

Come at me Industrial Revolution.  

snip.

I would also suggest to David that he takes a Physics course.

You know, to learn how physics work.

[KaiserShep]

David7204 wrote...

I would suggest you get used to the reality of your life depending very directly on software. Driverless cars are going to start popping up here and there within a decade. And they'll become commonplace not long after. And as you know, cars are everywhere. And they will be accidents. And people will die. And there will be opposition, but it's not going to last.

The point is that we don't want machinery that can operate outside of its parameters because it prefers something. We just want them to do what we design them to do, driverless cars included.

[dreamgazer]

Deathsaurer wrote...

Driverless cars I'm perfectly fine with. A computer that can have an intelligent debate with me I am not.

How about a driverless car that disputes the best way to drive with you (speed, route, yellow lights)?