ggggtez

45 ms·

421.
by ggggtez 6y ago
Is this some kind of new-age philosophy? Show me the part of the brain that doesn't work based on physical properties. If you can't, then we have to agree that the brain is just operating on mathematics. Computers can do math too.
422.
by ggggtez 6y ago
It doesn't help that quantum computers can be simulated with standard transistors (albeit much slower). Are we really arguing that speed of computation is now a pre-requisite for consciousness?
423.
by ggggtez 6y ago
>Patients in a vegetative state lie in bed, are unable to voluntary move or speak, sometimes can't even move their eyes anymore, but the consciousness-meter tells us that about a fifth of them remain conscious. > If I take my Tes
424.
by ggggtez 6y ago
The above poster's question was specifically about the US. GDPR does not cover the US. Europe has more privacy laws than the US does.
425.
by ggggtez 6y ago
>is granular location data illegal Generally speaking, there are no laws against merely possessing data, unless the data itself was the result of a crime. Maybe you mean selling the data? That's nuanced. It seems to be illegal for p
426.
by ggggtez 6y ago
Despite the title, it was mostly an article about location data being (no surprise) identifying information.
427.
by ggggtez 6y ago
Don't worry, it's only metaphorical blood. Equifax is just a concept, and can't be physically hurt.
428.
by ggggtez 6y ago
You need to buy a new router every year? I think the only thing needed here is a citation. How about NYT which suggests every 3-4 years? https://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/08/technology/personaltech/i..
429.
by ggggtez 6y ago
As a longtime firefox user, I don't think this is true. At best it's a choice thing, I haven't run into memory issues in Chrome in a long time. And IE being better than (any browser)? Let's not get carried away. They sti
430.
by ggggtez 6y ago
This comment thread really is nonsense. So Facebook and the government are secretly working together in a conspiracy to falsify court records while secretly they cooporate the whole time and the case was never actually tried? What planet ar
431.
by ggggtez 6y ago
You could have. And that would have been a crime. But contrary to popular opinion, tech companies are not a branch of the police force. So they have no obligation to help the police prosecute people without a warrant.
432.
by ggggtez 7y ago
Except it's not actually fair, which some people may not like.
433.
by ggggtez 7y ago
Down voted because this is just a lie. "Kind person" - pictures of men women, children, of all ages and colors. "good person" - Mostly pictures of two hands holding. No clear bias towards women at all. If anything, more
434.
by ggggtez 7y ago
Perhaps, but would you really say "Hi, I'm wearing a shirt without stripes"? It's a completely artificial construct. Simply the fact that this hacker-news entry is the #1 search result shows that real human people do n
435.
by ggggtez 7y ago
It's not really kosher to suggest that it's "for the best" that it doesn't work well for other people. :) It's not like paintings of darkskinned people don't exist for the AI to learn from, even if you don
436.
by ggggtez 7y ago
Why do I get the feeling that you could programmatically name all these colors in some trivial way? Then you wouldn't end up with 30x "Blue" in your dataset. Let's imagine we take the dominant byte of each color only. Th
437.
by ggggtez 7y ago
> neil with data .com > no data in the article to back up claims Yet another person who claims that hiring is broken. If this is the case, then show me the company that is not using technical interviews, and demonstrate to me that all
438.
by ggggtez 7y ago
>dubious ethics Yeah, I think datamining to steal and sell your LinkedIn account counts as dubious ethics. Or claiming to have E2E but actually they don't. There is a good share of incompetence as well, like the CSP issues.
439.
by ggggtez 7y ago
Surprisingly, as a person complaining about gullibility of other people, I really don't know how you came to the conclusion that everyone believes Japan's numbers. Almost every article I've read that has mentioned Japan'
440.
by ggggtez 7y ago
Even if it's true, this isn't your personal soap box. Wikipedia blocks edits to articles that people start spamming too. I don't see this as any different.
441.
by ggggtez 7y ago
So you are saying that you know for certain that keeping children home from school... cannot deprive them of an education? And keeping billions of people home, unable to socialize for months, with no end in sight... won't increase de
442.
by ggggtez 7y ago
It seems like everyone commenting on this article lost their gosh-darn minds. Can I helpfully remind folks to try to have productive discussions instead of quibbling about the definition of "proven", and outright vitriol?
443.
by ggggtez 7y ago
>Wheeled Luggage I think that one is pretty obvious. You need to be a traveler going somewhere you need to bring luggage to... but it has to be somewhere you can't just have someone help you or use a dolly (e.g. taxi or hotel) but a
444.
by ggggtez 7y ago
To be a little cynical, I remain unconvinced that humans are not just pattern matching too. Go players thought there was something uniquely human about mastering Go... until an AI proved them wrong. We are just beginning to see that machine
445.
by ggggtez 7y ago
With FP and FN you really need to be careful... 1 person committed a crime. So the true positive rate is 1 out of 7 billion or so. So how many false positives would 0.1% lead to? About 7 million pants wearers? And for false negatives, we ex
446.
by ggggtez 7y ago
On topic for the article: I don't think the Turing Test is a very good test at all. It's trivial by having the robot pretend to be stupid, a child, or not a native-speaker. When you hear it described, it was clearly intended to be
447.
by ggggtez 7y ago
We still have 10 more years to go then. But honestly I'd argue that we have already achieved at least some level of "greater than human" intelligence. Not general intelligence, mind you, but none the less.
448.
by ggggtez 7y ago
I think this is rather a simplification. It assumed the only value people obtain from voting is the actually election of the candidate. But humans get other value from voting. Social benefits, for example, by showing that you care about som
449.
by ggggtez 7y ago
In the USA, you don't need any piece of paper to preach but you do need that paper to work as an engineer. Choose better examples next time you want to be snarky, please.
450.
by ggggtez 7y ago
Very cool, skip to the end to hear it in action.

More ›