glitchc

35 ms·

631.
by glitchc 1y ago
Can we call it general intelligence then? Is human intelligence not the sum of both good and bad people?
632.
by glitchc 1y ago
Yes it's unlikely that hard safety rules are possible for general intelligence. After billions of years of trying, the best biology has been able to do is incentivize certain behaviours. The only way to prevent seems to be to kill the
633.
by glitchc 1y ago
Already tested. Success rate is too low. A great deal of aenergy gets wasted. Remember, this is about asymmetric warfare. If the number of rounds or amount of energy required costs more than the drone it shoots down, then it's not an
634.
by glitchc 1y ago
Did you read your own article? It was developed last year and one of the weapons tested in February of this year as per the IDF post. The rest is Rafael marketing speak.
635.
by glitchc 1y ago
You mean the demo done recently? The article might be misleading. The IDF tested 20 different systems produced by their military OEMs. It wasn't just lasers, and lasers are far from being the clear winner. Here's the official post
636.
by glitchc 1y ago
The point is that a focused laser will put a hole through the drone, much like an armor piercing round, but that is often insufficient to disable the drone. A larger ballistic projectile (think a solid shell or a rock) is much more effectiv
637.
by glitchc 1y ago
Lasers aren't effective. Most of the drone is just an empty frame. The control board is pretty tiny, as is the ordnance. Targeting those or the propulsion systems is quite difficult. Sure, you can punch holes in the chassis but it take
638.
by glitchc 1y ago
Yeah it's definitely an arms race. Interestingly, technology in the States lags behind the rest of the world. Every other country has moved on to chip and PIN, 2FA, obe time tokens and asymmetric cryptography. Whereas in the US, one ca
639.
by glitchc 1y ago
> - you can’t make your kid into this. Thanks for saying this up front. Worth repeating.
640.
by glitchc 1y ago
It's up to the merchant to decide if they want to support offline payments and to what limit. The terminals certainly allow it. Your transaction will be stored in a secure way (either encrypted or in a secure element) until the termina
641.
by glitchc 1y ago
> There is no real protection on card readers (most use Linux with a small shitty password). The protection comes from the contracts and regulations between the shops and the banks. I'm afraid that's not true. Merchant terminal
642.
by glitchc 1y ago
Honor only works if individual participants hold themselves to a higher standard. Once you have a couple of folks who are in it to maximize their return, FOMO guarantees that it quickly becomes an arms race.
643.
by glitchc 1y ago
That's my experience as well.
644.
by glitchc 1y ago
I'm not sure if this is driven to incentivize having children, but the more general point of incentivizing children for the good of society is a valid one. A society that stops having kids (or importing them) will cease to be a society
645.
by glitchc 1y ago
While there are people who wish that "yes" was a "no" instead, they form an exceedingly small portion of the general population. Most people are happy they exist.
646.
by glitchc 1y ago
It's a nice article, just the title needs a small tweak to add the word practical, as in "There is no practical DH..."
647.
by glitchc 1y ago
"Going to" is an aspiration. "Having done" is an achievement. Let us know how it goes.
648.
by glitchc 1y ago
It's likely the driver handling the conversion. Which makes me wonder, can I use the same driver to remap extra keys on my existing QMK compatible keyboard?
649.
by glitchc 1y ago
> We don't know why we experience things. It's bizarre that we do. Nothing in our understanding of the universe gives any indication that a bunch of atoms thrown together by cosmological processes and then assembled into self-r
650.
by glitchc 1y ago
All of the cost is tied to compliance. A Swift message costs pennies, it's the due diligence behind it that banks charge for. Stablecoins will not change the compliance requirements
651.
by glitchc 1y ago
This blog post started off sounding like it was about the plight of highly intellectual and motivated engineers hired to work on very mundane tasks. If we can abuse people like this, why not a computer? After all, it's not even alive.
652.
by glitchc 1y ago
I addressed the general point since the question was around whether R&D should be prioritized. Whether data centers are required for R&D (or not) is up for debate. Clearly, science to date has not been impeded by the absence of such
653.
by glitchc 1y ago
Demonetization is not the same thing as stablecoins. Countries are allowed to withdraw certain bank note denominations and it's been done many times in the past. In most countries where demonetization occurs, the central bank continues
654.
by glitchc 1y ago
Nah, most banks globally have a mechanism to send and receive USD. That's sufficient for all use-cases.
655.
by glitchc 1y ago
> Must R&D be prioritized over quality of life, environment, and be subsidized by local tax breaks/grants? Yes, yes and maybe, if it needs to be accelerated. No part of our modern life would exist without scientific and engineer
656.
by glitchc 1y ago
Expert Systems (TM) was trademarked (abandoned now) way way back in 1982. It was a licensed term that meant something very specific to those with a long background in technology. You sound new to the space and thus want to reinvent the term
657.
by glitchc 1y ago
AI as the bridge to fix expert systems. Now I've heard it all! Obligatory video (sound familiar?): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oLHc7rlac2s
658.
by glitchc 1y ago
That does seem odd given that Google is liable to take a 30% cut of each purchase.
659.
by glitchc 1y ago
> Those were all local events In a sufficiently catastrophic event (major loss of infrastructure), one wouldn't be able to tell if the event is local or global. To the people suffering from the Black Death, the event must have felt
660.
by glitchc 1y ago
The big issue may be companies clamping down on divulging details regarding vulnerabilities and mitigations. Cybersecurity is significantly more weaponized now than it was in the 90s and companies might be facing immense pressure to limit t

More ›