Good riddance, you vile racist cigar smoking scumbag.
My hair is about to go full Doc Brown..Protiguous, 2020
I’m getting so old, that…
Is it a strange thing? That I still love everyone I’ve ever loved?
I’ve been hurt, dropped, cheated on, angered to the point of hate, and disappointed too many times to count. But I still love you all.
I ain’t perfect either.
A Great President isn’t defined by their Party.Protiguous, 2020
A Great President is exemplified by a Great Person.
“My ignorance is better than your knowledge.” – Paraphrasing TrumpProtiguous, 2020
Okay, bare with me. I’m trying to formulate an idea here..
Sports. Some people love to watch, others to participate. Right?
The current problem, as I understand it, is that we (as enlightened as we claim to be in 2020) are still separating people who compete by their birth genders.. something which isn’t always 100% accurate!
Here is my proposal: How about grouping (not separating!) people into their performance-groups based on their maximum performance levels during training.
Level meaning how far they can throw, how fast they can run, how far they can jump, how well can they hit, etc during their training stages.
This would ignore gender differences, steroid use, drug use, strength.
All of it.
It would dismiss the old stereotype of ‘women’ being weaker than ‘men’.
It would dismiss the fear of being beat by a ‘woman’ who was classified as a ‘male’ at birth. And visa-versa.
If a 125 pound person can run, jump, & throw distance-X then classify them into that Level-10 group. No matter what they’re juiced up on, or born as, or how many years of training they’ve had.
Same thing: If a 275 pound Rock (Dwane Johnson – who is the coolest guy ever) can run, jump, & throw distance-X, then group him into a different Level-20 group.
Basically: Group via Observed Athletic Ability.
The only cheat to this grouping system, that I can think of at the moment, is some bad apples would purposely under-perform during the ‘testing’ phases in order to gain an edge on the group into which they would be categorized. But then during the actual competition they’d perform at their real Rated level, and thereby have an advantage over their competitors.
But, doesn’t something like this kind of cheating go on these days already?
Just hidden from view so they don’t get caught as easily?
Maybe adjust the pay/awards/rewards on their Level then?
What do you think? Would this help eliminate all of the phobias in sports?
Man vs woman. Transgender vs non-transgender?
“A stranger can point you to the door.
A friend will help you get to the door.
A teacher will show you how the door works.
A leader will help you get through the door.
A bigot hates you for making it through the door.”
[Original article published 2010-12-23]
Neural Networks are cool. Really cool.
My children are awesome.
They think, learn, and grow..
With sounds, words, emotions, ideas, thoughts.. more than I realize.
Every single day.
They deal with a new random chaotic world thrown at them every single day. And they make sense of it, even enjoy it. Show us new ways of perceiving the universe.
Why can’t we design a program to become alive.. Sentient?
Pentium CPUs can freak out even with simple math.
Our brains are so reliably unreliable at the neuronal level.. yet overall so quick, so accurate, and fast at recognizing patterns.
Even things we’ve never seen before.
We’ve tried neural networks.
Spike-timing-dependent neural nets (SNNs) are even cooler than regular fully connected neural networks (NNs).
But aren’t NNs just a way of brute forcing a function for a set of defined inputs?
The computational complexity of a fully connected NN.. is just staggering.
Our brains are not fully connected.. not every neuron has a connection to every other neuron.
I see this as a huge flaw in our current neuromorphic creations.
And why have layers?
Any amount of layers one chooses is arbitrary.
As I’ve observed in this life, almost everything arbitrary is ‘Not Good’.
So we create a sparse SNN..
But where do we draw this imaginary line of random ‘percentageness’?
Can we drop it down to a bare minimum?
Wouldn’t our AI get progressively ‘dumber’ until it was unable to correlate anything?
Unable to draw even the simplest of conclusions.. even with tidied inputs?
So we have to find some way to let the AI observe, learn, and grow all by itself. With the occasional teaching, of course.
Or else we’d have to feed it every bit of knowledge.
(OpenCyc.. cool project, but I don’t believe it is the right way to create an AI.)
Some people claim an AI is not possible.
Well, it [ intelligence / sentience ] either is able to be replicated / simulated / created through science or it isn’t.
Why create? Why paint? Why poetry? Why intuition? …Why love?
If we are the pinnacle of creation, meaning nothing better can or will be created, then what hope does humanity have to survive more than a few more thousand years more at best.
We are either magical, science-based, or God created.
I have a strong feeling it’s a bit of all three. 🙂
We can ask God to snap His fingers, but I have the feeling He wants us to work things out ourselves.
So you of the Internet: what ways are there for us to create a Star Trek Data-like artificial intelligence?
Storing knowledge RDF-like seems useful, because of the inference capability.
But how can we get this AI to learn this knowledge and use it without having to spoon feed it selected bits of information?
Not to mention ambiguity, point of view, understanding, self-awareness, and a host of other things we do not understand plaguing us.
Anyone have any ideas?
Any AI we create, we need to take responsibility for. No slaves. No war-machines.
No world-ending end-of-humanity takeovers. (An annoyingly overused scifi concept, yet still entertaining).
How do you teach something ethics and morality?
We humans haven’t even learned how to cooperate with each other..
Ever notice how trump tends to ramble on?