https://www.one-tab.com/page/NRs0jfUxTmaNnAURwZwYIQ
This is a companion discussion topic for the original entry at https://level1techs.com/video/level1-news-february-13-2018-stank-love
This is a companion discussion topic for the original entry at https://level1techs.com/video/level1-news-february-13-2018-stank-love
1 Like
@ryan mentions he doesn’t like Musk (even) more after reading reddit, got a link?
Also - I’ve been asking on Twitter about the paint on the Tesla turning white, but no one seems to care LOL.
Jacksonville.
Can’t wait to see them send it to the Bronx, how do you program for Squeegee men?
Will Sophia jump out when the customer fails to shovel snow and salt ice.
I see the near future as a synergistic relationship between human and AI drivers, as a delivery driver I do not subscribe to the doom and gloom AI will put us all out of work meme.
Feel bad for them railway workers. 
A loan for buying a smartphone? Really? I find it amazing that people will create debt for them just for a phone…
For the popcorn time thing, I kinda understand. Sure, it’s just info, and what people do with it is up to them.
But if the lawyer can successfully argue that the point of providing the info was helping people who wanted to do illegal stuff, then the court can basically decide “You did this with the express intent to facilitate illegal actions by others and you didn’t provide any evidence to convince us otherwise.”.
And from the sounds of the article, the info seemed complete, as opposed to the Anarchist cookbook example.
And even if he had no ill intent… if a car hits a person and kills that person, “I didn’t mean to” isn’t gonna get them out of punishment either. Not exactly a correct analogy, but it just serves to show: not having ill intent doesn’t get you out from under the consequences of your actions.
That said, googling a bit reveals that Denmark operates by a system of civil law, not common law. So that’s another difference.
EDIT: A hypothetical way to determine if a person did it on purpose: suppose this person gets an email saying “hey thanks for this guide, now I can download such and so illegal stuff easily” and this person then replies “glad to have been of help”. That could be construed and admitting he put the info online to help others do illegal stuff.
Hypothetical, but possible.
Just going to point out that the deepfake porn hammer came down very soon after deepfake porn of POTUS daughter showed up.
There is a commonly accepted unconsensual use of other peoples faces in memes, but even then it is bordering on misrepresenting a person in the sense it associates a person to something they may not wish to be associated with, completely disregarding their intentions and sometimes damaging their future possibilities by altering perception of them. Deepfake isn’t really too different from that.
One’s identity isn’t public property, though, or is it? Or is it the property of your ISP?
Or is your identity a property of your cell phone manufacturer? I’m getting so confud´sde.
I wish there’d been more protection and control of each individual of their own real (and preferably multiple and discrete) digital identities. Not a state-control, but a user-control. When Pinocchio wants to be a real boy, Pinocchio connects their online identity to their real-life identity. When Pinocchio wants to play wooden doll, Pinocchio stays a wooden doll. We simply must own our identities to the furthest extent possible.
But how do you protect yourself from other people´s cameras? Can you?
2 Likes
That news title is killing me! Those little candy hearts are vile.
@Ryan 21:50 can you make a vid for a standalone replacement of a smart tv internal pc? capable of playing 4k *.mkv over usb, wifi mirriring etc? it is clearly not that easy as you advertize it
For the Google Game Streaming service and latency issues… german computerbase did a test with nvidias streaming service and the latency didn’t seem to be as bad. I mean it’s not for esports shooters, but it’s low enough that it doesn’t bother you when you’re playing your typical consoly action games.
Here’s the test if anybody cares:
Google translates usually works quite well on them. Pretty sure there are some english tests as well.
As for the porn copyright though… wasn’t there some case that decided that porn isn’t worthy of protection or was that in the EU… can’t remember.
(worm sim)
It looks like complexity doubles with numbers of neurons as well because neurology is massively parallel. I don’t know that we could calculate predictive values in it. There’s a lot of emergence along the way too. Honestly, it looks like we’ll be able to create machines that are more intelligent than ourselves before we fully understand ourselves; and it’ll probably be the machines that we create that will aid in that. There is just too much evolutionary baggage in our brains to sort through.
Some of the top AI researchers are suggesting that AGI is about 10 years out or less. Of course the advances in AI are going to speed up brain scanning and mapping tech; so it’s likely to be accelerated with it. It seems like the best rout to advances in self-organizing machines is just to dig in and create them. Understanding the brain is probably going to require them. 100 trillion neurons that have been organized through somewhat arbitrary, normative influence over hundreds of millions of years appears to be more difficult than organizing an artifice. We are upwards of 90% impulse that is primarily irrelevant to Ai; as most of it is base instinct and autonomic function. It’s probably more relevant to AI embodied in a robot; but there is still a lot of baggage with things like reproduction. You’d be surprised with how many neuroses relate directly to sexual selection alone. A number of them were probably referenced in this video.
(crypto race to 0)
It’s just like securities. Investments need to be made in ICOs with interesting utility. The problem is that most people probably don’t know that. Even the people who hype crypto-currencies preach due diligence.
This reminds me of the early days of Kickstarter. People were constantly complaining of being ripped off. Most wished to view Kickstarter as a pre-order store. This is probably going to be another one of those live and learn experiences.
I doubt that 25% of the population understands derivatives. Let the pyramid schemes begin.
(Zuck)
Every time I hear the Howdy Doody in a hoody being mentioned, my first thought is danger Will Robinson. He will control us all some day.
(Flat Earthers)
I think @ryan nailed the psychology behind almost all conspiracy theory. Outcomes happen due to millions of consecutive instances of other outcomes. We have very little to do with it; and we tend to either take credit for it or justify it, or rationalize it. Under normal circumstances, we do have some control though; but it’s probably over things that aren’t really important. That’s the basis of a wide variety of neuroses.
Conspiracies actually exist in that type of context; but Flat Earth is one that just couldn’t be, in an advanced society. There are just too many people who can use measuring tools and do math.
They are not recovering the central rocket from the Falcon Heavy. It hit the water at 300mph. Only one of the three engines needed to slow it down actually fired.
When you default on your crApple GS loan guess what:
crApple and the pigs gonna come battering your door down.
Paint turning white? Be good to know more, got links?
I’m not that much of a rabid fan but I will support his efforts, given they seem genuinely philanthropic. Compared to the typical corporate greed that’s going on anyway, I think most things are more difficult than he anticipates though, whether he can’t get suppliers on board, or technically it takes more time to overcome challenges.
Still, what happened with the car? I hear there is planetary protection issues that prevented the car from going into Mars orbit, so the idea was to put it into an orbit around the sun close to mars. However, they just did a massive burn that pushed it further out, and now it is in an elliptical orbit extending from earth to the astroid belt. You kind of need to do another burn at the height of it’s orbit to keep it out there. If not, it;s going to be swinging in past Mar’s and Earths orbits for ever. There is plenty of room out there, so I am not worried about crashing into it again. It seems they didn’t plan that far ahead, like they didn’t expect it to take off at all. My knowledge of orbital mechanics comes of course from stuffing about with Kerbal Space Program, so take that for what it’s worth.
*edit: Ah I see someone ballsed up the orbit calculation, the car doesn’t seem to be going that far out. Just past Mars orbit. Still, another body just floating around out there. Like the floating ball of garbage from Futurama.
BOG LOVE
Every week the show should end on stank love.
Reminds me of Cards Against Humanity selling poop on Black Friday 2014:
Some people couldn’t believe it was poop, so they went on and bought it - and as CAH put it, paid for a valuable a lesson. It is also funny how CAH really went far out of their way to explain it was poop. It could not have been made clearer.
What would you call the opposite of “suspension of disbelief”? Suspension of belief? But?!.. But!?..
This changes the (still) common perception of what a belief is. A belief is a choice.
You may not be able to choose your need for a belief (some people are wired towards needing to share a belief), but you do get to choose that you believe in. Insanely enough, when you reduce belief to a personal fashion choice (and thus disregard/refuse to acknowledge the consequence your creed may have to other people) any belief, no matter how abusive or obnoxious, becomes a valid choice.
Except choices matter. Choices of belief and personal creed even more so. Individual morality and ethics have never been as important as today. It is virtually a choice between bad company dragging each other down into a “snake” pit, or having your life in your own hands and changing yourself into a better “spirit animal” you.
I don’t see any evidence for real choice in the instances that unfold for individuals. This is also the outcomes for studies in the behavioral sciences. Choice appears to be of collective consciousness. It’s normative influence that promotes novelty in society; as much as it is anything else. It’s a cultural allowance for something that is likely to happen anyway.
All ideas are pieces of other ideas. This may sound strange coming from an artist, but creativity doesn’t seem to exist. It’s merely reorganizing patterns in a novel way. The patterns however were already in existence. We’re not creating new fundamental patterns. We’re just mixing them up.
Decisions are made before the time they are needed. That’s evolutionary efficiency. Perception and observation are not one in the same. Our perception is that we make decisions on the fly. That just isn’t standing up to scientific scrutiny. We don’t likely choose to believe this either. It’s our perception; and the evidence suggests that it is a neurotic perception.
We like to think that consciousness has a purpose; but we have yet to find one. This is the big joke on us. We’re “locked in”.
Hmm, yeah, I see what you are saying, and agree to a degree. What I was aiming at, however, was the individual inclination to internalize the common belief and accept it as a truth. In this, one does have some choice, I think. For example, I know many Christians who find the idea of Jesus rising from the dead a bit difficult to swallow. Yet this is a part of the Christian creed, and you will only have these kind of discussions with a Christian person if they trust you enough to confide. I was using the word “creed” with a purpose - we all have our internal creeds, or mantras we are inclined to repeat regardless of the full set of beliefs we are expected to internalize. In this sense, religion is a set of beliefs for you to take internalize, and it is not impossible to make a choice of what you take in, once you learn to view how it affects you and the people around you. Most grown ups have become conditioned to not internalize negative behaviors, such as for example thoughts of committing theft, or acting on thoughts of committing theft.
There are several choices available within any belief system, and other then “agree” and “disagree”, there is most often also a choice of third alternative, which takes some effort to imagine but can often yield much better gain in the end. For example, I could have been stuck for ages contemplating my parents beliefs, instead of finding means to educate myself towards a larger set of beliefs to pick from, and perhaps invent some of my own (or rather re-invent them, because there are few if any original thoughts remaining that no one has already thought of before).
What I’m saying is, a flat-earther is just a person looking for an insane level of conviction to claim. They have a choice in what conviction to go for (hollow earth is a serious contender), but they have no choice in what the exact level of conviction is - they need some extreme bullshit idea to explain their failings, just as @ryan quite accurately pointed out. Misery loves company - it is a different same level company to keep, or rather, same circle of hell to misappropriate Dante for a bit.
Originality in and of itself is an overrated make-belief, other than when it refers to a person originating something (something almost certainly unoriginal) into a discussion (which almost certainly isn’t a completely new context no one ever thought of for that something), i.e originating something in a specific instance of a context. I’d rather see genuine over original any day, though.
I kind of associate the challenge of what you’re saying here with the model that a human mind simply is a record/replay mechanism with some innate combination ability, and little say in what we get to record and replay, outside the fact that we are acting in a complex system, and it is the complexity, and not choice, which makes it unpredictable. I will also point out this is similar to the argument of free will vs the predestination theory in Christianity - just to point out we aren’t inventing anything original here . No doubt other religions (or sets of beliefs) also have similar challenges when it comes to discussing the concepts of good, bad, and free will.
Now, the worms!!!
(This is kind of connected to the previous paragraphs in this post, but can also be taken in independently as a kind of TL;DR)
I am quite keen on the implications of worm simulation mentioned in this episode. If you have read this:
you are quite likely to already have a short list of the implications the worm simulation will have on the perception of life, consciousness, and existence. I will abstain from theorising on a theological level - but this will have impact also on the perception of choice and predestination - if certain assumptions about simulation accuracy, importance/lack of importance of the simulation accuracy, and role of simulated environment, can be proven.
Just saying, the simulated worm may yet prove you right about the “no real choice” argument. Yet, if we have no choice, then how can we be liable for anything? It’s the butterfly that did it, your honour, it flapped it’s wings in 1843, and one thing leading to another, I had to kill my wife with 50 knife stabs, each lethal.
Indeed, there is humor to be had here. We may end up having to live in a less accurate model of truth, just so that we can find a means to coexist with each other in the world the truth implies. Perhaps this has always been the case.
1 Like
Communication is bound to have some difficulty. This even appears to be the case with signals between us and our environment. Many instances of poorly written encoders and decoders are just a part of nature. Entropy in communications is expected.
Humans have a high level understanding that is pretty rigidly constrained. It’s probably a great expectation to expect coherence in human thought. Technology however doesn’t have the same requirements for existence. It’s almost as if humans are being used by technology, from the future to birth it. Attractors complicate things even more. Explanations for normative influence and morphology are some of the weirdest hypotheses that exist. They transcend space and time; and make us all feel a bit sheepish.
The constraints on our thinking are often used for psychological analysis. It tends to be informative conflicts that produce neuroses. It can actually be measured locally and a plan for correction can be cultivated. Tracing down the root isn’t really necessary. All that needs to be understood is that something is broken.
The main issues with the legal system are human conflicts as well. Impulses toward retribution, empathy for victims and imposition of intent on impulses complicate the process in a way that prevents us from moving forward toward rehabilitation.
Even with the seriousness of the implications of our lack of ability, I do agree that it’s riddled with humor.