It seems it is a complex exercise and to be fair Nicola Sturgeon said she was delaying any announcement on her announced mandated quarantine until next week
I expect this has been agreed across the four nations
I like the idea of a pick and mix, department by department. If you want to Ban the Bomb and Bring Back Hanging, then you can vote for candidates that fit the bill.
If we are going to restrict the franchise, then I suggest a 'Voter Proficiency Test'. Fail, and no vote for you this year. If you are 7 years old and pass, here's your ballot.
Sounds to me like a recipe for a really erratic course over the years. Never knowingly consistent, we're bloodthirsty pacifists this year and the reverse next year.
I think personally that it is a recipe for a much less erratic course, currently we get a new secretary of state for education he can choose to try and change everything on a whim. Under my scheme you get a new secretary of state for education that has been elected and has a mandate only for those proposals he got elected on. Trying to change other things except if there turns out to be a real problem should be forbidden.
The thing is, using Bring Back Hanging as an example, that policy could well be popular enough to win. At the next election, those who find it abhorrent would be all fired up so someone who promised to repeal it would win.
Everybody would need something eye catching as a USP, which (I would expect) to lead to more extremist positions.
Which is why I suggested av for the executive positions, while I am sure hanging would win primary votes it would lose on secondary votes
Yes, perhaps.
Anyway, I must go to bed. Thank you for stimulating some really interesting and varied discussions.
Good night, all.
My pleasure and I must admit I enjoyed them so mine too
Just had a quick squint, Pagan, and although I think I could drive a coach and horses through some of it I admire the ambition and thought behind the piece.
Well done, and I look forward to your next thread header, when hopefully I will have more time to digest it and reply.
Feel free to do so and hit me with it in dm if not in this thread I am open to being wrong
The vaccination success wouldn't have been possible without the centralised nature of the NHS. An inconvenient fact for those of us who've been critical of the organisation in the past.
Ten years ago, these robots would have seem magical. If not Satanically miraculous. Yours is a brave call.
Correct, they will not.
The problem of self driving cars is filled with a series of incredibly challenging hard problems. Over the last decade people have made tremendous strides defeating hard problem after hard problem only to discover there are yet more hard problems.
AI is not magic, it is just an encoding of a human solution run on processors with far less computational power than the human brain.
Likewise language translation. Automatic language translation is a forever improving field but we are still no closer to the death of the professional translator than we were a decade ago.
There is an infinite number of hard problems between here and there.
And as a society we are improved by meeting and beating those problems but they don't move us appreciably closer to the purported goal.
lol.
Would you seriously advise your, say, 16 year old child, to seek a career in "professional translation"?
Of course not. We all know it is doomed. As with the car (discussed below) a few ultra-wealthy individuals may keep a human translator for the sheer, vulgar, blingy display value (like horses, or antique ink pens, or other outdated tech) but the vast majority of translation will be done by computer tech, which already, even at iPhone level, is now remarkably good at translating
It's done. It is over. It will happen. The advantages of self driving electric cars in particular (near zero deaths, no drunk driving, zero pollution, an end to parking problems, forget insurance and MOTS, freeing of streets, greening of all cities) are so overwhelming they are near certain.
Driverless cars... The advantages aren't questioned; the actual achievement, that's the issue.
Hofstadter's law coined in 1979 said that the time when a computer beat a grandmaster at chess would always be ten years away, and Hofstadter was an unbelievably smart cookie. 1997, Deep Blue beats Kasparov.
I'll be happy to be proved wrong... I'd like a driverless car. I just do not believe it's going to happen in my lifetime.
Ten years ago, these robots would have seem magical. If not Satanically miraculous. Yours is a brave call.
Correct, they will not.
The problem of self driving cars is filled with a series of incredibly challenging hard problems. Over the last decade people have made tremendous strides defeating hard problem after hard problem only to discover there are yet more hard problems.
AI is not magic, it is just an encoding of a human solution run on processors with far less computational power than the human brain.
Likewise language translation. Automatic language translation is a forever improving field but we are still no closer to the death of the professional translator than we were a decade ago.
There is an infinite number of hard problems between here and there.
And as a society we are improved by meeting and beating those problems but they don't move us appreciably closer to the purported goal.
lol.
Would you seriously advise your, say, 16 year old child, to seek a career in "professional translation"?
Of course not. We all know it is doomed. As with the car (discussed below) a few ultra-wealthy individuals may keep a human translator for the sheer, vulgar, blingy display value (like horses, or antique ink pens, or other outdated tech) but the vast majority of translation will be done by computer tech, which already, even at iPhone level, is now remarkably good at translating
It's done. It is over. It will happen. The advantages of self driving electric cars in particular (near zero deaths, no drunk driving, zero pollution, an end to parking problems, forget insurance and MOTS, freeing of streets, greening of all cities) are so overwhelming they are near certain.
Driverless cars... The advantages aren't questioned; the actual achievement, that's the issue.
Sure, it is difficult. But - this may shock you - years ago I used to argue here under a different name (M****tin D**), and I used to debate with PB Luddites then, that translation technology was accelerating so fast that in a few years, except for really technical stuff, a phone would give you a usable English translation of almost any text.
I was loudly derided, yet it has happened. An iPhone with Google translate can now do as good a job, at interpreting, as a moderately gifted bilingual person. And they get better and better by the day as they accrue feedback.
Driving in a street is even more difficult, but it is not beyond computer comprehension. Humans do it, FFS. You just need good sensors: eyes, ears, touch. We are at the stage now where computers can drive, but we are so nervous we demand someone walks in front with a flag to warn others, at about 5mph. ie cars in 1905 or whatever, and sometimes there are mishaps
I hereby and solemnly predict that computer driven cars will advance as fast or faster than human driven cars in 1905. The first to be automated will be long distance trucks in China, and the USA. Big spaces, pointless boring drives, easy to do, warehouse to warehouse. It will continue from there.
And, at the same time, of course, there is the advance of the pilotless taxi-drone
In 20 years time life on Earth will come to resemble the myths of the ancient Greeks. A pantheon of super intelligent beings will watch over us, using human agents to meddle in our affairs.
Anecdata South London Category 6 (underlying health condition) friend getting jabbed tomorrow - despite the lower numbers they do seem to be motoring......
Category 6 is a big chunk 7.3m, so that could take 2-3 weeks.
Then category 7 which is very important.
(Personal disclosure - cat 7 includes me!)
I wonder what the most common categories are here.
I'm guessing I'll be the not-yet-announced category 12.
Category 12 sounds about right for me too - with category 10 being the whole of the rest of the public sector not already covered at the outset under 1 and 2, and category 11 being all supermarket workers. Essentially the back of the queue. Defenceless until some point between June and September, depending on how much more supply can be ramped up by.
Off topic, that clown Simon Calder popped up on Look North tonight. Wibbling on about the price of summer holidays. Yep. That's the number one issue of the moment.
It seems it is a complex exercise and to be fair Nicola Sturgeon said she was delaying any announcement on her announced mandated quarantine until next week
I expect this has been agreed across the four nations
Ten years ago, these robots would have seem magical. If not Satanically miraculous. Yours is a brave call.
Correct, they will not.
The problem of self driving cars is filled with a series of incredibly challenging hard problems. Over the last decade people have made tremendous strides defeating hard problem after hard problem only to discover there are yet more hard problems.
AI is not magic, it is just an encoding of a human solution run on processors with far less computational power than the human brain.
Likewise language translation. Automatic language translation is a forever improving field but we are still no closer to the death of the professional translator than we were a decade ago.
There is an infinite number of hard problems between here and there.
And as a society we are improved by meeting and beating those problems but they don't move us appreciably closer to the purported goal.
lol.
Would you seriously advise your, say, 16 year old child, to seek a career in "professional translation"?
Of course not. We all know it is doomed. As with the car (discussed below) a few ultra-wealthy individuals may keep a human translator for the sheer, vulgar, blingy display value (like horses, or antique ink pens, or other outdated tech) but the vast majority of translation will be done by computer tech, which already, even at iPhone level, is now remarkably good at translating
It's done. It is over. It will happen. The advantages of self driving electric cars in particular (near zero deaths, no drunk driving, zero pollution, an end to parking problems, forget insurance and MOTS, freeing of streets, greening of all cities) are so overwhelming they are near certain.
About 6, maybe 7 years ago on here I swear I remember someone saying that professional translators would be out of a job in 10 years.
Clock is ticking on that prediction.
You completely under estimate how hard the problems are and how many of them there are.
It is the 80/20 rules but every 20 is also split 80/20 recursively, forever.
Off topic, that clown Simon Calder popped up on Look North tonight. Wibbling on about the price of summer holidays. Yep. That's the number one issue of the moment.
I cannot understand how Calder features so much on the media
Off topic, that clown Simon Calder popped up on Look North tonight. Wibbling on about the price of summer holidays. Yep. That's the number one issue of the moment.
It seems it is a complex exercise and to be fair Nicola Sturgeon said she was delaying any announcement on her announced mandated quarantine until next week
I expect this has been agreed across the four nations
Ten years ago, these robots would have seem magical. If not Satanically miraculous. Yours is a brave call.
Correct, they will not.
The problem of self driving cars is filled with a series of incredibly challenging hard problems. Over the last decade people have made tremendous strides defeating hard problem after hard problem only to discover there are yet more hard problems.
AI is not magic, it is just an encoding of a human solution run on processors with far less computational power than the human brain.
Likewise language translation. Automatic language translation is a forever improving field but we are still no closer to the death of the professional translator than we were a decade ago.
There is an infinite number of hard problems between here and there.
And as a society we are improved by meeting and beating those problems but they don't move us appreciably closer to the purported goal.
lol.
Would you seriously advise your, say, 16 year old child, to seek a career in "professional translation"?
Of course not. We all know it is doomed. As with the car (discussed below) a few ultra-wealthy individuals may keep a human translator for the sheer, vulgar, blingy display value (like horses, or antique ink pens, or other outdated tech) but the vast majority of translation will be done by computer tech, which already, even at iPhone level, is now remarkably good at translating
It's done. It is over. It will happen. The advantages of self driving electric cars in particular (near zero deaths, no drunk driving, zero pollution, an end to parking problems, forget insurance and MOTS, freeing of streets, greening of all cities) are so overwhelming they are near certain.
Driverless cars... The advantages aren't questioned; the actual achievement, that's the issue.
Hofstadter's law coined in 1979 said that the time when a computer beat a grandmaster at chess would always be ten years away, and Hofstadter was an unbelievably smart cookie. 1997, Deep Blue beats Kasparov.
Well said. I think the moment a computer beat the best human chess player on the planet will be seen as pivotal, looking back. At the time it passed, almost unnoticed.
FWIW I think computers passed the Turing Test (supposedly the litmus test of "plausibly sentient AI") several years ago
If true, then the fact that they think they need 28,000 rooms just to cope with the red list indicates the ludicrous total number of people that must still be coming into the country through the airports. Even if one disregards the continuous flow of truck drivers through the Channel Tunnel and the ports, that must still leave several hundred thousand flying in every month.
You could argue that locking up people arriving from Brazil is better than nothing at all, but what's meant to stop anyone who's determined to get in and has the time and money to do it from simply travelling to a non-red list neighbour and flying from there, Lord alone knows.
You'll have to file a flight plan, for all flights from the UK and into the UK.
Backed up with eye-watering fines/prison for cheats.
I will look forward to foreign travel freeing up as much as the next man. But that time ain't for a good while yet.
Ten years ago, these robots would have seem magical. If not Satanically miraculous. Yours is a brave call.
Correct, they will not.
The problem of self driving cars is filled with a series of incredibly challenging hard problems. Over the last decade people have made tremendous strides defeating hard problem after hard problem only to discover there are yet more hard problems.
AI is not magic, it is just an encoding of a human solution run on processors with far less computational power than the human brain.
Likewise language translation. Automatic language translation is a forever improving field but we are still no closer to the death of the professional translator than we were a decade ago.
There is an infinite number of hard problems between here and there.
And as a society we are improved by meeting and beating those problems but they don't move us appreciably closer to the purported goal.
lol.
Would you seriously advise your, say, 16 year old child, to seek a career in "professional translation"?
Of course not. We all know it is doomed. As with the car (discussed below) a few ultra-wealthy individuals may keep a human translator for the sheer, vulgar, blingy display value (like horses, or antique ink pens, or other outdated tech) but the vast majority of translation will be done by computer tech, which already, even at iPhone level, is now remarkably good at translating
It's done. It is over. It will happen. The advantages of self driving electric cars in particular (near zero deaths, no drunk driving, zero pollution, an end to parking problems, forget insurance and MOTS, freeing of streets, greening of all cities) are so overwhelming they are near certain.
Driverless cars... The advantages aren't questioned; the actual achievement, that's the issue.
Hofstadter's law coined in 1979 said that the time when a computer beat a grandmaster at chess would always be ten years away, and Hofstadter was an unbelievably smart cookie. 1997, Deep Blue beats Kasparov.
Well said. I think the moment a computer beat the best human chess player on the planet will be seen as pivotal, looking back. At the time it passed, almost unnoticed.
FWIW I think computers passed the Turing Test (supposedly the litmus test of "plausibly sentient AI") several years ago
I think its more concern that many humans dont pass it
Ten years ago, these robots would have seem magical. If not Satanically miraculous. Yours is a brave call.
Correct, they will not.
The problem of self driving cars is filled with a series of incredibly challenging hard problems. Over the last decade people have made tremendous strides defeating hard problem after hard problem only to discover there are yet more hard problems.
AI is not magic, it is just an encoding of a human solution run on processors with far less computational power than the human brain.
Likewise language translation. Automatic language translation is a forever improving field but we are still no closer to the death of the professional translator than we were a decade ago.
There is an infinite number of hard problems between here and there.
And as a society we are improved by meeting and beating those problems but they don't move us appreciably closer to the purported goal.
lol.
Would you seriously advise your, say, 16 year old child, to seek a career in "professional translation"?
Of course not. We all know it is doomed. As with the car (discussed below) a few ultra-wealthy individuals may keep a human translator for the sheer, vulgar, blingy display value (like horses, or antique ink pens, or other outdated tech) but the vast majority of translation will be done by computer tech, which already, even at iPhone level, is now remarkably good at translating
It's done. It is over. It will happen. The advantages of self driving electric cars in particular (near zero deaths, no drunk driving, zero pollution, an end to parking problems, forget insurance and MOTS, freeing of streets, greening of all cities) are so overwhelming they are near certain.
Driverless cars... The advantages aren't questioned; the actual achievement, that's the issue.
Hofstadter's law coined in 1979 said that the time when a computer beat a grandmaster at chess would always be ten years away, and Hofstadter was an unbelievably smart cookie. 1997, Deep Blue beats Kasparov.
Well said. I think the moment a computer beat the best human chess player on the planet will be seen as pivotal, looking back. At the time it passed, almost unnoticed.
FWIW I think computers passed the Turing Test (supposedly the litmus test of "plausibly sentient AI") several years ago
I think its more concern that many humans dont pass it
I made that same accusation against Snowflake, once of this parish, who may or may not have been a senior Labour politician
I claimed she was the first human to FAIL the Turing Test, and sound like a computer
Ten years ago, these robots would have seem magical. If not Satanically miraculous. Yours is a brave call.
Correct, they will not.
The problem of self driving cars is filled with a series of incredibly challenging hard problems. Over the last decade people have made tremendous strides defeating hard problem after hard problem only to discover there are yet more hard problems.
AI is not magic, it is just an encoding of a human solution run on processors with far less computational power than the human brain.
Likewise language translation. Automatic language translation is a forever improving field but we are still no closer to the death of the professional translator than we were a decade ago.
There is an infinite number of hard problems between here and there.
And as a society we are improved by meeting and beating those problems but they don't move us appreciably closer to the purported goal.
lol.
Would you seriously advise your, say, 16 year old child, to seek a career in "professional translation"?
Of course not. We all know it is doomed. As with the car (discussed below) a few ultra-wealthy individuals may keep a human translator for the sheer, vulgar, blingy display value (like horses, or antique ink pens, or other outdated tech) but the vast majority of translation will be done by computer tech, which already, even at iPhone level, is now remarkably good at translating
It's done. It is over. It will happen. The advantages of self driving electric cars in particular (near zero deaths, no drunk driving, zero pollution, an end to parking problems, forget insurance and MOTS, freeing of streets, greening of all cities) are so overwhelming they are near certain.
Driverless cars... The advantages aren't questioned; the actual achievement, that's the issue.
Hofstadter's law coined in 1979 said that the time when a computer beat a grandmaster at chess would always be ten years away, and Hofstadter was an unbelievably smart cookie. 1997, Deep Blue beats Kasparov.
Well said. I think the moment a computer beat the best human chess player on the planet will be seen as pivotal, looking back. At the time it passed, almost unnoticed.
FWIW I think computers passed the Turing Test (supposedly the litmus test of "plausibly sentient AI") several years ago
Yet there isn't an AI-robotics around today they would even be able to get close to setting up a chess board and then putting the pieces away again afterwards.
What's the best and worst airport hotel PBers have stayed in?
Worst: thankfully I avoided it, but entirely by luck. Going into Hanoi in the early 90's, there was an airport hotel nobody wanted to stay at. But it was owned by some Army generals and so they would pick people off flights to be put under "house arrest 10pm to 8 am". And charge you $200 a night for the privilege.
A lawyer I was working with got put there. She had to go for a pee in the middle of the night, put on the light - and the whole of the floor looked up at her....
I'm very impressed by the way @Pagan2 has been courteously batting off objections from dozens of PBers at once. It's like watching one of those chess tournaments where the Grand Master plays simultaneously against 20 opponents.
If true, then the fact that they think they need 28,000 rooms just to cope with the red list indicates the ludicrous total number of people that must still be coming into the country through the airports. Even if one disregards the continuous flow of truck drivers through the Channel Tunnel and the ports, that must still leave several hundred thousand flying in every month.
You could argue that locking up people arriving from Brazil is better than nothing at all, but what's meant to stop anyone who's determined to get in and has the time and money to do it from simply travelling to a non-red list neighbour and flying from there, Lord alone knows.
10 day stay plus 3 days for cleaning between guests. Still doesn't come to 28k based on 1425 per day, but I guess they want spare capacity?
I still think this should be expanded to all nations, but starting with red list is better than nothing. Once a few nations are doing it and the system is up and running hopefully it'll be easier to then expand it to all.
There's an argument that, for so long as the UK was in the EU, it was worth our making a fuss over its pretentions to statehood - but that now we're out of the way that's something for the 27 to worry about (or not.) Consequently, we might as well indulge the Commission in this regard and avoid hurting anyone's feelings, because its mission creep no longer applies here.
That would be my view too.
(And it's not like there aren't things the EU does that are normally the preserve of nation states where do have embassies. If we wanted to lodge a formal complaint to the US regarding a tariff being misapplied, HMG would do it at the US Embassy in London. Where would we lodge a complain about the EU misapplying a tariff?)
Thirded.
Though it seems, now we've requested bits and bobs from the EU on the trade deal, it might be expedient to tie it to something - it can look like we've been 'forced to recognise their ambassador' - whatever.
The vaccination success wouldn't have been possible without the centralised nature of the NHS. An inconvenient fact for those of us who've been critical of the organisation in the past.
Yes, the US "total vaccinations by day" number is only just ahead of the UK right now, and that is a direct consequence of them having a deeply fucked up healthcare system.
I'm very impressed by the way @Pagan2 has been courteously batting off objections from dozens of PBers at once. It's like watching one of those chess tournaments where the Grand Master plays simultaneously against 20 opponents.
Well have to be courteous when I provoke above the line. Not so much below the line
Ten years ago, these robots would have seem magical. If not Satanically miraculous. Yours is a brave call.
Correct, they will not.
The problem of self driving cars is filled with a series of incredibly challenging hard problems. Over the last decade people have made tremendous strides defeating hard problem after hard problem only to discover there are yet more hard problems.
AI is not magic, it is just an encoding of a human solution run on processors with far less computational power than the human brain.
Likewise language translation. Automatic language translation is a forever improving field but we are still no closer to the death of the professional translator than we were a decade ago.
There is an infinite number of hard problems between here and there.
And as a society we are improved by meeting and beating those problems but they don't move us appreciably closer to the purported goal.
lol.
Would you seriously advise your, say, 16 year old child, to seek a career in "professional translation"?
Of course not. We all know it is doomed. As with the car (discussed below) a few ultra-wealthy individuals may keep a human translator for the sheer, vulgar, blingy display value (like horses, or antique ink pens, or other outdated tech) but the vast majority of translation will be done by computer tech, which already, even at iPhone level, is now remarkably good at translating
It's done. It is over. It will happen. The advantages of self driving electric cars in particular (near zero deaths, no drunk driving, zero pollution, an end to parking problems, forget insurance and MOTS, freeing of streets, greening of all cities) are so overwhelming they are near certain.
Driverless cars... The advantages aren't questioned; the actual achievement, that's the issue.
Hofstadter's law coined in 1979 said that the time when a computer beat a grandmaster at chess would always be ten years away, and Hofstadter was an unbelievably smart cookie. 1997, Deep Blue beats Kasparov.
Well said. I think the moment a computer beat the best human chess player on the planet will be seen as pivotal, looking back. At the time it passed, almost unnoticed.
FWIW I think computers passed the Turing Test (supposedly the litmus test of "plausibly sentient AI") several years ago
Yet there isn't an AI-robotics around today they would even be able to get close to setting up a chess board and then putting the pieces away again afterwards.
Did you not see what Samsung announced three weeks ago?
Ten years ago, these robots would have seem magical. If not Satanically miraculous. Yours is a brave call.
Correct, they will not.
The problem of self driving cars is filled with a series of incredibly challenging hard problems. Over the last decade people have made tremendous strides defeating hard problem after hard problem only to discover there are yet more hard problems.
AI is not magic, it is just an encoding of a human solution run on processors with far less computational power than the human brain.
Likewise language translation. Automatic language translation is a forever improving field but we are still no closer to the death of the professional translator than we were a decade ago.
There is an infinite number of hard problems between here and there.
And as a society we are improved by meeting and beating those problems but they don't move us appreciably closer to the purported goal.
lol.
Would you seriously advise your, say, 16 year old child, to seek a career in "professional translation"?
Of course not. We all know it is doomed. As with the car (discussed below) a few ultra-wealthy individuals may keep a human translator for the sheer, vulgar, blingy display value (like horses, or antique ink pens, or other outdated tech) but the vast majority of translation will be done by computer tech, which already, even at iPhone level, is now remarkably good at translating
It's done. It is over. It will happen. The advantages of self driving electric cars in particular (near zero deaths, no drunk driving, zero pollution, an end to parking problems, forget insurance and MOTS, freeing of streets, greening of all cities) are so overwhelming they are near certain.
About 6, maybe 7 years ago on here I swear I remember someone saying that professional translators would be out of a job in 10 years.
Clock is ticking on that prediction.
You completely under estimate how hard the problems are and how many of them there are.
It is the 80/20 rules but every 20 is also split 80/20 recursively, forever.
Well, here's a bunch of people who actually DO professional translating who are saying, to each other: fuck, it's over
Anecdata South London Category 6 (underlying health condition) friend getting jabbed tomorrow - despite the lower numbers they do seem to be motoring......
Category 6 is a big chunk 7.3m, so that could take 2-3 weeks.
Then category 7 which is very important.
(Personal disclosure - cat 7 includes me!)
I wonder what the most common categories are here.
I'm guessing I'll be the not-yet-announced category 12.
Category 12 sounds about right for me too - with category 10 being the whole of the rest of the public sector not already covered at the outset under 1 and 2, and category 11 being all supermarket workers. Essentially the back of the queue. Defenceless until some point between June and September, depending on how much more supply can be ramped up by.
That's unduly pessimistic if I may say. At the current average rate of 430k doses per day the whole adult population of the UK (52.8m) could get a 1st dose by 12th May 2021.
Ah, but the 2nd doses you say. To which I say the average daily rate will be well above 600k within two weeks. That brings the 12th May back to 14th April. 2nd doses really only pick up big-time in April. Then you have to consider the refusniks... say 10-20%? So 52.8m becomes maybe 45m?
You'll get your 1st dose before May imo, possibly before April.
It took a long time for video conferencing to catch on. I remember trying it out in the mid-80s at a theme park in the United States. And it was available on most PCs/Macs from about 1993.
The vaccination success wouldn't have been possible without the centralised nature of the NHS. An inconvenient fact for those of us who've been critical of the organisation in the past.
Yes, the US "total vaccinations by day" number is only just ahead of the UK right now, and that is a direct consequence of them having a deeply fucked up healthcare system.
The US is a long way ahead in terms of absolute numbers, but some distance behind in terms of jabs per head of population, if I'm reading the numbers correctly.
Ten years ago, these robots would have seem magical. If not Satanically miraculous. Yours is a brave call.
Correct, they will not.
The problem of self driving cars is filled with a series of incredibly challenging hard problems. Over the last decade people have made tremendous strides defeating hard problem after hard problem only to discover there are yet more hard problems.
AI is not magic, it is just an encoding of a human solution run on processors with far less computational power than the human brain.
Likewise language translation. Automatic language translation is a forever improving field but we are still no closer to the death of the professional translator than we were a decade ago.
There is an infinite number of hard problems between here and there.
And as a society we are improved by meeting and beating those problems but they don't move us appreciably closer to the purported goal.
lol.
Would you seriously advise your, say, 16 year old child, to seek a career in "professional translation"?
Of course not. We all know it is doomed. As with the car (discussed below) a few ultra-wealthy individuals may keep a human translator for the sheer, vulgar, blingy display value (like horses, or antique ink pens, or other outdated tech) but the vast majority of translation will be done by computer tech, which already, even at iPhone level, is now remarkably good at translating
It's done. It is over. It will happen. The advantages of self driving electric cars in particular (near zero deaths, no drunk driving, zero pollution, an end to parking problems, forget insurance and MOTS, freeing of streets, greening of all cities) are so overwhelming they are near certain.
Driverless cars... The advantages aren't questioned; the actual achievement, that's the issue.
Hofstadter's law coined in 1979 said that the time when a computer beat a grandmaster at chess would always be ten years away, and Hofstadter was an unbelievably smart cookie. 1997, Deep Blue beats Kasparov.
Well said. I think the moment a computer beat the best human chess player on the planet will be seen as pivotal, looking back. At the time it passed, almost unnoticed.
FWIW I think computers passed the Turing Test (supposedly the litmus test of "plausibly sentient AI") several years ago
I think its more concern that many humans dont pass it
I made that same accusation against Snowflake, once of this parish, who may or may not have been a senior Labour politician
I claimed she was the first human to FAIL the Turing Test, and sound like a computer
She really was very poor at the smart back and forth bantz that is required to survive on here.
They left out the punchline from that clip where he gets furious when he is interrupted in his backswing and loses his cool.
Yes that was good, couldn't find a better YouTube clip.
It was one of the best episodes they ever made, though amusingly enough that scene wasn't even part of the original script; the episode ran short on time and so they put that scene in as filler and it became so funny and memorable.
Ten years ago, these robots would have seem magical. If not Satanically miraculous. Yours is a brave call.
Correct, they will not.
The problem of self driving cars is filled with a series of incredibly challenging hard problems. Over the last decade people have made tremendous strides defeating hard problem after hard problem only to discover there are yet more hard problems.
AI is not magic, it is just an encoding of a human solution run on processors with far less computational power than the human brain.
Likewise language translation. Automatic language translation is a forever improving field but we are still no closer to the death of the professional translator than we were a decade ago.
There is an infinite number of hard problems between here and there.
And as a society we are improved by meeting and beating those problems but they don't move us appreciably closer to the purported goal.
lol.
Would you seriously advise your, say, 16 year old child, to seek a career in "professional translation"?
Of course not. We all know it is doomed. As with the car (discussed below) a few ultra-wealthy individuals may keep a human translator for the sheer, vulgar, blingy display value (like horses, or antique ink pens, or other outdated tech) but the vast majority of translation will be done by computer tech, which already, even at iPhone level, is now remarkably good at translating
It's done. It is over. It will happen. The advantages of self driving electric cars in particular (near zero deaths, no drunk driving, zero pollution, an end to parking problems, forget insurance and MOTS, freeing of streets, greening of all cities) are so overwhelming they are near certain.
Driverless cars... The advantages aren't questioned; the actual achievement, that's the issue.
Hofstadter's law coined in 1979 said that the time when a computer beat a grandmaster at chess would always be ten years away, and Hofstadter was an unbelievably smart cookie. 1997, Deep Blue beats Kasparov.
Well said. I think the moment a computer beat the best human chess player on the planet will be seen as pivotal, looking back. At the time it passed, almost unnoticed.
FWIW I think computers passed the Turing Test (supposedly the litmus test of "plausibly sentient AI") several years ago
Yet there isn't an AI-robotics around today they would even be able to get close to setting up a chess board and then putting the pieces away again afterwards.
Did you not see what Samsung announced three weeks ago?
It took a long time for video conferencing to catch on. I remember trying it out in the mid-80s at a theme park in the United States. And it was available on most PCs/Macs from about 1993.
It's only really caught on for most people when they had no choice, last year!
Ten years ago, these robots would have seem magical. If not Satanically miraculous. Yours is a brave call.
Correct, they will not.
The problem of self driving cars is filled with a series of incredibly challenging hard problems. Over the last decade people have made tremendous strides defeating hard problem after hard problem only to discover there are yet more hard problems.
AI is not magic, it is just an encoding of a human solution run on processors with far less computational power than the human brain.
Likewise language translation. Automatic language translation is a forever improving field but we are still no closer to the death of the professional translator than we were a decade ago.
There is an infinite number of hard problems between here and there.
And as a society we are improved by meeting and beating those problems but they don't move us appreciably closer to the purported goal.
lol.
Would you seriously advise your, say, 16 year old child, to seek a career in "professional translation"?
Of course not. We all know it is doomed. As with the car (discussed below) a few ultra-wealthy individuals may keep a human translator for the sheer, vulgar, blingy display value (like horses, or antique ink pens, or other outdated tech) but the vast majority of translation will be done by computer tech, which already, even at iPhone level, is now remarkably good at translating
It's done. It is over. It will happen. The advantages of self driving electric cars in particular (near zero deaths, no drunk driving, zero pollution, an end to parking problems, forget insurance and MOTS, freeing of streets, greening of all cities) are so overwhelming they are near certain.
About 6, maybe 7 years ago on here I swear I remember someone saying that professional translators would be out of a job in 10 years.
Clock is ticking on that prediction.
You completely under estimate how hard the problems are and how many of them there are.
It is the 80/20 rules but every 20 is also split 80/20 recursively, forever.
Well, here's a bunch of people who actually DO professional translating who are saying, to each other: fuck, it's over
Ten years ago, these robots would have seem magical. If not Satanically miraculous. Yours is a brave call.
Correct, they will not.
The problem of self driving cars is filled with a series of incredibly challenging hard problems. Over the last decade people have made tremendous strides defeating hard problem after hard problem only to discover there are yet more hard problems.
AI is not magic, it is just an encoding of a human solution run on processors with far less computational power than the human brain.
Likewise language translation. Automatic language translation is a forever improving field but we are still no closer to the death of the professional translator than we were a decade ago.
There is an infinite number of hard problems between here and there.
And as a society we are improved by meeting and beating those problems but they don't move us appreciably closer to the purported goal.
lol.
Would you seriously advise your, say, 16 year old child, to seek a career in "professional translation"?
Of course not. We all know it is doomed. As with the car (discussed below) a few ultra-wealthy individuals may keep a human translator for the sheer, vulgar, blingy display value (like horses, or antique ink pens, or other outdated tech) but the vast majority of translation will be done by computer tech, which already, even at iPhone level, is now remarkably good at translating
It's done. It is over. It will happen. The advantages of self driving electric cars in particular (near zero deaths, no drunk driving, zero pollution, an end to parking problems, forget insurance and MOTS, freeing of streets, greening of all cities) are so overwhelming they are near certain.
Driverless cars... The advantages aren't questioned; the actual achievement, that's the issue.
Hofstadter's law coined in 1979 said that the time when a computer beat a grandmaster at chess would always be ten years away, and Hofstadter was an unbelievably smart cookie. 1997, Deep Blue beats Kasparov.
Well said. I think the moment a computer beat the best human chess player on the planet will be seen as pivotal, looking back. At the time it passed, almost unnoticed.
FWIW I think computers passed the Turing Test (supposedly the litmus test of "plausibly sentient AI") several years ago
Yet there isn't an AI-robotics around today they would even be able to get close to setting up a chess board and then putting the pieces away again afterwards.
Did you not see what Samsung announced three weeks ago?
Ten years ago, these robots would have seem magical. If not Satanically miraculous. Yours is a brave call.
Correct, they will not.
The problem of self driving cars is filled with a series of incredibly challenging hard problems. Over the last decade people have made tremendous strides defeating hard problem after hard problem only to discover there are yet more hard problems.
AI is not magic, it is just an encoding of a human solution run on processors with far less computational power than the human brain.
Likewise language translation. Automatic language translation is a forever improving field but we are still no closer to the death of the professional translator than we were a decade ago.
There is an infinite number of hard problems between here and there.
And as a society we are improved by meeting and beating those problems but they don't move us appreciably closer to the purported goal.
lol.
Would you seriously advise your, say, 16 year old child, to seek a career in "professional translation"?
Of course not. We all know it is doomed. As with the car (discussed below) a few ultra-wealthy individuals may keep a human translator for the sheer, vulgar, blingy display value (like horses, or antique ink pens, or other outdated tech) but the vast majority of translation will be done by computer tech, which already, even at iPhone level, is now remarkably good at translating
It's done. It is over. It will happen. The advantages of self driving electric cars in particular (near zero deaths, no drunk driving, zero pollution, an end to parking problems, forget insurance and MOTS, freeing of streets, greening of all cities) are so overwhelming they are near certain.
Driverless cars... The advantages aren't questioned; the actual achievement, that's the issue.
Hofstadter's law coined in 1979 said that the time when a computer beat a grandmaster at chess would always be ten years away, and Hofstadter was an unbelievably smart cookie. 1997, Deep Blue beats Kasparov.
Well said. I think the moment a computer beat the best human chess player on the planet will be seen as pivotal, looking back. At the time it passed, almost unnoticed.
FWIW I think computers passed the Turing Test (supposedly the litmus test of "plausibly sentient AI") several years ago
More significant when it beat the best Go player. There are simply many, many more credible moves any top player can make in any situation. Often, the AI analysis will find several equally good, or separated by 0.1 stone (or point). Interestingly, it played only one move that no human would have previously considered. It simply didn't make mistakes. And added up a winnable position by fractions at a time. In other words. Humans had "solved" Go already. They hadn't solved human error.
Anecdata South London Category 6 (underlying health condition) friend getting jabbed tomorrow - despite the lower numbers they do seem to be motoring......
Category 6 is a big chunk 7.3m, so that could take 2-3 weeks.
Then category 7 which is very important.
(Personal disclosure - cat 7 includes me!)
I wonder what the most common categories are here.
I'm guessing I'll be the not-yet-announced category 12.
Category 12 sounds about right for me too - with category 10 being the whole of the rest of the public sector not already covered at the outset under 1 and 2, and category 11 being all supermarket workers. Essentially the back of the queue. Defenceless until some point between June and September, depending on how much more supply can be ramped up by.
That's unduly pessimistic if I may say. At the current average rate of 430k doses per day the whole adult population of the UK (52.8m) could get a 1st dose by 12th May 2021.
Ah, but the 2nd doses you say. To which I say the average daily rate will be well above 600k within two weeks. That brings the 12th May back to 14th April. 2nd doses really only pick up big-time in April. Then you have to consider the refusniks... say 10-20%? So 52.8m becomes maybe 45m?
You'll get your 1st dose before May imo, possibly before April.
I'll be delighted if you're proven correct, but this does rather depend on supply continuing to increase at quite a significant rate and nothing at all going wrong.
It is quite absurd how long this scheme is taking to realise. Over the past 12 months, has the government not thought to perhaps have a few civil servants come up with such a plan , you know just in case....
It may be significant that Nicola would not give details of her managed quarantine scheme announced by her yesterday, saying she is hoping to give more details next week
It would be a welcome change if Boris and Nicola could, for once, agree a scheme rather than continual point scoring
Hoiw do you know it's point scoring on Ms Sturgeon's side? SHe did a much better job of Christmas.
I said it is better than point scoring, and as for Christmas all four nations had the same regulations, just allowing mixing on Christmas day only
They did not and do not have the same regulations. Scotland was more restrictive even on Christmas Day.
Scotland was certainly not more restrictive on Christmas Day than London and the SE
Re government spending, the problem is that government deficits tend to rise during recessions (lower taxes, more income support and equivalent) and fall during booms. If governments try and balance budgets during recessions, they tend to exacerbate problems (see Greece) as they create a negative feedback loop. The difficulty is, of course, how do you enforce through the cycle discipline?
I also don't see how you avoid the electorate voting for contradictory things - ultimately in government about day to day compromise: what if the education person had a policy of getting more doctors by importing them from France, and the immigration person promised a complete halt on all new immigration?
I would expect cross department issues to be raised prior to the election. In your example though I would expect it more to be the other way the education person promising more med school places to be opened and the immigration person saying we will give an extra 40000 work visa's to doctors. However I would like to see conflicts like that noted by the civil service on the prospectus pages for all candidates
I think this is the really key point. Life is just too convoluted and requires a holistic approach. Who deals with issues around housing close to university. Is it housing or education? Is a crime wave related to a new drug addiction problem a health issue or a law and order issue.
Ten years ago, these robots would have seem magical. If not Satanically miraculous. Yours is a brave call.
Correct, they will not.
The problem of self driving cars is filled with a series of incredibly challenging hard problems. Over the last decade people have made tremendous strides defeating hard problem after hard problem only to discover there are yet more hard problems.
AI is not magic, it is just an encoding of a human solution run on processors with far less computational power than the human brain.
Likewise language translation. Automatic language translation is a forever improving field but we are still no closer to the death of the professional translator than we were a decade ago.
There is an infinite number of hard problems between here and there.
And as a society we are improved by meeting and beating those problems but they don't move us appreciably closer to the purported goal.
lol.
Would you seriously advise your, say, 16 year old child, to seek a career in "professional translation"?
Of course not. We all know it is doomed. As with the car (discussed below) a few ultra-wealthy individuals may keep a human translator for the sheer, vulgar, blingy display value (like horses, or antique ink pens, or other outdated tech) but the vast majority of translation will be done by computer tech, which already, even at iPhone level, is now remarkably good at translating
It's done. It is over. It will happen. The advantages of self driving electric cars in particular (near zero deaths, no drunk driving, zero pollution, an end to parking problems, forget insurance and MOTS, freeing of streets, greening of all cities) are so overwhelming they are near certain.
Driverless cars... The advantages aren't questioned; the actual achievement, that's the issue.
Hofstadter's law coined in 1979 said that the time when a computer beat a grandmaster at chess would always be ten years away, and Hofstadter was an unbelievably smart cookie. 1997, Deep Blue beats Kasparov.
Well said. I think the moment a computer beat the best human chess player on the planet will be seen as pivotal, looking back. At the time it passed, almost unnoticed.
FWIW I think computers passed the Turing Test (supposedly the litmus test of "plausibly sentient AI") several years ago
More significant when it beat the best Go player. There are simply many, many more credible moves any top player can make in any situation. Often, the AI analysis will find several equally good, or separated by 0.1 stone (or point). Interestingly, it played only one move that no human would have previously considered. It simply didn't make mistakes. And added up a winnable position by fractions at a time. In other words. Humans had "solved" Go already. They hadn't solved human error.
That really is the difference for full information games like chess or go, they dont make the mistakes humans do...for incomplete information games like poker they do less well
Ten years ago, these robots would have seem magical. If not Satanically miraculous. Yours is a brave call.
Correct, they will not.
The problem of self driving cars is filled with a series of incredibly challenging hard problems. Over the last decade people have made tremendous strides defeating hard problem after hard problem only to discover there are yet more hard problems.
AI is not magic, it is just an encoding of a human solution run on processors with far less computational power than the human brain.
Likewise language translation. Automatic language translation is a forever improving field but we are still no closer to the death of the professional translator than we were a decade ago.
There is an infinite number of hard problems between here and there.
And as a society we are improved by meeting and beating those problems but they don't move us appreciably closer to the purported goal.
lol.
Would you seriously advise your, say, 16 year old child, to seek a career in "professional translation"?
Of course not. We all know it is doomed. As with the car (discussed below) a few ultra-wealthy individuals may keep a human translator for the sheer, vulgar, blingy display value (like horses, or antique ink pens, or other outdated tech) but the vast majority of translation will be done by computer tech, which already, even at iPhone level, is now remarkably good at translating
It's done. It is over. It will happen. The advantages of self driving electric cars in particular (near zero deaths, no drunk driving, zero pollution, an end to parking problems, forget insurance and MOTS, freeing of streets, greening of all cities) are so overwhelming they are near certain.
Driverless cars... The advantages aren't questioned; the actual achievement, that's the issue.
Hofstadter's law coined in 1979 said that the time when a computer beat a grandmaster at chess would always be ten years away, and Hofstadter was an unbelievably smart cookie. 1997, Deep Blue beats Kasparov.
Well said. I think the moment a computer beat the best human chess player on the planet will be seen as pivotal, looking back. At the time it passed, almost unnoticed.
FWIW I think computers passed the Turing Test (supposedly the litmus test of "plausibly sentient AI") several years ago
Yet there isn't an AI-robotics around today they would even be able to get close to setting up a chess board and then putting the pieces away again afterwards.
Did you not see what Samsung announced three weeks ago?
Ten years ago, these robots would have seem magical. If not Satanically miraculous. Yours is a brave call.
Correct, they will not.
The problem of self driving cars is filled with a series of incredibly challenging hard problems. Over the last decade people have made tremendous strides defeating hard problem after hard problem only to discover there are yet more hard problems.
AI is not magic, it is just an encoding of a human solution run on processors with far less computational power than the human brain.
Likewise language translation. Automatic language translation is a forever improving field but we are still no closer to the death of the professional translator than we were a decade ago.
There is an infinite number of hard problems between here and there.
And as a society we are improved by meeting and beating those problems but they don't move us appreciably closer to the purported goal.
lol.
Would you seriously advise your, say, 16 year old child, to seek a career in "professional translation"?
Of course not. We all know it is doomed. As with the car (discussed below) a few ultra-wealthy individuals may keep a human translator for the sheer, vulgar, blingy display value (like horses, or antique ink pens, or other outdated tech) but the vast majority of translation will be done by computer tech, which already, even at iPhone level, is now remarkably good at translating
It's done. It is over. It will happen. The advantages of self driving electric cars in particular (near zero deaths, no drunk driving, zero pollution, an end to parking problems, forget insurance and MOTS, freeing of streets, greening of all cities) are so overwhelming they are near certain.
Driverless cars... The advantages aren't questioned; the actual achievement, that's the issue.
Hofstadter's law coined in 1979 said that the time when a computer beat a grandmaster at chess would always be ten years away, and Hofstadter was an unbelievably smart cookie. 1997, Deep Blue beats Kasparov.
Well said. I think the moment a computer beat the best human chess player on the planet will be seen as pivotal, looking back. At the time it passed, almost unnoticed.
FWIW I think computers passed the Turing Test (supposedly the litmus test of "plausibly sentient AI") several years ago
More significant when it beat the best Go player. There are simply many, many more credible moves any top player can make in any situation. Often, the AI analysis will find several equally good, or separated by 0.1 stone (or point). Interestingly, it played only one move that no human would have previously considered. It simply didn't make mistakes. And added up a winnable position by fractions at a time. In other words. Humans had "solved" Go already. They hadn't solved human error.
That really is the difference for full information games like chess or go, they dont make the mistakes humans do...for incomplete information games like poker they do less well
Heads Up Limit is solved.....Heads Up No Limit, it seems extremely likely that no human can beat the state of the art now.
Any preflop tree can now be solved in seconds,
Unlocking the Potential of Deep Counterfactual Value Networks
Re government spending, the problem is that government deficits tend to rise during recessions (lower taxes, more income support and equivalent) and fall during booms. If governments try and balance budgets during recessions, they tend to exacerbate problems (see Greece) as they create a negative feedback loop. The difficulty is, of course, how do you enforce through the cycle discipline?
I also don't see how you avoid the electorate voting for contradictory things - ultimately in government about day to day compromise: what if the education person had a policy of getting more doctors by importing them from France, and the immigration person promised a complete halt on all new immigration?
I would expect cross department issues to be raised prior to the election. In your example though I would expect it more to be the other way the education person promising more med school places to be opened and the immigration person saying we will give an extra 40000 work visa's to doctors. However I would like to see conflicts like that noted by the civil service on the prospectus pages for all candidates
I think this is the really key point. Life is just too convoluted and requires a holistic approach. Who deals with issues around housing close to university. Is it housing or education? Is a crime wave related to a new drug addiction problem a health issue or a law and order issue.
Yes and its not a problem I dispute and yes its a hole in my theory that needs resolving. If I can point out the whole post came from a discussion between me and kinablu originally. He was talking about pr I said thats not enough we need to rip it up and start from a blank sheet and he challenged me how...that was more or less what I dm'ed him. Yes there are holes but they can be discussed
Ten years ago, these robots would have seem magical. If not Satanically miraculous. Yours is a brave call.
Correct, they will not.
The problem of self driving cars is filled with a series of incredibly challenging hard problems. Over the last decade people have made tremendous strides defeating hard problem after hard problem only to discover there are yet more hard problems.
AI is not magic, it is just an encoding of a human solution run on processors with far less computational power than the human brain.
Likewise language translation. Automatic language translation is a forever improving field but we are still no closer to the death of the professional translator than we were a decade ago.
There is an infinite number of hard problems between here and there.
And as a society we are improved by meeting and beating those problems but they don't move us appreciably closer to the purported goal.
lol.
Would you seriously advise your, say, 16 year old child, to seek a career in "professional translation"?
Of course not. We all know it is doomed. As with the car (discussed below) a few ultra-wealthy individuals may keep a human translator for the sheer, vulgar, blingy display value (like horses, or antique ink pens, or other outdated tech) but the vast majority of translation will be done by computer tech, which already, even at iPhone level, is now remarkably good at translating
It's done. It is over. It will happen. The advantages of self driving electric cars in particular (near zero deaths, no drunk driving, zero pollution, an end to parking problems, forget insurance and MOTS, freeing of streets, greening of all cities) are so overwhelming they are near certain.
Driverless cars... The advantages aren't questioned; the actual achievement, that's the issue.
Hofstadter's law coined in 1979 said that the time when a computer beat a grandmaster at chess would always be ten years away, and Hofstadter was an unbelievably smart cookie. 1997, Deep Blue beats Kasparov.
Well said. I think the moment a computer beat the best human chess player on the planet will be seen as pivotal, looking back. At the time it passed, almost unnoticed.
FWIW I think computers passed the Turing Test (supposedly the litmus test of "plausibly sentient AI") several years ago
More significant when it beat the best Go player. There are simply many, many more credible moves any top player can make in any situation. Often, the AI analysis will find several equally good, or separated by 0.1 stone (or point). Interestingly, it played only one move that no human would have previously considered. It simply didn't make mistakes. And added up a winnable position by fractions at a time. In other words. Humans had "solved" Go already. They hadn't solved human error.
That really is the difference for full information games like chess or go, they dont make the mistakes humans do...for incomplete information games like poker they do less well
Heads Up Limit is solved.....Heads Up No Limit, it seems extremely likely that no human can beat the state of the art now.
Any preflop tree can now be solved in seconds,
Unlocking the Potential of Deep Counterfactual Value Networks
Ten years ago, these robots would have seem magical. If not Satanically miraculous. Yours is a brave call.
Correct, they will not.
The problem of self driving cars is filled with a series of incredibly challenging hard problems. Over the last decade people have made tremendous strides defeating hard problem after hard problem only to discover there are yet more hard problems.
AI is not magic, it is just an encoding of a human solution run on processors with far less computational power than the human brain.
Likewise language translation. Automatic language translation is a forever improving field but we are still no closer to the death of the professional translator than we were a decade ago.
There is an infinite number of hard problems between here and there.
And as a society we are improved by meeting and beating those problems but they don't move us appreciably closer to the purported goal.
lol.
Would you seriously advise your, say, 16 year old child, to seek a career in "professional translation"?
Of course not. We all know it is doomed. As with the car (discussed below) a few ultra-wealthy individuals may keep a human translator for the sheer, vulgar, blingy display value (like horses, or antique ink pens, or other outdated tech) but the vast majority of translation will be done by computer tech, which already, even at iPhone level, is now remarkably good at translating
It's done. It is over. It will happen. The advantages of self driving electric cars in particular (near zero deaths, no drunk driving, zero pollution, an end to parking problems, forget insurance and MOTS, freeing of streets, greening of all cities) are so overwhelming they are near certain.
Driverless cars... The advantages aren't questioned; the actual achievement, that's the issue.
Hofstadter's law coined in 1979 said that the time when a computer beat a grandmaster at chess would always be ten years away, and Hofstadter was an unbelievably smart cookie. 1997, Deep Blue beats Kasparov.
Well said. I think the moment a computer beat the best human chess player on the planet will be seen as pivotal, looking back. At the time it passed, almost unnoticed.
FWIW I think computers passed the Turing Test (supposedly the litmus test of "plausibly sentient AI") several years ago
More significant when it beat the best Go player. There are simply many, many more credible moves any top player can make in any situation. Often, the AI analysis will find several equally good, or separated by 0.1 stone (or point). Interestingly, it played only one move that no human would have previously considered. It simply didn't make mistakes. And added up a winnable position by fractions at a time. In other words. Humans had "solved" Go already. They hadn't solved human error.
That really is the difference for full information games like chess or go, they dont make the mistakes humans do...for incomplete information games like poker they do less well
Heads Up Limit is solved.....Heads Up No Limit, it seems extremely likely that no human can beat the state of the art now.
Any preflop tree can now be solved in seconds,
Unlocking the Potential of Deep Counterfactual Value Networks
well limit....can I just say pfft like black jack there are acknowledged strategies
Well the whole game tree has been solved for limit. For NL, even a a few years ago the top HU players at the time couldn't beat the best bot, now the game trees can be solved in seconds, it is game over if somebody was willing to throw enough resources at it.
Anecdata South London Category 6 (underlying health condition) friend getting jabbed tomorrow - despite the lower numbers they do seem to be motoring......
Category 6 is a big chunk 7.3m, so that could take 2-3 weeks.
Then category 7 which is very important.
(Personal disclosure - cat 7 includes me!)
I wonder what the most common categories are here.
I'm guessing I'll be the not-yet-announced category 12.
Category 12 sounds about right for me too - with category 10 being the whole of the rest of the public sector not already covered at the outset under 1 and 2, and category 11 being all supermarket workers. Essentially the back of the queue. Defenceless until some point between June and September, depending on how much more supply can be ramped up by.
That's unduly pessimistic if I may say. At the current average rate of 430k doses per day the whole adult population of the UK (52.8m) could get a 1st dose by 12th May 2021.
Ah, but the 2nd doses you say. To which I say the average daily rate will be well above 600k within two weeks. That brings the 12th May back to 14th April. 2nd doses really only pick up big-time in April. Then you have to consider the refusniks... say 10-20%? So 52.8m becomes maybe 45m?
You'll get your 1st dose before May imo, possibly before April.
I'll be delighted if you're proven correct, but this does rather depend on supply continuing to increase at quite a significant rate and nothing at all going wrong.
My experience with manufacturing is that you design a plant to a certain capacity.
You turn it on.
There are tonnes of problems. Nothing works as it should.
It month one, you run at perhaps 10% of theoretical capacity.
In month two, it's still dreadful, perhaps 25% of capacity.
By month four, you're getting into your stride and getting 80%.
And by the time you get to a year, you are talking about debottlenecking and how you can get actual output up to 125% of capacity.
I don't see why vaccines should be any different. Lots of teething problems. But they get solved. And new capacity is brought on at additional plants. And new vaccines are released.
It's also worth remembering the *scale* of the prize to a Pfizer.
They now saw they will produce two billion doses this year. If they are sold for $30 each, Pfizer will have made sales of their vaccine of $60bn in one year.
Bear in mind that in 2020, Pfizer's total sales were $41bn. That would be quite the increase.
Ten years ago, these robots would have seem magical. If not Satanically miraculous. Yours is a brave call.
Correct, they will not.
The problem of self driving cars is filled with a series of incredibly challenging hard problems. Over the last decade people have made tremendous strides defeating hard problem after hard problem only to discover there are yet more hard problems.
AI is not magic, it is just an encoding of a human solution run on processors with far less computational power than the human brain.
Likewise language translation. Automatic language translation is a forever improving field but we are still no closer to the death of the professional translator than we were a decade ago.
There is an infinite number of hard problems between here and there.
And as a society we are improved by meeting and beating those problems but they don't move us appreciably closer to the purported goal.
lol.
Would you seriously advise your, say, 16 year old child, to seek a career in "professional translation"?
Of course not. We all know it is doomed. As with the car (discussed below) a few ultra-wealthy individuals may keep a human translator for the sheer, vulgar, blingy display value (like horses, or antique ink pens, or other outdated tech) but the vast majority of translation will be done by computer tech, which already, even at iPhone level, is now remarkably good at translating
It's done. It is over. It will happen. The advantages of self driving electric cars in particular (near zero deaths, no drunk driving, zero pollution, an end to parking problems, forget insurance and MOTS, freeing of streets, greening of all cities) are so overwhelming they are near certain.
Driverless cars... The advantages aren't questioned; the actual achievement, that's the issue.
Hofstadter's law coined in 1979 said that the time when a computer beat a grandmaster at chess would always be ten years away, and Hofstadter was an unbelievably smart cookie. 1997, Deep Blue beats Kasparov.
Well said. I think the moment a computer beat the best human chess player on the planet will be seen as pivotal, looking back. At the time it passed, almost unnoticed.
FWIW I think computers passed the Turing Test (supposedly the litmus test of "plausibly sentient AI") several years ago
More significant when it beat the best Go player. There are simply many, many more credible moves any top player can make in any situation. Often, the AI analysis will find several equally good, or separated by 0.1 stone (or point). Interestingly, it played only one move that no human would have previously considered. It simply didn't make mistakes. And added up a winnable position by fractions at a time. In other words. Humans had "solved" Go already. They hadn't solved human error.
That really is the difference for full information games like chess or go, they dont make the mistakes humans do...for incomplete information games like poker they do less well
Heads Up Limit is solved.....Heads Up No Limit, it seems extremely likely that no human can beat the state of the art now.
Any preflop tree can now be solved in seconds,
Unlocking the Potential of Deep Counterfactual Value Networks
well limit....can I just say pfft like black jack there are acknowledged strategies
Well the whole game tree has been solved for limit. For NL, even a a few years ago the top HU players at the time couldn't beat the best bot, now the game trees can be solved in seconds, it is game over if somebody was willing to throw enough resources at it.
I should point out heads up no limit isnt the usual either...yes people do it they know their are bots doing it and they still win. bots and 9 person no limit suck donkey balls
Ten years ago, these robots would have seem magical. If not Satanically miraculous. Yours is a brave call.
Correct, they will not.
The problem of self driving cars is filled with a series of incredibly challenging hard problems. Over the last decade people have made tremendous strides defeating hard problem after hard problem only to discover there are yet more hard problems.
AI is not magic, it is just an encoding of a human solution run on processors with far less computational power than the human brain.
Likewise language translation. Automatic language translation is a forever improving field but we are still no closer to the death of the professional translator than we were a decade ago.
There is an infinite number of hard problems between here and there.
And as a society we are improved by meeting and beating those problems but they don't move us appreciably closer to the purported goal.
lol.
Would you seriously advise your, say, 16 year old child, to seek a career in "professional translation"?
Of course not. We all know it is doomed. As with the car (discussed below) a few ultra-wealthy individuals may keep a human translator for the sheer, vulgar, blingy display value (like horses, or antique ink pens, or other outdated tech) but the vast majority of translation will be done by computer tech, which already, even at iPhone level, is now remarkably good at translating
It's done. It is over. It will happen. The advantages of self driving electric cars in particular (near zero deaths, no drunk driving, zero pollution, an end to parking problems, forget insurance and MOTS, freeing of streets, greening of all cities) are so overwhelming they are near certain.
Driverless cars... The advantages aren't questioned; the actual achievement, that's the issue.
Hofstadter's law coined in 1979 said that the time when a computer beat a grandmaster at chess would always be ten years away, and Hofstadter was an unbelievably smart cookie. 1997, Deep Blue beats Kasparov.
Well said. I think the moment a computer beat the best human chess player on the planet will be seen as pivotal, looking back. At the time it passed, almost unnoticed.
FWIW I think computers passed the Turing Test (supposedly the litmus test of "plausibly sentient AI") several years ago
More significant when it beat the best Go player. There are simply many, many more credible moves any top player can make in any situation. Often, the AI analysis will find several equally good, or separated by 0.1 stone (or point). Interestingly, it played only one move that no human would have previously considered. It simply didn't make mistakes. And added up a winnable position by fractions at a time. In other words. Humans had "solved" Go already. They hadn't solved human error.
That really is the difference for full information games like chess or go, they dont make the mistakes humans do...for incomplete information games like poker they do less well
Heads Up Limit is solved.....Heads Up No Limit, it seems extremely likely that no human can beat the state of the art now.
Any preflop tree can now be solved in seconds,
Unlocking the Potential of Deep Counterfactual Value Networks
well limit....can I just say pfft like black jack there are acknowledged strategies
Well the whole game tree has been solved for limit. For NL, even a a few years ago the top HU players at the time couldn't beat the best bot, now the game trees can be solved in seconds, it is game over if somebody was willing to throw enough resources at it.
I should point out heads up no limit isnt the usual either...yes people do it they know their are bots doing it and they still win. bots and 9 person no limit suck donkey balls
I don't think that is true either these days. Putting aside the academic bots which are way ahead of anything people deploy on the internet, there has been plenty of examples of bots and players with "Real Time Assistance" (RTA) i.e. it tells them what to do in every spot making millions, while even playing in some of the big games online.
The only protection in the big games these days is the player pools are tiny so if an unknown account turns up, it is immediately has the red flags.
At the mid stakes, some sites are totally infested with bots or RTA players and they win big. Just a cat and mouse game of them winning, getting banned, resurfacing with new accounts and rinse and repeat.
Ten years ago, these robots would have seem magical. If not Satanically miraculous. Yours is a brave call.
Correct, they will not.
The problem of self driving cars is filled with a series of incredibly challenging hard problems. Over the last decade people have made tremendous strides defeating hard problem after hard problem only to discover there are yet more hard problems.
AI is not magic, it is just an encoding of a human solution run on processors with far less computational power than the human brain.
Likewise language translation. Automatic language translation is a forever improving field but we are still no closer to the death of the professional translator than we were a decade ago.
There is an infinite number of hard problems between here and there.
And as a society we are improved by meeting and beating those problems but they don't move us appreciably closer to the purported goal.
lol.
Would you seriously advise your, say, 16 year old child, to seek a career in "professional translation"?
Of course not. We all know it is doomed. As with the car (discussed below) a few ultra-wealthy individuals may keep a human translator for the sheer, vulgar, blingy display value (like horses, or antique ink pens, or other outdated tech) but the vast majority of translation will be done by computer tech, which already, even at iPhone level, is now remarkably good at translating
It's done. It is over. It will happen. The advantages of self driving electric cars in particular (near zero deaths, no drunk driving, zero pollution, an end to parking problems, forget insurance and MOTS, freeing of streets, greening of all cities) are so overwhelming they are near certain.
Driverless cars... The advantages aren't questioned; the actual achievement, that's the issue.
Hofstadter's law coined in 1979 said that the time when a computer beat a grandmaster at chess would always be ten years away, and Hofstadter was an unbelievably smart cookie. 1997, Deep Blue beats Kasparov.
Well said. I think the moment a computer beat the best human chess player on the planet will be seen as pivotal, looking back. At the time it passed, almost unnoticed.
FWIW I think computers passed the Turing Test (supposedly the litmus test of "plausibly sentient AI") several years ago
Yet there isn't an AI-robotics around today they would even be able to get close to setting up a chess board and then putting the pieces away again afterwards.
Did you not see what Samsung announced three weeks ago?
Ten years ago, these robots would have seem magical. If not Satanically miraculous. Yours is a brave call.
Correct, they will not.
The problem of self driving cars is filled with a series of incredibly challenging hard problems. Over the last decade people have made tremendous strides defeating hard problem after hard problem only to discover there are yet more hard problems.
AI is not magic, it is just an encoding of a human solution run on processors with far less computational power than the human brain.
Likewise language translation. Automatic language translation is a forever improving field but we are still no closer to the death of the professional translator than we were a decade ago.
There is an infinite number of hard problems between here and there.
And as a society we are improved by meeting and beating those problems but they don't move us appreciably closer to the purported goal.
lol.
Would you seriously advise your, say, 16 year old child, to seek a career in "professional translation"?
Of course not. We all know it is doomed. As with the car (discussed below) a few ultra-wealthy individuals may keep a human translator for the sheer, vulgar, blingy display value (like horses, or antique ink pens, or other outdated tech) but the vast majority of translation will be done by computer tech, which already, even at iPhone level, is now remarkably good at translating
It's done. It is over. It will happen. The advantages of self driving electric cars in particular (near zero deaths, no drunk driving, zero pollution, an end to parking problems, forget insurance and MOTS, freeing of streets, greening of all cities) are so overwhelming they are near certain.
Driverless cars... The advantages aren't questioned; the actual achievement, that's the issue.
Hofstadter's law coined in 1979 said that the time when a computer beat a grandmaster at chess would always be ten years away, and Hofstadter was an unbelievably smart cookie. 1997, Deep Blue beats Kasparov.
Well said. I think the moment a computer beat the best human chess player on the planet will be seen as pivotal, looking back. At the time it passed, almost unnoticed.
FWIW I think computers passed the Turing Test (supposedly the litmus test of "plausibly sentient AI") several years ago
Around about the time HYUFD started posting on pb.com...
Ten years ago, these robots would have seem magical. If not Satanically miraculous. Yours is a brave call.
Correct, they will not.
The problem of self driving cars is filled with a series of incredibly challenging hard problems. Over the last decade people have made tremendous strides defeating hard problem after hard problem only to discover there are yet more hard problems.
AI is not magic, it is just an encoding of a human solution run on processors with far less computational power than the human brain.
Likewise language translation. Automatic language translation is a forever improving field but we are still no closer to the death of the professional translator than we were a decade ago.
There is an infinite number of hard problems between here and there.
And as a society we are improved by meeting and beating those problems but they don't move us appreciably closer to the purported goal.
lol.
Would you seriously advise your, say, 16 year old child, to seek a career in "professional translation"?
Of course not. We all know it is doomed. As with the car (discussed below) a few ultra-wealthy individuals may keep a human translator for the sheer, vulgar, blingy display value (like horses, or antique ink pens, or other outdated tech) but the vast majority of translation will be done by computer tech, which already, even at iPhone level, is now remarkably good at translating
It's done. It is over. It will happen. The advantages of self driving electric cars in particular (near zero deaths, no drunk driving, zero pollution, an end to parking problems, forget insurance and MOTS, freeing of streets, greening of all cities) are so overwhelming they are near certain.
Driverless cars... The advantages aren't questioned; the actual achievement, that's the issue.
Hofstadter's law coined in 1979 said that the time when a computer beat a grandmaster at chess would always be ten years away, and Hofstadter was an unbelievably smart cookie. 1997, Deep Blue beats Kasparov.
Well said. I think the moment a computer beat the best human chess player on the planet will be seen as pivotal, looking back. At the time it passed, almost unnoticed.
FWIW I think computers passed the Turing Test (supposedly the litmus test of "plausibly sentient AI") several years ago
More significant when it beat the best Go player. There are simply many, many more credible moves any top player can make in any situation. Often, the AI analysis will find several equally good, or separated by 0.1 stone (or point). Interestingly, it played only one move that no human would have previously considered. It simply didn't make mistakes. And added up a winnable position by fractions at a time. In other words. Humans had "solved" Go already. They hadn't solved human error.
That really is the difference for full information games like chess or go, they dont make the mistakes humans do...for incomplete information games like poker they do less well
Heads Up Limit is solved.....Heads Up No Limit, it seems extremely likely that no human can beat the state of the art now.
Any preflop tree can now be solved in seconds,
Unlocking the Potential of Deep Counterfactual Value Networks
well limit....can I just say pfft like black jack there are acknowledged strategies
Well the whole game tree has been solved for limit. For NL, even a a few years ago the top HU players at the time couldn't beat the best bot, now the game trees can be solved in seconds, it is game over if somebody was willing to throw enough resources at it.
I should point out heads up no limit isnt the usual either...yes people do it they know their are bots doing it and they still win. bots and 9 person no limit suck donkey balls
I don't think that is true either these days. Putting aside the academic bots which are way ahead of anything people deploy on the internet, there has been plenty of examples of bots and players with "Real Time Assistance" i.e. it tells them what to do in every spot making millions, even some of the bigger games online.
Most sites have anti cheat software, I know pokerstars picked up on a project I was developing in visual studio that was using genetic algorithms to develop different poker strategies for tournaments and even though it never linked into their site or was running while on their site they slapped me and said dont have that loaded while you are playing
Ten years ago, these robots would have seem magical. If not Satanically miraculous. Yours is a brave call.
Correct, they will not.
The problem of self driving cars is filled with a series of incredibly challenging hard problems. Over the last decade people have made tremendous strides defeating hard problem after hard problem only to discover there are yet more hard problems.
AI is not magic, it is just an encoding of a human solution run on processors with far less computational power than the human brain.
Likewise language translation. Automatic language translation is a forever improving field but we are still no closer to the death of the professional translator than we were a decade ago.
There is an infinite number of hard problems between here and there.
And as a society we are improved by meeting and beating those problems but they don't move us appreciably closer to the purported goal.
lol.
Would you seriously advise your, say, 16 year old child, to seek a career in "professional translation"?
Of course not. We all know it is doomed. As with the car (discussed below) a few ultra-wealthy individuals may keep a human translator for the sheer, vulgar, blingy display value (like horses, or antique ink pens, or other outdated tech) but the vast majority of translation will be done by computer tech, which already, even at iPhone level, is now remarkably good at translating
It's done. It is over. It will happen. The advantages of self driving electric cars in particular (near zero deaths, no drunk driving, zero pollution, an end to parking problems, forget insurance and MOTS, freeing of streets, greening of all cities) are so overwhelming they are near certain.
Driverless cars... The advantages aren't questioned; the actual achievement, that's the issue.
Hofstadter's law coined in 1979 said that the time when a computer beat a grandmaster at chess would always be ten years away, and Hofstadter was an unbelievably smart cookie. 1997, Deep Blue beats Kasparov.
Well said. I think the moment a computer beat the best human chess player on the planet will be seen as pivotal, looking back. At the time it passed, almost unnoticed.
FWIW I think computers passed the Turing Test (supposedly the litmus test of "plausibly sentient AI") several years ago
I think its more concern that many humans dont pass it
I made that same accusation against Snowflake, once of this parish, who may or may not have been a senior Labour politician
I claimed she was the first human to FAIL the Turing Test, and sound like a computer
She really was very poor at the smart back and forth bantz that is required to survive on here.
Ten years ago, these robots would have seem magical. If not Satanically miraculous. Yours is a brave call.
Correct, they will not.
The problem of self driving cars is filled with a series of incredibly challenging hard problems. Over the last decade people have made tremendous strides defeating hard problem after hard problem only to discover there are yet more hard problems.
AI is not magic, it is just an encoding of a human solution run on processors with far less computational power than the human brain.
Likewise language translation. Automatic language translation is a forever improving field but we are still no closer to the death of the professional translator than we were a decade ago.
There is an infinite number of hard problems between here and there.
And as a society we are improved by meeting and beating those problems but they don't move us appreciably closer to the purported goal.
lol.
Would you seriously advise your, say, 16 year old child, to seek a career in "professional translation"?
Of course not. We all know it is doomed. As with the car (discussed below) a few ultra-wealthy individuals may keep a human translator for the sheer, vulgar, blingy display value (like horses, or antique ink pens, or other outdated tech) but the vast majority of translation will be done by computer tech, which already, even at iPhone level, is now remarkably good at translating
It's done. It is over. It will happen. The advantages of self driving electric cars in particular (near zero deaths, no drunk driving, zero pollution, an end to parking problems, forget insurance and MOTS, freeing of streets, greening of all cities) are so overwhelming they are near certain.
Driverless cars... The advantages aren't questioned; the actual achievement, that's the issue.
Hofstadter's law coined in 1979 said that the time when a computer beat a grandmaster at chess would always be ten years away, and Hofstadter was an unbelievably smart cookie. 1997, Deep Blue beats Kasparov.
Well said. I think the moment a computer beat the best human chess player on the planet will be seen as pivotal, looking back. At the time it passed, almost unnoticed.
FWIW I think computers passed the Turing Test (supposedly the litmus test of "plausibly sentient AI") several years ago
More significant when it beat the best Go player. There are simply many, many more credible moves any top player can make in any situation. Often, the AI analysis will find several equally good, or separated by 0.1 stone (or point). Interestingly, it played only one move that no human would have previously considered. It simply didn't make mistakes. And added up a winnable position by fractions at a time. In other words. Humans had "solved" Go already. They hadn't solved human error.
That really is the difference for full information games like chess or go, they dont make the mistakes humans do...for incomplete information games like poker they do less well
Heads Up Limit is solved.....Heads Up No Limit, it seems extremely likely that no human can beat the state of the art now.
Any preflop tree can now be solved in seconds,
Unlocking the Potential of Deep Counterfactual Value Networks
well limit....can I just say pfft like black jack there are acknowledged strategies
Well the whole game tree has been solved for limit. For NL, even a a few years ago the top HU players at the time couldn't beat the best bot, now the game trees can be solved in seconds, it is game over if somebody was willing to throw enough resources at it.
I should point out heads up no limit isnt the usual either...yes people do it they know their are bots doing it and they still win. bots and 9 person no limit suck donkey balls
I don't think that is true either these days. Putting aside the academic bots which are way ahead of anything people deploy on the internet, there has been plenty of examples of bots and players with "Real Time Assistance" i.e. it tells them what to do in every spot making millions, even some of the bigger games online.
Most sites have anti cheat software, I know pokerstars picked up on a project I was developing in visual studio that was using genetic algorithms to develop different poker strategies for tournaments and even though it never linked into their site or was running while on their site they slapped me and said dont have that loaded while you are playing
They do and Stars is one of the "safer" sites, but HU Sit n Gos in particular were totally overrun with RTA players playing essential perfect solved (GTO) HU short stack poker.
But even with that been said, plenty of examples of bot / RTA running on Stars and winning big. The cheaters are normally caught out by greed, either playing far too long for it to be human or if RTA, playing "prefect" in such a way their stats never vary over large sample sizes.
Then when it comes to Party, iPoker, WPN, good luck playing a table without a bot / RTA these days.
Ten years ago, these robots would have seem magical. If not Satanically miraculous. Yours is a brave call.
Correct, they will not.
The problem of self driving cars is filled with a series of incredibly challenging hard problems. Over the last decade people have made tremendous strides defeating hard problem after hard problem only to discover there are yet more hard problems.
AI is not magic, it is just an encoding of a human solution run on processors with far less computational power than the human brain.
Likewise language translation. Automatic language translation is a forever improving field but we are still no closer to the death of the professional translator than we were a decade ago.
There is an infinite number of hard problems between here and there.
And as a society we are improved by meeting and beating those problems but they don't move us appreciably closer to the purported goal.
lol.
Would you seriously advise your, say, 16 year old child, to seek a career in "professional translation"?
Of course not. We all know it is doomed. As with the car (discussed below) a few ultra-wealthy individuals may keep a human translator for the sheer, vulgar, blingy display value (like horses, or antique ink pens, or other outdated tech) but the vast majority of translation will be done by computer tech, which already, even at iPhone level, is now remarkably good at translating
It's done. It is over. It will happen. The advantages of self driving electric cars in particular (near zero deaths, no drunk driving, zero pollution, an end to parking problems, forget insurance and MOTS, freeing of streets, greening of all cities) are so overwhelming they are near certain.
Driverless cars... The advantages aren't questioned; the actual achievement, that's the issue.
Hofstadter's law coined in 1979 said that the time when a computer beat a grandmaster at chess would always be ten years away, and Hofstadter was an unbelievably smart cookie. 1997, Deep Blue beats Kasparov.
Well said. I think the moment a computer beat the best human chess player on the planet will be seen as pivotal, looking back. At the time it passed, almost unnoticed.
FWIW I think computers passed the Turing Test (supposedly the litmus test of "plausibly sentient AI") several years ago
Around about the time HYUFD started posting on pb.com...
Are you asserting hyufd is big blue and that its got bored and is posting here?
Thats why I play only stars these days though used to win big on ultimate bet
I wouldn't want to burst your bubble, but even with the anti-cheat, the RTA stuff is basically undetectable from a technology perspective that Stars deploys i.e. scanning for processes running on your PC. The RTA systems don't run on the client machine.
It is play style / greed / can't keep their mouths shut that normally does for these people
Ten years ago, these robots would have seem magical. If not Satanically miraculous. Yours is a brave call.
Correct, they will not.
The problem of self driving cars is filled with a series of incredibly challenging hard problems. Over the last decade people have made tremendous strides defeating hard problem after hard problem only to discover there are yet more hard problems.
AI is not magic, it is just an encoding of a human solution run on processors with far less computational power than the human brain.
Likewise language translation. Automatic language translation is a forever improving field but we are still no closer to the death of the professional translator than we were a decade ago.
There is an infinite number of hard problems between here and there.
And as a society we are improved by meeting and beating those problems but they don't move us appreciably closer to the purported goal.
lol.
Would you seriously advise your, say, 16 year old child, to seek a career in "professional translation"?
Of course not. We all know it is doomed. As with the car (discussed below) a few ultra-wealthy individuals may keep a human translator for the sheer, vulgar, blingy display value (like horses, or antique ink pens, or other outdated tech) but the vast majority of translation will be done by computer tech, which already, even at iPhone level, is now remarkably good at translating
It's done. It is over. It will happen. The advantages of self driving electric cars in particular (near zero deaths, no drunk driving, zero pollution, an end to parking problems, forget insurance and MOTS, freeing of streets, greening of all cities) are so overwhelming they are near certain.
Driverless cars... The advantages aren't questioned; the actual achievement, that's the issue.
Hofstadter's law coined in 1979 said that the time when a computer beat a grandmaster at chess would always be ten years away, and Hofstadter was an unbelievably smart cookie. 1997, Deep Blue beats Kasparov.
Well said. I think the moment a computer beat the best human chess player on the planet will be seen as pivotal, looking back. At the time it passed, almost unnoticed.
FWIW I think computers passed the Turing Test (supposedly the litmus test of "plausibly sentient AI") several years ago
Around about the time HYUFD started posting on pb.com...
Are you asserting hyufd is big blue and that its got bored and is posting here?
No poster here is Deep Blue. That does not compute.
Thats why I play only stars these days though used to win big on ultimate bet
I wouldn't want to burst your bubble, but even with the anti-cheat, the RTA stuff is basically undetectable.....
Not saying it detects all but I play tournaments and while there are bots I doubt they win
I would be more worried about the colluding stables in tournaments.
But I can tell you a big winner in MTTs recently got busted using RTA. But in general, you can get a lot more bang for your buck using RTA in cash games.
Off topic, that clown Simon Calder popped up on Look North tonight. Wibbling on about the price of summer holidays. Yep. That's the number one issue of the moment.
Can he please be quarantined in a hotel with no wifi or mobile phone signal?
On the thread header - an interesting, well written piece, but as well as a principled objection to removing the franchise, I’d also flag that there’s an underlying assumption that each executive position is independent of the others and suitable for its own mandate. I don’t think that works. What you do on policing affects prisons. What you do on education affects policing. What you do on drugs policy affects them all etc. You therefore need a unified executive under one leader.
I do, however, see a strong case for a directly elected PM who can appoint a Cabinet; none of which are in the legislature.
What's the best and worst airport hotel PBers have stayed in?
I stayed in a ropey place near to Dulles. However, a good sleep and daytime flight back to LHR was better than the usual overnight.
Only time I ever stayed at an airport hotel was one at O'Hare. At the end of a flight from Heathrow to Newark (the New Jersey one).
What happened, was that mid-flight a workcrew near Newark airport cut the main electric cable for the tower. Meaning NO flights could land (or take off) from there for a day.
Our flight ended up landing in Bangor, Maine where we waited several hours (and went through customs & immigration) until we then flew to Chicago. Where the airline put us up for the night. Next day, flew to Newark.
On the thread header - an interesting, well written piece, but as well as a principled objection to removing the franchise, I’d also flag that there’s an underlying assumption that each executive position is independent of the others and suitable for its own mandate. I don’t think that works. What you do on policing affects prisons. What you do on education affects policing. What you do on drugs policy affects them all etc. You therefore need a unified executive under one leader.
I do, however, see a strong case for a directly elected PM who can appoint a Cabinet; none of which are in the legislature.
On the thread header - an interesting, well written piece, but as well as a principled objection to removing the franchise, I’d also flag that there’s an underlying assumption that each executive position is independent of the others and suitable for its own mandate. I don’t think that works. What you do on policing affects prisons. What you do on education affects policing. What you do on drugs policy affects them all etc. You therefore need a unified executive under one leader.
I do, however, see a strong case for a directly elected PM who can appoint a Cabinet; none of which are in the legislature.
As I have replied before there is overlap and where they overlap for example health and drugs the one with the drugs policy they are implementing takes over.....so if health they implement drugs policy because that was what people voted for, justice loses its hold over it.
Yes in more general terms it is a problem but one we already have anyway
On the thread header - an interesting, well written piece, but as well as a principled objection to removing the franchise, I’d also flag that there’s an underlying assumption that each executive position is independent of the others and suitable for its own mandate. I don’t think that works. What you do on policing affects prisons. What you do on education affects policing. What you do on drugs policy affects them all etc. You therefore need a unified executive under one leader.
I do, however, see a strong case for a directly elected PM who can appoint a Cabinet; none of which are in the legislature.
If only there was a name for such a system.
To be absolutely clear - I’d retain the Monarchy. So it’s sort of the French Republic - ish - but with a ceremonial monarch and a more powerful PM. I’d therefore oppose my own plan in reality, because it’s French.
"McKinsey Settles for Nearly $600 Million Over Role in Opioid Crisis The consulting firm has reached agreements with 49 states because of its sales advice to drugmakers, including Purdue Pharma, the manufacturer of OxyContin."
Anecdata South London Category 6 (underlying health condition) friend getting jabbed tomorrow - despite the lower numbers they do seem to be motoring......
Category 6 is a big chunk 7.3m, so that could take 2-3 weeks.
Then category 7 which is very important.
(Personal disclosure - cat 7 includes me!)
I wonder what the most common categories are here.
I'm guessing I'll be the not-yet-announced category 12.
Category 12 sounds about right for me too - with category 10 being the whole of the rest of the public sector not already covered at the outset under 1 and 2, and category 11 being all supermarket workers. Essentially the back of the queue. Defenceless until some point between June and September, depending on how much more supply can be ramped up by.
That's unduly pessimistic if I may say. At the current average rate of 430k doses per day the whole adult population of the UK (52.8m) could get a 1st dose by 12th May 2021.
Ah, but the 2nd doses you say. To which I say the average daily rate will be well above 600k within two weeks. That brings the 12th May back to 14th April. 2nd doses really only pick up big-time in April. Then you have to consider the refusniks... say 10-20%? So 52.8m becomes maybe 45m?
You'll get your 1st dose before May imo, possibly before April.
I'll be delighted if you're proven correct, but this does rather depend on supply continuing to increase at quite a significant rate and nothing at all going wrong.
My experience with manufacturing is that you design a plant to a certain capacity.
You turn it on.
There are tonnes of problems. Nothing works as it should.
It month one, you run at perhaps 10% of theoretical capacity.
In month two, it's still dreadful, perhaps 25% of capacity.
By month four, you're getting into your stride and getting 80%.
And by the time you get to a year, you are talking about debottlenecking and how you can get actual output up to 125% of capacity.
I don't see why vaccines should be any different. Lots of teething problems. But they get solved. And new capacity is brought on at additional plants. And new vaccines are released.
It's also worth remembering the *scale* of the prize to a Pfizer.
They now saw they will produce two billion doses this year. If they are sold for $30 each, Pfizer will have made sales of their vaccine of $60bn in one year.
Bear in mind that in 2020, Pfizer's total sales were $41bn. That would be quite the increase.
In principle the same applies in biological production. However, for anything involving live cells, the engineering of scaling up is more complex than 'dry' systems or even chemical reactions. And even when you have those issues sorted, it takes only a tiny bit of contamination to ruin and entire run. I know some 'dry' manufacturing (semiconductors, nano-materials) also demand very clean, non-static environments, but growing live stuff, the probability of the occasional ruined batch is ever present.
The vaccination success wouldn't have been possible without the centralised nature of the NHS. An inconvenient fact for those of us who've been critical of the organisation in the past.
Interesting. Was speaking to an American colleague today who admitted exactly the same.
Ten years ago, these robots would have seem magical. If not Satanically miraculous. Yours is a brave call.
Correct, they will not.
The problem of self driving cars is filled with a series of incredibly challenging hard problems. Over the last decade people have made tremendous strides defeating hard problem after hard problem only to discover there are yet more hard problems.
AI is not magic, it is just an encoding of a human solution run on processors with far less computational power than the human brain.
Likewise language translation. Automatic language translation is a forever improving field but we are still no closer to the death of the professional translator than we were a decade ago.
There is an infinite number of hard problems between here and there.
And as a society we are improved by meeting and beating those problems but they don't move us appreciably closer to the purported goal.
lol.
Would you seriously advise your, say, 16 year old child, to seek a career in "professional translation"?
Of course not. We all know it is doomed. As with the car (discussed below) a few ultra-wealthy individuals may keep a human translator for the sheer, vulgar, blingy display value (like horses, or antique ink pens, or other outdated tech) but the vast majority of translation will be done by computer tech, which already, even at iPhone level, is now remarkably good at translating
It's done. It is over. It will happen. The advantages of self driving electric cars in particular (near zero deaths, no drunk driving, zero pollution, an end to parking problems, forget insurance and MOTS, freeing of streets, greening of all cities) are so overwhelming they are near certain.
Driverless cars... The advantages aren't questioned; the actual achievement, that's the issue.
Hofstadter's law coined in 1979 said that the time when a computer beat a grandmaster at chess would always be ten years away, and Hofstadter was an unbelievably smart cookie. 1997, Deep Blue beats Kasparov.
I'll be happy to be proved wrong... I'd like a driverless car. I just do not believe it's going to happen in my lifetime.
My tutor at university was experimenting with autonomous vehicles (working on simultaneous localization and mapping) 30 years ago. A lot of the problems have been solved since then, but the problem is mainly all those unpredictable humans. Perhaps if the humans were eliminated, it would all work fine.
For some reason he was advising the MOD fairly recently...
Off topic, that clown Simon Calder popped up on Look North tonight. Wibbling on about the price of summer holidays. Yep. That's the number one issue of the moment.
Clearly it’s not the biggest issue. but people are thinking about it.
Anecdata South London Category 6 (underlying health condition) friend getting jabbed tomorrow - despite the lower numbers they do seem to be motoring......
Category 6 is a big chunk 7.3m, so that could take 2-3 weeks.
Then category 7 which is very important.
(Personal disclosure - cat 7 includes me!)
I wonder what the most common categories are here.
I'm guessing I'll be the not-yet-announced category 12.
Category 12 sounds about right for me too - with category 10 being the whole of the rest of the public sector not already covered at the outset under 1 and 2, and category 11 being all supermarket workers. Essentially the back of the queue. Defenceless until some point between June and September, depending on how much more supply can be ramped up by.
That's unduly pessimistic if I may say. At the current average rate of 430k doses per day the whole adult population of the UK (52.8m) could get a 1st dose by 12th May 2021.
Ah, but the 2nd doses you say. To which I say the average daily rate will be well above 600k within two weeks. That brings the 12th May back to 14th April. 2nd doses really only pick up big-time in April. Then you have to consider the refusniks... say 10-20%? So 52.8m becomes maybe 45m?
You'll get your 1st dose before May imo, possibly before April.
I'll be delighted if you're proven correct, but this does rather depend on supply continuing to increase at quite a significant rate and nothing at all going wrong.
My experience with manufacturing is that you design a plant to a certain capacity.
You turn it on.
There are tonnes of problems. Nothing works as it should.
It month one, you run at perhaps 10% of theoretical capacity.
In month two, it's still dreadful, perhaps 25% of capacity.
By month four, you're getting into your stride and getting 80%.
And by the time you get to a year, you are talking about debottlenecking and how you can get actual output up to 125% of capacity.
I don't see why vaccines should be any different. Lots of teething problems. But they get solved. And new capacity is brought on at additional plants. And new vaccines are released.
It's also worth remembering the *scale* of the prize to a Pfizer.
They now saw they will produce two billion doses this year. If they are sold for $30 each, Pfizer will have made sales of their vaccine of $60bn in one year.
Bear in mind that in 2020, Pfizer's total sales were $41bn. That would be quite the increase.
In principle the same applies in biological production. However, for anything involving live cells, the engineering of scaling up is more complex than 'dry' systems or even chemical reactions. And even when you have those issues sorted, it takes only a tiny bit of contamination to ruin and entire run. I know some 'dry' manufacturing (semiconductors, nano-materials) also demand very clean, non-static environments, but growing live stuff, the probability of the occasional ruined batch is ever present.
Oh yes, there's the ever present risk of a batch being "zero" through contamination, etc.
But people simply get better over time. Problems occur, and then the experience is shared among all the manufacturing sites.
My point is that some people seem to worry that production of vaccines in aggregate might dip, when the reality is that more and more plants will get brought on-line every month between now and the end of the year, and production at existing plants should continue to rise too.
The vaccination success wouldn't have been possible without the centralised nature of the NHS. An inconvenient fact for those of us who've been critical of the organisation in the past.
Interesting. Was speaking to an American colleague today who admitted exactly the same.
They hold an NHS number. If you don't know it you quote your name and date of birth. A serious advantage we have. The only other unique factor it flags is medical history... Once again....
Ten years ago, these robots would have seem magical. If not Satanically miraculous. Yours is a brave call.
Correct, they will not.
The problem of self driving cars is filled with a series of incredibly challenging hard problems. Over the last decade people have made tremendous strides defeating hard problem after hard problem only to discover there are yet more hard problems.
AI is not magic, it is just an encoding of a human solution run on processors with far less computational power than the human brain.
Likewise language translation. Automatic language translation is a forever improving field but we are still no closer to the death of the professional translator than we were a decade ago.
There is an infinite number of hard problems between here and there.
And as a society we are improved by meeting and beating those problems but they don't move us appreciably closer to the purported goal.
lol.
Would you seriously advise your, say, 16 year old child, to seek a career in "professional translation"?
Of course not. We all know it is doomed. As with the car (discussed below) a few ultra-wealthy individuals may keep a human translator for the sheer, vulgar, blingy display value (like horses, or antique ink pens, or other outdated tech) but the vast majority of translation will be done by computer tech, which already, even at iPhone level, is now remarkably good at translating
It's done. It is over. It will happen. The advantages of self driving electric cars in particular (near zero deaths, no drunk driving, zero pollution, an end to parking problems, forget insurance and MOTS, freeing of streets, greening of all cities) are so overwhelming they are near certain.
Driverless cars... The advantages aren't questioned; the actual achievement, that's the issue.
Hofstadter's law coined in 1979 said that the time when a computer beat a grandmaster at chess would always be ten years away, and Hofstadter was an unbelievably smart cookie. 1997, Deep Blue beats Kasparov.
I'll be happy to be proved wrong... I'd like a driverless car. I just do not believe it's going to happen in my lifetime.
My tutor at university was experimenting with autonomous vehicles (working on simultaneous localization and mapping) 30 years ago. A lot of the problems have been solved since then, but the problem is mainly all those unpredictable humans. Perhaps if the humans were eliminated, it would all work fine.
For some reason he was advising the MOD fairly recently...
In a way the self driving cars are solving the wrong problem. They are solving for a situation where roads contain large numbers of vehicles controlled by humans and all that unpredictability that goes along with that.
If only self driving cars were allowed on the roads (and the roads were augmented with sensors), the current technology is sufficient.
Comments
I expect this has been agreed across the four nations
I was loudly derided, yet it has happened. An iPhone with Google translate can now do as good a job, at interpreting, as a moderately gifted bilingual person. And they get better and better by the day as they accrue feedback.
Driving in a street is even more difficult, but it is not beyond computer comprehension. Humans do it, FFS. You just need good sensors: eyes, ears, touch. We are at the stage now where computers can drive, but we are so nervous we demand someone walks in front with a flag to warn others, at about 5mph. ie cars in 1905 or whatever, and sometimes there are mishaps
I hereby and solemnly predict that computer driven cars will advance as fast or faster than human driven cars in 1905. The first to be automated will be long distance trucks in China, and the USA. Big spaces, pointless boring drives, easy to do, warehouse to warehouse. It will continue from there.
And, at the same time, of course, there is the advance of the pilotless taxi-drone
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mCk5T__x4Ow
That is here already
Or so some on here might think.
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-55941787
Clock is ticking on that prediction.
You completely under estimate how hard the problems are and how many of them there are.
It is the 80/20 rules but every 20 is also split 80/20 recursively, forever.
He is very poor
FWIW I think computers passed the Turing Test (supposedly the litmus test of "plausibly sentient AI") several years ago
Backed up with eye-watering fines/prison for cheats.
I will look forward to foreign travel freeing up as much as the next man. But that time ain't for a good while yet.
I claimed she was the first human to FAIL the Turing Test, and sound like a computer
A lawyer I was working with got put there. She had to go for a pee in the middle of the night, put on the light - and the whole of the floor looked up at her....
I still think this should be expanded to all nations, but starting with red list is better than nothing. Once a few nations are doing it and the system is up and running hopefully it'll be easier to then expand it to all.
Though it seems, now we've requested bits and bobs from the EU on the trade deal, it might be expedient to tie it to something - it can look like we've been 'forced to recognise their ambassador' - whatever.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3H6g19EhXQQ&ab_channel=Samsung
So, whatever
https://www.trainingfortranslators.com/2020/03/02/entry/
Ah, but the 2nd doses you say. To which I say the average daily rate will be well above 600k within two weeks. That brings the 12th May back to 14th April. 2nd doses really only pick up big-time in April. Then you have to consider the refusniks... say 10-20%? So 52.8m becomes maybe 45m?
You'll get your 1st dose before May imo, possibly before April.
And utterly without humour.
It was one of the best episodes they ever made, though amusingly enough that scene wasn't even part of the original script; the episode ran short on time and so they put that scene in as filler and it became so funny and memorable.
Also... no one loads the dishwasher properly apart from me!
(Maybe I'm missing the point here.)
There are simply many, many more credible moves any top player can make in any situation. Often, the AI analysis will find several equally good, or separated by 0.1 stone (or point).
Interestingly, it played only one move that no human would have previously considered. It simply didn't make mistakes. And added up a winnable position by fractions at a time.
In other words. Humans had "solved" Go already.
They hadn't solved human error.
Any preflop tree can now be solved in seconds,
Unlocking the Potential of Deep Counterfactual Value Networks
https://arxiv.org/abs/2007.10442
Threshold is about £19000. What I earn above that is taxed at an effective 41%.
You turn it on.
There are tonnes of problems. Nothing works as it should.
It month one, you run at perhaps 10% of theoretical capacity.
In month two, it's still dreadful, perhaps 25% of capacity.
By month four, you're getting into your stride and getting 80%.
And by the time you get to a year, you are talking about debottlenecking and how you can get actual output up to 125% of capacity.
I don't see why vaccines should be any different. Lots of teething problems. But they get solved. And new capacity is brought on at additional plants. And new vaccines are released.
It's also worth remembering the *scale* of the prize to a Pfizer.
They now saw they will produce two billion doses this year. If they are sold for $30 each, Pfizer will have made sales of their vaccine of $60bn in one year.
Bear in mind that in 2020, Pfizer's total sales were $41bn. That would be quite the increase.
First Test:
India 1.5
England 5.4
Draw 6.4
https://www.betfair.com/exchange/plus/en/cricket/test-matches/india-v-england-betting-30233775
The only protection in the big games these days is the player pools are tiny so if an unknown account turns up, it is immediately has the red flags.
At the mid stakes, some sites are totally infested with bots or RTA players and they win big. Just a cat and mouse game of them winning, getting banned, resurfacing with new accounts and rinse and repeat.
The roomba with the attached tablet and connection to your outlook calendar was quality though.
But even with that been said, plenty of examples of bot / RTA running on Stars and winning big. The cheaters are normally caught out by greed, either playing far too long for it to be human or if RTA, playing "prefect" in such a way their stats never vary over large sample sizes.
Then when it comes to Party, iPoker, WPN, good luck playing a table without a bot / RTA these days.
It is play style / greed / can't keep their mouths shut that normally does for these people
But I can tell you a big winner in MTTs recently got busted using RTA. But in general, you can get a lot more bang for your buck using RTA in cash games.
If so, I might just watch some
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hU4rp-efn-I
https://www.channel4.com/programmes/cricket-india-v-england
I do, however, see a strong case for a directly elected PM who can appoint a Cabinet; none of which are in the legislature.
What happened, was that mid-flight a workcrew near Newark airport cut the main electric cable for the tower. Meaning NO flights could land (or take off) from there for a day.
Our flight ended up landing in Bangor, Maine where we waited several hours (and went through customs & immigration) until we then flew to Chicago. Where the airline put us up for the night. Next day, flew to Newark.
All part of the romance of travel.
Yes in more general terms it is a problem but one we already have anyway
"McKinsey Settles for Nearly $600 Million Over Role in Opioid Crisis
The consulting firm has reached agreements with 49 states because of its sales advice to drugmakers, including Purdue Pharma, the manufacturer of OxyContin."
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/02/03/business/mckinsey-opioids-settlement.html
For some reason he was advising the MOD fairly recently...
And, fair enough.
But people simply get better over time. Problems occur, and then the experience is shared among all the manufacturing sites.
My point is that some people seem to worry that production of vaccines in aggregate might dip, when the reality is that more and more plants will get brought on-line every month between now and the end of the year, and production at existing plants should continue to rise too.
Once again....
If only self driving cars were allowed on the roads (and the roads were augmented with sensors), the current technology is sufficient.