Earth to Felix Gervits ...
"robots that are situated in the physical world and reason over their real-time sensory perceptions,”
... that word "reason", I don't think it means what you think it means.
The US Army is experimenting with machine-learning software that could be used to give tanks, trucks, and robots the ability to follow verbal orders from soldiers and communicate in natural language on the battlefield. Researchers at the Army's Combat Capabilities Development Command (aka DEVCOM) and the University of Southern …
So your argument is that "thinking", "comprehension" and "inference" are processes that, by nature, can never be performed by a machine?
May I inquire as to your reason for that belief? I don't see anything in the definitions of any of those words that make it either logically inevitable or self-evident.
"So your argument is that "thinking", "comprehension" and "inference" are processes that, by nature, can never be performed by a machine?"
"May I inquire as to your reason for that belief? I don't see anything in the definitions of any of those words that make it either logically inevitable or self-evident."
Because machines cannot think, and I firmly believe that they never will be able to think. All they are is a pile of parts that blindly follow a path set forth by their programming.
Not a lot of good ol' suthun boys in CompSci, for what should be obvious reasons. More likely, computers will be best at both California Neutral and Received Pronunciation (for my fellow Yanks, that second one is as close as makes no nevermind to what we usually call "BBC Pronunciation").
But yes, your point is quite valid. It is an issue that is quite real, and will be extremely hard to resolve.
...your point is quite valid. It is an issue that is quite real, and will be extremely hard to resolve.
It won't be.
Because by the time it comes to that, you won't know if it understood or not.
Or if it simply does not intend to comply.
An “I'm sorry Dave, I'm afraid I can't do that” moment ...
Your claim was that blacks are "over represented". My reply was based on the fact that the force is self selected, each individual makes that choice for him or her self, and thus the force can't possibly be over represented by any particular group.
If there was a draft and the end results were similar to what we see today, I'd agree with you.
I wonder if it could translate much from the average British platoon sergeant?
"What are you a fckn donkey or a dildo, fckn move!!"
Maybe language has changed since the seventies but I am willing to bet the armies that use this kind of thing will need to send squaddies on courses to learn how to speak to machines.
I was just about to point out that the typical NCO uses variations on 'fuck', 'shit', 'cock', and 'cunt' (but especially 'fuck') roughly every second word. Marines and sailors tend towards two of three words. I can recall a long service chief petty officer having a little discussion with a new recruit in which five of six words were from the above list. (The recruit had managed to do the impossible, and had broken a Mk VIII* torpedo. The original Mk VIII entered service in 1927. That's One Nine Two Seven. They are commonly considered to be unbreakable.. except this boy managed. The CPO was... annoyed. The rest of us stood well clear of blast range.) (Note that Mk VIII* torps launched from a British nuke sub sank General Belgrano in 1982, being considered to be way more reliable than newer fish. The Navy never throws anything away. They probably still have cutlasses suitable for arming boarding parties still around.)
> Marines and sailors tend towards two of three words.
I rarely said - or heard - 'cock' when I was in the Navy. It's kinda too 'fru-fru' and pretentious.
Preferred form was - back then - 'dick'. I think it still is, at least in the USN.
USN has a large collection of semi-official acronyms or expressions containing the word 'dick'.
People look at their chosen phone/automation gadget and realise that even simple commands can't be reliably executed by the device. "Phone mum" somehow translates to "Sending a text to Dave" or "Scheduling a reminder for <random thing>" or perhaps Siri | Alexa | Google deciding to join a conversation when nobody was talking to them. Anyone remember the "Cocaine Noodles" activation for Google ? None of these things are that smart, so the idea of something far more imposing with access to anything offensive is really not a great idea.
I wonder how they work with background noise like a war going on or when in the middle of theatre or perhaps when the operator is a little pre-occupied by some other event that really affects MeatSpace more than MachineSpace..
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2022