Talk:1263: Reassuring - Revision history

Psychoticpotato at 05:03, 26 August 2024

2024-08-26T05:03:11Z

Davidy22 at 16:03, 26 April 2016

2016-04-26T16:03:33Z

162.158.83.162 at 11:10, 25 April 2016

2016-04-25T11:10:05Z

108.162.250.162 at 23:53, 11 October 2015

2015-10-11T23:53:23Z

199.27.130.180 at 09:58, 22 September 2015

2015-09-22T09:58:51Z

108.162.249.205 at 03:07, 20 January 2015

2015-01-20T03:07:21Z

108.162.219.58 at 09:33, 4 February 2014

2014-02-04T09:33:49Z

Sten at 01:06, 4 November 2013

2013-11-04T01:06:59Z

Lennartgoosens: Image burn-in, or rather image persistence, does apply to LCD's after all.

2013-10-05T22:57:57Z

Image burn-in, or rather image *persistence*, does apply to LCD's after all.

Dgbrt at 22:18, 20 September 2013

2013-09-20T22:18:13Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 05:03, 26 August 2024
Line 40:		Line 40:

	:AlphaGo has us beat. It defeated 2-dan Fan Hui in October 2015 and 9-dan Lee Sedol in March 2016. {{unsigned ip\|162.158.83.162}}		:AlphaGo has us beat. It defeated 2-dan Fan Hui in October 2015 and 9-dan Lee Sedol in March 2016. {{unsigned ip\|162.158.83.162}}
		+
		+	COMPUTERS WILL NEVER BEAT RISK OF RAIN 2 IN 9 MINUTES RAAAAAAH [[User:Psychoticpotato\|P?sych??otic?pot??at???o ]] ([[User talk:Psychoticpotato\|talk]]) 05:03, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:03, 26 April 2016
Line 39:		Line 39:
	::I'm going to side more with computer experts, neurologists, and cognitive experts over physicists and philosophers on the subject of computer consciousness, cognition, and capacity (especially given my opinion that most philosophy is self-indulgent wankery by people with nothing better to do). Also I didn't preclude quantum computing from the options here. If human neurological functions require quantum level computing, then that's what it'll take. -Pennpenn [[Special:Contributions/108.162.250.162\|108.162.250.162]] 23:53, 11 October 2015 (UTC)		::I'm going to side more with computer experts, neurologists, and cognitive experts over physicists and philosophers on the subject of computer consciousness, cognition, and capacity (especially given my opinion that most philosophy is self-indulgent wankery by people with nothing better to do). Also I didn't preclude quantum computing from the options here. If human neurological functions require quantum level computing, then that's what it'll take. -Pennpenn [[Special:Contributions/108.162.250.162\|108.162.250.162]] 23:53, 11 October 2015 (UTC)

−	:AlphaGo has us beat. It defeated 2-dan Fan Hui in October 2015 and 9-dan Lee Sedol in March 2016.	+	:AlphaGo has us beat. It defeated 2-dan Fan Hui in October 2015 and 9-dan Lee Sedol in March 2016. {{unsigned ip\|162.158.83.162}}

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:10, 25 April 2016
Line 38:		Line 38:

	::I'm going to side more with computer experts, neurologists, and cognitive experts over physicists and philosophers on the subject of computer consciousness, cognition, and capacity (especially given my opinion that most philosophy is self-indulgent wankery by people with nothing better to do). Also I didn't preclude quantum computing from the options here. If human neurological functions require quantum level computing, then that's what it'll take. -Pennpenn [[Special:Contributions/108.162.250.162\|108.162.250.162]] 23:53, 11 October 2015 (UTC)		::I'm going to side more with computer experts, neurologists, and cognitive experts over physicists and philosophers on the subject of computer consciousness, cognition, and capacity (especially given my opinion that most philosophy is self-indulgent wankery by people with nothing better to do). Also I didn't preclude quantum computing from the options here. If human neurological functions require quantum level computing, then that's what it'll take. -Pennpenn [[Special:Contributions/108.162.250.162\|108.162.250.162]] 23:53, 11 October 2015 (UTC)
		+
		+	:AlphaGo has us beat. It defeated 2-dan Fan Hui in October 2015 and 9-dan Lee Sedol in March 2016.

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:53, 11 October 2015
Line 36:		Line 36:

	:You're assuming that everything humans do is algorithmic. Every computer scientist agrees with you, and almost every neurologist, and the vast majority of cognitive scientists. But a few physicists and a lot of philosophers disagree. If human minds are actually doing something that requires quantum computing (as Penrose believes), or that's impossible even with quantum computing (as Searle claims not to believe but keeps ending up arguing for), then... Well, then we're wrong about the last century or so of knowledge, and we've got bigger problems than AI anyway.... [[Special:Contributions/199.27.130.180\|199.27.130.180]] 09:58, 22 September 2015 (UTC)		:You're assuming that everything humans do is algorithmic. Every computer scientist agrees with you, and almost every neurologist, and the vast majority of cognitive scientists. But a few physicists and a lot of philosophers disagree. If human minds are actually doing something that requires quantum computing (as Penrose believes), or that's impossible even with quantum computing (as Searle claims not to believe but keeps ending up arguing for), then... Well, then we're wrong about the last century or so of knowledge, and we've got bigger problems than AI anyway.... [[Special:Contributions/199.27.130.180\|199.27.130.180]] 09:58, 22 September 2015 (UTC)
		+
		+	::I'm going to side more with computer experts, neurologists, and cognitive experts over physicists and philosophers on the subject of computer consciousness, cognition, and capacity (especially given my opinion that most philosophy is self-indulgent wankery by people with nothing better to do). Also I didn't preclude quantum computing from the options here. If human neurological functions require quantum level computing, then that's what it'll take. -Pennpenn [[Special:Contributions/108.162.250.162\|108.162.250.162]] 23:53, 11 October 2015 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 09:58, 22 September 2015
Line 34:		Line 34:

	I don't see why computers can "never" do certain things. I mean, humans can do those things, so its just a sensory inputs and processing, and the structure that gets built to understand it. The first step though, is to figure out why we do those things so we can replicate it elsewhere. -Pennpenn [[Special:Contributions/108.162.249.205\|108.162.249.205]] 03:07, 20 January 2015 (UTC)		I don't see why computers can "never" do certain things. I mean, humans can do those things, so its just a sensory inputs and processing, and the structure that gets built to understand it. The first step though, is to figure out why we do those things so we can replicate it elsewhere. -Pennpenn [[Special:Contributions/108.162.249.205\|108.162.249.205]] 03:07, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
		+
		+	:You're assuming that everything humans do is algorithmic. Every computer scientist agrees with you, and almost every neurologist, and the vast majority of cognitive scientists. But a few physicists and a lot of philosophers disagree. If human minds are actually doing something that requires quantum computing (as Penrose believes), or that's impossible even with quantum computing (as Searle claims not to believe but keeps ending up arguing for), then... Well, then we're wrong about the last century or so of knowledge, and we've got bigger problems than AI anyway.... [[Special:Contributions/199.27.130.180\|199.27.130.180]] 09:58, 22 September 2015 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 03:07, 20 January 2015
Line 32:		Line 32:

	The screensaver is not obsolete; the years-old Dell that has been running it (and possibly being amused by it) is obsolete. No other reading of the title text can be justified. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.219.58\|108.162.219.58]] 09:33, 4 February 2014 (UTC)		The screensaver is not obsolete; the years-old Dell that has been running it (and possibly being amused by it) is obsolete. No other reading of the title text can be justified. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.219.58\|108.162.219.58]] 09:33, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
		+
		+	I don't see why computers can "never" do certain things. I mean, humans can do those things, so its just a sensory inputs and processing, and the structure that gets built to understand it. The first step though, is to figure out why we do those things so we can replicate it elsewhere. -Pennpenn [[Special:Contributions/108.162.249.205\|108.162.249.205]] 03:07, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 09:33, 4 February 2014
Line 30:		Line 30:
	[[User:Lennartgoosens\|Lennartgoosens]] ([[User talk:Lennartgoosens\|talk]]) 22:57, 5 October 2013 (UTC)		[[User:Lennartgoosens\|Lennartgoosens]] ([[User talk:Lennartgoosens\|talk]]) 22:57, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
	:You can simply set a timeout for the display to turn off to avoid this (the same timeout as you would set for a screensaver). I have clarified that in the explanation. [[User:Sten\|'''S<small>TEN</small>''']] <small>([[User talk:Sten\|talk]])</small> 01:06, 4 November 2013 (UTC)		:You can simply set a timeout for the display to turn off to avoid this (the same timeout as you would set for a screensaver). I have clarified that in the explanation. [[User:Sten\|'''S<small>TEN</small>''']] <small>([[User talk:Sten\|talk]])</small> 01:06, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
		+
		+	The screensaver is not obsolete; the years-old Dell that has been running it (and possibly being amused by it) is obsolete. No other reading of the title text can be justified. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.219.58\|108.162.219.58]] 09:33, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:06, 4 November 2013
Line 29:		Line 29:
	Actually, the screen saver being obsolete is not true. I have an LCD monitor here that has a faint, but still distinctly visible Windows XP taskbar with a very blurry clock when displaying black. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image_persistence		Actually, the screen saver being obsolete is not true. I have an LCD monitor here that has a faint, but still distinctly visible Windows XP taskbar with a very blurry clock when displaying black. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image_persistence
	[[User:Lennartgoosens\|Lennartgoosens]] ([[User talk:Lennartgoosens\|talk]]) 22:57, 5 October 2013 (UTC)		[[User:Lennartgoosens\|Lennartgoosens]] ([[User talk:Lennartgoosens\|talk]]) 22:57, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
		+	:You can simply set a timeout for the display to turn off to avoid this (the same timeout as you would set for a screensaver). I have clarified that in the explanation. [[User:Sten\|'''S<small>TEN</small>''']] <small>([[User talk:Sten\|talk]])</small> 01:06, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:57, 5 October 2013
Line 26:		Line 26:

	http://chessprogramming.wikispaces.com/Shih-Chieh+Huang {{unsigned ip\|82.15.102.182}}		http://chessprogramming.wikispaces.com/Shih-Chieh+Huang {{unsigned ip\|82.15.102.182}}
		+
		+	Actually, the screen saver being obsolete is not true. I have an LCD monitor here that has a faint, but still distinctly visible Windows XP taskbar with a very blurry clock when displaying black. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image_persistence
		+	[[User:Lennartgoosens\|Lennartgoosens]] ([[User talk:Lennartgoosens\|talk]]) 22:57, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:18, 20 September 2013
Line 25:		Line 25:
	Haha. https://www.khanacademy.org/cs/sentence-generator/2038602492 [[Special:Contributions/203.188.230.100\|203.188.230.100]] 10:38, 15 September 2013 (UTC)		Haha. https://www.khanacademy.org/cs/sentence-generator/2038602492 [[Special:Contributions/203.188.230.100\|203.188.230.100]] 10:38, 15 September 2013 (UTC)

−	http://chessprogramming.wikispaces.com/Shih-Chieh+Huang	+	http://chessprogramming.wikispaces.com/Shih-Chieh+Huang {{unsigned ip\|82.15.102.182}}