Isn't someone who says aliens exist just a theoretical scientist?
490 posts • joined 2 Jan 2013
I feel I should clarify I completely agree with the use of the phrase AI, I used it purely in the context of this article.
However my point still stands. It is through machine learning monitored by humans that will have more success in spotting truly unusual and unexplained phenomena. Humans do indeed see patterns in everything, but an algorithm can be 'trained' to ignore such things, and concentrate purely on the numbers.
I am not suggesting Alexa is going to make the discovery. We will. By properly using the tools we have. Right now,any concept of a computer being better than humans is immediately scoffed at, but the blunt truth is we simply are not patient enough, and while we might miss something a computer churning through data will not. And if it is wrong, it learns and keeps going.
No I think the problem is twofold. Aliens dont win political votes, and therefore will never receive the funding needed to truly search in an effective manner.
And even if nothing is found, I suspect other data gathered during the search will be useful for some other studies.
While I of course understand that the discovery of alien intelligence would be an earth shattering event, and we must not blindly jump to conclusions, I'm saddened by the continuing efforts by a large group of people to quickly stamp out any remote possibility that such life exists.
While it's easy to say nothing is real until it is, trying to block every possible Avenue of investigation is just wrong. AI could easily spot things we miss, and should then be examined by humans to make an informed decision.
Saying it is unsafe is scaremongering of the highest order.
"I downvoted you because unlike the people that Kaltern was talking about, you actively tried to prevent the auto-renew. Your insurance company ignored your request. That is significantly different to Kaltern's discussion and as such Kaltern's post was not deserving of your downvote."
Yeah... what he said! *blows raspberry*.
Ok, back to grownup-ing.
Difference is, you knowingly and willingly signed up for these packages. It's what 'subscription' means, and I get very tired of people who have 'forgotten' they signed up for an annual renewal, and then say 'Oh I forgot, and I've been using your service for 3 months since... I want my money back'... it isn't going to happen. Not enough people bother to actually check what they're signing up to, and thus blame everyone else for their own mistake.
In THIS case, no one signed up for anything, no one knew they were going to be charged, and in many cases no one actually used the product they were unwillingly forced to have. And as it appears there was no obvious opt-out for these domains, it is pure theft.
This won't end well for Nominet I suspect...
If your business is SO dependent on mobile networking, then, in the same way you always make a safe, reliable set of daily backups for your important data, you should already have a contingency plan for such events. Such as a cheap PAYG secondary driver.
Blaming o2 for your 'loss of business' is like saying 'I always meant to get those backups done...'. And people are asking for compensation? Seriously?
And the way the Sky news anchor was absolutely ripping into the CEO of o2 last night was ridiculous - literally asking if he was going to resign, and virtually demanding financial compensation...
I would imagine there is plenty of contract clauses that cover unforseen issues such as these. I think the country as a whole needs to stop jumping on things like this - we're ALWAYS so quick to blame everyone else for our own oversights.
(I'm not suggesting that there are not SOME legitimate complaints about what happened - but these will be special cases, and I imagine o2 will already be dealing with such companies due to contractual obligations)
I can see this being an issue for people who review things - gaming channels, or probably anything that has a trademark.
Favourable reviews will be left alone, but the moment someone leaves a bad review, one copyright claim later and it can be removed.
This doesn't tend to happen right now, as the mechanism for doing so isn't QUITE as easy - although it can still be done. However, I can definitely see this being abused in such a way as to control data flow, rather than restrict it completely.
I've said this before - people are more willing to believe the evil corporate nightmarish vision, than the idea that these companies - while indeed using data WE VOLUNTARILY² GIVE to these companies - are just listening to everything we do and say, and that these listening devices are exactly the same as eavesdropping bugs favoured in spy movies - despite the overwhelming proof this just isn't the case.
I'm not suggesting these companies then get a free ride. But the amount of hyperbole and hysteria I read about these things are only based upon more hyperbole and hysteria which itself is based on nothing substantive.
²-Except Facebook. Because they don't always get our permission...
Must admit, while I'm all for SETI and Breakthrough, I fail to see ANY point to this project.
Even the longest burst of laser is going to take hundreds of years to be detectable by ANY telescopic device in the galaxy because as we all know, light has to GET there first. And by the time it does, we may not even be here as a species.
It's a complete waste of time and resources. I like the idea of using it for a spacecraft energy source though...
"Get over it, ffs.
If people are that offended by jiggling boobies, don’t fucking look.
Stop this over-the-top PC shit, now!"
I could have gone into a tirade against the lunacy of people with nothing better to do than complain about things that offend them so much they believe EVERYONE should be offended....
... but I think BugabooSue said it far more eloquently than I could ever manage.
Consider what this actually means.
'View As' exposes your account as whatever setting you want. So if you locked it down to Friends, generally speaking, you'll not be hiding very much. So ANYTHING you have on there was viewable by whoever used the correct token.
The amount of information people put on their supposed 'safe' FB account is staggering. Dates, addresses, full names, photos of all types... Not to mention the friends list, which will show other photos of potentially 'interesting' things... which would then be ripe for leeching info from.
This is EXACTLY the reason Facebook etc are just such a bad idea. Identity thieves will be having a field day from all this - far more valuable than just a simple debit card number...
And what will be the result? The repercussions? The world is watching because if FB is not taken to task for this, then what's the point of GPDR and whatever other rules should apply to this...
I do hope that, if microbial life is indeed found on Mars, or even our own moon, that they don't try and bring it right back to Earth...I don't really fancy being exterminated by an unrelenting bacterial infection that, being from a completely different ecosystem, is totally invulnerable to all forms of anti-biotic, and that the human immune system is incapable to fighting off.
Now, where's my oxygen tent...
From experience, the horrors that content moderators are exposed to is really quite horrific. The general Facebook user has no real understanding of the absolute depths of depravity and disturbing imagery some people post on a daily basis.
Some do it purely because they find beheadings funny.
Some do it to prove a point (PETA), which most often has the opposite effect
Some do it as revenge against others who have 'wronged' them
Whatever the reason, content moderators are given no real counselling, and certainly are not paid enough for the exposure of terror they see every day, so you don't have to.
And, typically, the only real time you hear about moderators, is when they decide to censor something that some people think shouldn't be. Regardless if the rules, or interpretation of such, are broken; too many people forget that the use of social media is at the behest of the service provider, and not a right that everyone has - the number of people who complain when an image is taken down that, while breaking specific rules, is also considered a 'breach of free speech' or whatever nonsense they come out with, forget that it's entirely up to the platform if they wish to keep it up or not.
And yes, while it is true that people more or less know what they're signing up for when they choose to moderate any social media UGC, it doesn't make it any less horrifying for them when they come across content which is just beyond normal human tolerances for either gore, suffering or deviance. So it is unsurprising that people feel they can sue such firms, if they feel their time and effort to, let's face it - make these companies money, is undervalued by not offering proper support and training for such unpleasant content.
Generally speaking, the human race is a group of despicable beings, who delight in the pain and suffering of other people.
Maybe Equifax should have a 'trust rating', held by some company that measures the level of trust you can have in companies who deal with sensitive data. And anyone can check the rating of said companies, who must display their rating in any and all correspondence and advertising.
Such a rating should determine how much data they can hold and for how long, subject to GDPR rules. And these companies may not ask to have their rating altered, unless they can prove beyond doubt that their rating is wrong.
Almost like... a credit rating. How coincidental....
Interesting how the immediate response without seeing any supporting evidence at all was 'this is clearly bullshit'.
Yes, this would be one of the scientific breakthroughs of all time, and naturally something as huge as this needs peer review and replication. However, while it is likely to be incorrect as the odd emails seem to point out, I find it sad that the initial reaction seems to be from other people claiming they're just 'in it for the money' and 'Let their colleagues convince them that it is in their best interest to do so instead of hiding behind technicalities.”' - they wouldn't be saying this if THEY had discovered the secret...
I hope it IS true. Perhaps then the whole concept of peer review and scientific method should be slightly revised as to not immediately pour scorn on those who claim to have discovered something before THEY did...
What happens if Bob sends Alice an encrypted email, but spoofs it so it looks like it came from Tom - who is oblivious to his intent to blow up Parliament, and wouldn't know the password anyway?
Let's be honest, it isn't exactly difficult to spoof an email so it looks authentic enough for the police to take action.
But then they would have innumerable competition from everyone else who realises that is all people really want.. and then they'd no longer be classed as 'special'.
That is the only reason we're getting all this pointless crap - in order to have something to say 'we're better than everyone at this (oh just ignore the huge amount of data mining, that's not your concern - just click OK, you won't feel a thing...)
Imagine how they'd sell the next Galaxy? "Yes, our phone has no extra features, Google is optional and ... it even has a removable battery.." And next year? "Yes, our new phone has a lower resolution screen.. to save battery power.. well we can't afford a bigger one because we had no data to sell...."
So..let me get this straight.
In essence, the 1st iteration IS going to be on sale. It's going to be terrible. We all knew this.
Also, there is ALREADY BUILT another 2 versions, which only 'investors' get to see? I mean, apart from the fact one wonders why they don't just release at LEAST version 2, this whole things is starting to sound very much like a scam.
I think Abovitz has borrowed Jobs' Reality Distortion Field® - but hasn't figured out how to fine tune it.
Such a non story - it's accurate tech being used to streamline the safety and security of participants and those watching - and I am unable to see how taking pictures of people they probably already have many pictures of is of any concern.
Obviously if this was to be used on the general public through normal high street CCTV, I could see it being a problem - but that is an entirely different situation and cannot be compared.
Sometimes privacy laws simply do not apply to every situation.
I wonder if the various countries where the Zuck Zervers are housed have any control over how they're used?
I actually think that there SHOULD be a mass re-registration. On October 1st, all accounts will be frozen, requiring an email verification and a bot-defeating CAPTCHA within 48 hours before permanent deletion... and this should happen at random intervals through the year.
Of course I'd also like to see a mandatory Twat Tax introduced, requiring you to deposit £100 to use FB, with a refund 6 months later... but then I'm not really sure who you'd pay it to..
So you're convinced steel was actually discovered and used 10,000 years ago? Of course not. The only materials they had to use back then was stone and later on, copper. It's already been shown that the standard tools like saws do not work well on granite, for example. And yes, while it has been shown that adding an abrasive material such as sand and lubrication can indeed help to cut using copper, this again, is just a possible theory that is unlikely to ever be proved.
The point I'm making, is you cannot use one theory to disprove another - both are equally valid until concrete evidence is found.
Using Wiki as a source to dismiss theories? Yes.. that makes perfect sense.
These jars DO produce current - that is easily proven. Therefore, by definition, they are batteries. Just because nothing has been found to explain their use, does not disqualify them from what they actually are.
There are many theories that can't be proven due to lack of physical evidence... but you don't hear about those being dismissed quite so easily.
To actually post something slightly serious, I definitely do not subscribe to ALL the wacky theories put forward by the Ancient Aliens lot (the moon, a starbase? Really??). However, I definitely agree with the points made in relation to established theory such as anything Egyptian being rooted in egostism, and complete unwillingness to admit there might be room for improvement or, and this REALLY gets any archaeology theorist a bit grumbly, that they could just be plain wrong.
After all, the Great Pyramid's reason for existence is based on one hieroglyph, which is highly likely to be completely fake, in order to save explorer Vyse's reputation (go read it, I'm not explaining history here!), and if this IS the case, then much of what we theorised about the pyramids are likely wrong as well.
After all, as those with closed minds tell us, without evidence, there is no truth.
I agree... those nutters who believe in a 'higher power', thinking that signs and symbols in ancient history can only mean that there are these luminous beings who shaped the world with stories like 'Genesis' and that monotheism is clearly correct...
And don't get me started on the concept of some bearded guy rising from the dead...
... what you mean, 3 billion people? Nah, that would make them as crazy as those who believe in alternative meanings and possibilities.... Can't be going against the One True God® now can we...
Which is why I get so irritated with this - companies have no business to be keeping your personal detail for that long without your express consent and knowledge - and not some sneaky weaselwording on the Checkout page like; 'We would like to pass your details on to carefully selected 3rd parties who might interest you. If you would not like for us to not do this, then please don't tick the box.'
"We're disappointed in having fallen short here, and very sorry for any distress we've caused our customers. I want to assure them that we remain fully committed to making their personal data safe with us."
I'm getting very tired of these mass data breaches without any real consequence to the companies involved. I know that people should probably be not giving them this info, but I wonder how much is by choice - after all, if you buy something, you need to give your details, and I'm pretty sure you don't get an option to opt-in to the site keeping them.
It's high time CEO's were held directly responsible for these issues.
The problem is, people are beginning to wise up to the fact that today, a phone is a phone is a phone...
I'm not really sure what else you can DO with a phone right now - cameras are exceptional, screen quality is superb, the speed of most phones is spot on, and you can do pretty much what you want on them.
Phone updates are becoming very much about pointless additions. Like the notch - as much as it pains me, Apple actually innovated a bit by sticking stuff into it. Other phones? They're simply copying as the makers somehow think we WANT a notch - that doesn't actually contain very much. But they're afraid if they DON'T add one, people will think something is missing.
I'm actually waiting for the next round of updates to have such new and innovative features like a removable battery, stereo speakers, dual sim slots as standard and a headphone socket...
These sort of stories make me sigh.
Obviously VR headset sales are falling. Rift and Vive was released like 2 years ago now, and while still technically superb, they're 2 years old. The AR sets released since have all been universally terrible, and the Vive Pro, while better than the original, is only slightly improved, for insane money.
The least said about the Go and similar sets the better.
The main issue is the lack of commitment by hardware developers to move on. VR desperately needs higher res, better optics and crucially, more high-qualit games. These are all coming, and I predict within 2 years we'll see proper next-gen headsets that will finally make those who see it as nothing more than a waste of time sit up and take notice.
As long as the costs are kept realistic.
It'll be fine, it'll get to -39.999ºC and just at the point of disaster, a ray of sun will fall upon it's dust smeared panels, and a spark of energy will crackle along it's old, worn out circuits... bringing it back for another year of cold, desolate lonliness while trundling across an unforgiving, alien world. All in the name of science.
Either that or Curiosity could trundle over and give it a jump start...
And you've not even seen half of it, before it's deleted by mods working in the background. I've seen some truly despicable things that thankfully never made it very far.
Social media exists purely for the benefit of those who want to exploit it for their own gains or agendas. And someone mentioned earlier that it is only used because it is 'free'. Personally I'd like to introduce 'Internet Licenses' as you find for cars.. Of course, people don't WANT Social Media policed, free speech and all that. Many don't realise it is already policed, just in the shadows.
Maybe we should charge for these licenses, and have a 'Social' test before issuing them.
Users paying for access to the Internet/Social Media, instead of relying on selling personal data? It'll never happen of course. But people like Zuck should not be allowed to have such a monopoly on data.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2020