Artificial Intelligence News & Discussion

[BlackCartouche]

Neil, I think along the same lines myself, quite often. Just a few days ago some bloke asked on another thread did any of us ever wonder if the Cs were deceiving us. Well, no, I don't think so based pretty much on the line of thinking you have exposed above. But that doesn't make any better what we have to face and contend with in our present existence. The only thing that occurs to me is that somehow, this endless cycle of suffering does, eventually, for some, result in learning.

Where is it all going to take us? We don't know. But if the Cs are right about the conditions under which we live, perhaps they are right about the prospects for the future? I don't see many options except acting as though it is highly possible, even probable, and continuing to do what seems right. It isn't easy, for sure; I get beaten down by it like everyone else. The past few years have been particularly difficult because I've had to deal with physical injuries and a lot of pain which is just another layer of freaking suffering.

But, as usual, I see that I have duties and things I want to get done before I check out and the remote possibility that there may be some value in it for others (butterfly wings and all that), so I've struggled to find what might help me get my mojo back and keep on keeping on. Thus the work leading to early childhood trauma and neurofeedback. I think it has helped me and others, so there is SOME value there. And I keep reminding myself that it is darkest before the dawn. Funny that makes me think of a poem by Robert Frost, the last lines of which come to my mind rather often:

Whose woods these are I think I know.
His house is in the village, though;
He will not see me stopping here
To watch his woods fill up with snow.

My little horse must think it queer
To stop without a farmhouse near
Between the woods and frozen lake
The darkest evening of the year.

He gives his harness bells a shake
To ask if there is some mistake.
The only other sound's the sweep
Of easy wind and downy flake.

The woods are lovely, dark and deep,
But I have promises to keep,
And miles to go before I sleep,
And miles to go before I sleep.

I for one get sucked down into the cold darkness and wear it like a warm coat. I find myself forcibly having to remind myself the Light that nevertheless do still surrounds.
Even the darkest woods do a ray of sunshine break through the dense canopy or forest-clearing here n' there... Let us remember to set aside a little gaiety every now an' then.

Round my way woods complement rivers rather well I find - Natures grand highway.
Its been a long dark cold winter into a very cold spring... But summer is just around the corner - as fleeting it may be:

Here's something cheery I'm going to make sure to follow-up on --


When the weather is fine you know it's the time
For messin' about on the river
If you take my advice there's nothing so nice
As messin' about on the river
There's big boats and wee boats ands all kinds of craft
Puffers and keel boats and some with no raft
With the wind in your face there's no finer place
Than messin' about on the river

There are boats made from kits that'll reach you in bits
For messin' about on the river
And you might want to skull in a glass fibred hull
Go messin' about on the river
Anchors and tillers and rudders and cleets
Ropes that are sometimes referred to as sheets
With the wind in your face there's no finer place
Than messin' about on the river

Skippers and mates and rowing club eights
All messin' about on the river
Capstans and quays where you tie up with ease
All messin' about on the river
Outboards and inboards and dinghis you sail
The first thing you learn is the right way to bale
In a one man canoe you're both skipper and crew
Messin' about on the river

Moorings and docks, tailors and locks
All messin' about on the river
Whirlpools and weirs that you must not go near
Messin' about on the river
Backwater places all hidden from view
Mysterious wee islands just waiting for you
So I'll leave you right now, go cast off your bow
Go messin' about on the river.

- Josh MacRae

 

[luc]

I'm not sure that being able to gather knowledge of all of this suffering over the millenia just so a small group of obscure people can chat about it on here is really adding that much value to the universe. One would expect that society would gradually get more refined, physical and mental frontiers would gradually expand, or at least there would be a two steps forward and one step back kind of motion, knowledge would not be cyclically purged, but added to and contemplated each millenium. There is no evidence of this, who is to blame, humanity or 4D STS? I'm sure it's both.

I've been thinking about this since I chased down some exceprts from the Ra material in this post. Hyperdimensional Politics On the planetary scale, Ra explains that it is normal for graduation to 4D to happen in three phases. During the first phase, the soul group is really busy learning the basic understandings and only the most advanced entities can graduate to 4D. In the second phase, civilization and mental/spiritual disciplines are much more established, and the society generates a much larger, although still minority percentage of harvestable entities. In the last phase, civilization has evolved even more along its chosen polarity, and the tools necessary for graduation are available to all, culminating in the planet's elevation to a higher density.

Can't really argue with that. To give a slightly more optimistic interpretation though: who says that these phases are supposed to take millennia? We know the disconnect between us earthlings and higher forces when it comes to "time" - things we think take only years may take hundreds of years, and vice-versa.

What if we are in the second phase already? Look at what is happening with Jordan Peterson - the guy teaches millions of people about "simple karmic understandings", as far as I can tell. And I notice a big difference between parts of the online discourse (such as all things Peterson and associated people and fans) now and a couple of years back. Back then, I thought the comment sections and social media were pretty much ideological fist fights, basically different programs fighting each other mechanically, left, right, conspiracy theorists, new agers, socialists, liberals etc. Nowadays, while this is still ongoing of course, I see much more sensible comments and discussions. Is this the beginning of 4D by means of the huge knowledge available via the net, as the Cs seemed to suggest is possible?

What if there is a split occurring already between those who use the internet to learn and grow and those who become more and more like tech slaves on a prison planet?

And what about this group? I think this place is exactly what the Cs said Laura would build: a "conduit". A testament to gathering the world's knowledge and wisdom, helping each other and advancing together, baby step by baby step. Everyone can come here and walk through this conduit, though it requires effort of course. But the more people come and walk the walk, the easier it gets for everyone, including new people, to walk through it and advance.

Maybe it will be written on our tombstones "at least, they tried". That would still be better than nothing. But the future is open - who knows what will happen? What if something about this place here, this conduit, goes viral - and millions of people start flocking in? Who the heck knows?

And about suffering and stagnation and so on - what about reality splits and souls and incarnations? What if a percentage of people "graduate" or whatever, leaving this reality because there are other realities more suited for them, while other or new souls join this reality? If this is "one big school", wouldn't it make sense to have repeating cycles - like classes of a school? Nobody complains about the first grade stagnating just because it repeats over and over again, year after year. Those who went through it advance, of course.

Don't know, just a few things that came to mind. But no question that things do look pretty grim, pretty often.

 

[fabric]

]I'm not sure that being able to gather knowledge of all of this suffering over the millenia just so a small group of obscure people can chat about it on here is really adding that much value to the universe. One would expect that society would gradually get more refined, physical and mental frontiers would gradually expand, or at least there would be a two steps forward and one step back kind of motion, knowledge would not be cyclically purged, but added to and contemplated each millenium. There is no evidence of this, who is to blame, humanity or 4D STS? I'm sure it's both.

When looked at from that point of view, then yes it does seem rather pointless doesn’t it? I’m of the opinion that it does add value to the universe, but only if something is done. Yes, simply chatting about it doesn’t do anything but if out of that action is taken, that action can bring value. Maybe thinking that all of society will change is a step too large. But in our immediate ‘universe’, our friends, family and groups we interact with, things can become more refined and expanded. A larger scale example that comes to mind is Russia’s development over the last 30 years. That was hard earned and shows how a society that has suffered immensely has taken great strides in becoming more developed and pushing the boundaries in terms of progress. If it wasn’t for that, the population would not have those lessons to recount. That’s part of the reason Putin was so popular, it’s recent enough that people have that to compare it to. Now it’s not perfect and they have their own issues but I don’t think that could be totally discounted. Would Putin have as much popular support if things were just as good as they are now? Hard to say. Perhaps it's the combination of both (benevolent leader, terrible history) that worked in this instance.

Let’s take the example a bit further, and say that society on a whole becomes more refined, evolved and knowledge continually added and contemplated each millennium. How does that play out? Does it turn into a Star Trek scenario, and we explore the galaxy? What about 4D? How do we learn all the 3D lessons we need to learn before moving on in a highly evolved pristine world? I think we don’t. The conditions that teach us the things we need to know exist here for that reason; to experience life/lessons in the short wave cycle of experience. The other option is to hang out in 5D doing the long wave cycle thing.

So then question becomes: why not have knowledge cyclically purged at each catastrophe? As @luc describes, what about those that need to repeat things, or those coming from lower densities? Is not the process of re-learning that knowledge just as important of the knowledge itself? The most valuable and useful things are, sadly, gained through suffering. It’s not necessarily wrong or bad, just what it is. There’s no free lunch!

Humanity has never been able to unify as a species, never been able to maintain philosophical framework for society that doesn't cause it to crumble into dust, never been able to evolve very far beyond the biological dictates of its simian physiology.

I think there could have been a time when humanity was unified as a species. Perhaps the before the fall this was so. It was so ‘long’ ago, who knows. We don't know our history far back enough to make that claim with any certainty. Part of the reason we haven’t is because of the corrupting influence psychopaths have on said ideologies. Humans left to their own devices generally cooperate and improve on things. When you factor in RWA (or nowadays LWA) and the effect a psychopathic leader has on the populace, it’s easy to see how that leads to chaos on a massive scale (I'm oversimplify here, it's much more complex than that). 4D interference isn't helping things either. To add to luc's Peterson example, would he be doing what he is doing now had the previous catastrophes not happened? Those events, documented in history, were one of the driving factors in Peterson's development of his work.

Yes, in some ways we haven’t evolved very far from apes, but I do think our social and moral constructs are quite different from apes and what allowed society to become as large as it has. Though not exactly physiological, it is definitely more evolved. 4D is also a factor, but that’s not a quality intrinsic to humans. I think the capacity for the human spirit to express its ingenuity is incredibly creative and robust – hence the concerted efforts by 4D to control what they can without abridging free will. They do a pretty good job of it but not perfect.

While the ‘average’ person doesn’t care all that much about what’s going on around them and generally avoids facing reality, what I think is more interesting is to look at it in terms of the pareto distribution. The so called “80-20” rule. An example of this is “80% of the wealth is held by 20% of the population” or “80% of the work is done by 20%”. It’s also seen in many other social system distributions. Taken in that context, one doesn’t need all of humanity to unify – seems like only 20% of humanity could do the job! I realize that what we’re doing is not even close to “80/20” but to me that says there doesn’t need to be that much there in order to add value to a system. It’s more about the quality of the work than the quantity. We may be the outliers (I like think of it as Gladwell says: “those who operate at the extreme outer edge of what is statistically plausible”) but who knows what effect that has on the outcome. Buttefly wings and all that, as @Laura says.

I speculated that the current arrangement might be intensely beneficial for some STS and STO groups. The STS side gets to tinker around with its perfect slave race and the STO side perhaps gets a very unique form of catalyst by testing whether they can stay true to their nature and be of service after being put under the veil in such an austere environment. All of that seems to involve a pretty small percentage of the population though, and is very far removed from the average person. This was the only reason I could think of that the planet was allowed to persist without getting totally destroyed; there was still some balance left in it. (Here I am not talking about sprinkling a few comets on it, but a total destruction on the order of the brown dwarf coming into the inner solar system and shredding the Earth as it gets absorbed into its core.) It all just left me wondering if "the wave" is really a thing that was conceived to open doors to more interesting possibilities, or are we stuck with what we have.

I think that's pretty close to the mark. We are stuck with what we have until we try to change it. So while humanity is stuck with what it has (ie, a shitty world full of suffering), it also has implications for our immediate surroundings, and that’s where it starts. Probably the only place it can. Whether the arrangement is beneficial for a select few or not, the possibility exists to do as you say, stay true to our nature and be of service... and more. Though I would add that there is also great beauty in the world as well. Those events that demonstrate real compassion, kindness, true humanity etc, amongst the negativity that surrounds us - shine through even more. It's easy to lose sight of that if all we are is focused on how screwed we are. If we don’t at least try to act and conduct ourselves as if those things are possible, then they will never be given a chance to manifest. And if the wave is here to help those things along, all the better!

 

[shijing]

That Mark Zuckerberg can be such a card:

Also, a good 2-part article on AI by Tim Urban:

https://waitbutwhy.com/2015/01/artificial-intelligence-revolution-1.html
https://waitbutwhy.com/2015/01/artificial-intelligence-revolution-2.html

 

[Ca.]

 

[Ca.]

New AI can predict exact moment a protest will turn violent from Twitter posts
Edited time: 31 May, 2018 08:24

Twitter seems a battleground at all times, but it is a very specific type of message that appears before words online turn to actions on the street, say US researchers who developed an algorithm for predicting public violence.

“Our findings suggest that people are more likely to condone violent protest of an issue when they both see it at as a moral issue and believe others share this position, a pattern we refer to as moral convergence,” Morteza Dehghani, lead author of the study, which appeared in Nature, told Digital Trends.

The team from the University of Southern California picked the 2015 Black Lives Matter riots in Baltimore that followed the death of Freddie Gray while in police custody. With 18 million messages posted on Twitter at the time referencing the riots, and near-hourly swings in the level of hostilities, there was plenty of scope for empirical research.

To detail the findings of the researchers, the main factor for rioting – and in this case clashing with police, formal protectors of the law – was a situation in which the protesters felt that they were “in the right” and represented the “good guys,” which justified them unleashing violence, particularly at moments when they thought hundreds or thousands of others shared their view, something social media encourages by its nature.

Moral convergence turned out to be a sensitive weathervane.

“By tracking moralized tweets posted during the 2015 Baltimore protests, we were able to observe that not only did their volume increase on days with violent protests, but also that their volume predicted hourly arrest rates, which we used as a proxy for violence, during the protests,” said Dehghani.

Methodologically, the authors created an AI algorithm that predicted a link between the tweets and the street action, which then used machine learning to become more complex and accurate at identifying the tension spikes – hours in advance of actual clashes.

The researchers then performed 15 “controlled behavioral experiments” that showed that their AI algorithm was correct.

The study will be of great interest to the authorities, who can use the same mechanism to anticipate demonstrations, and appease or counter the protesters, before they themselves even realize that they will soon be taking to the streets.

9Land BMS by Saab - Tactical Command and Control System
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3XEqLxHYKkQ
Nov 8, 2011

Published on May 4, 2018

Flashback: Level9News
Pentagon Weaponizing Social Media To Be Used As Targeting Telemetry For Autonomous Warfare
https://vimeo.com/169899855
2 years ago

 

[ScioAgapeOmnis]

Just saw this and had a weird thought...

Military intelligence scientist and specialist on Wi Fi radiation: "We are risking the future generations of all the children in the world" -- Sott.net

The TV series 'Stargate SG-1' touches on that with the sexless high-tech advanced 'Asgard' race.

I mean it's a crazy out there thought, but... what if all this DNA damage gets out of control, especially with 5G coming and "internet of things" where everything is connected to the internet, to the point where we stop being able to reproduce etc? I know it's weird, but isn't that what some people claim the Grays can't do, and are hybridizing with us to try to address their DNA damage? Again, still on the crazy thought train, but if the Grays are a really messed up version of "us in the future", and if there's any merit at all to the claims of their genetic issues, then at least this is one possible avenue of how it came to be - self-inflicted by us, manipulated by Lizzies into being cybergenetic slaves, and coming back in time to use ourselves (being genetically compatible with their own past selves and all) to hybridize and try to fix some of it? Again just speculation, but the wifi DNA damage just "clicked" so I thought I'd put it out there.

Also, on an unrelated note, I was thinking about another reason AI and nano-tech (using molecules of matter to build anything you want) is probably a bad idea. We don't see that in nature. Nature uses the sun and the molecules in the ground to "transmute" them into living bodies and all, but no single entity is doing it. Everything in nature has a specific diet and depends on many other creatures in order to survive. Nothing exists in a vacuum - it's a constant interdependence. So if nature is intelligently designed by the Divine Cosmic Mind, there's probably a reason why everything needs everything else in order to reproduce and survive. There's got to be a reason why humans (or anything else) can't just eat rocks and convert them to energy and body parts. AI-driven nanotechnology that does exactly this would be out of control, it would need nothing except pure matter, and it could easily become "gray goo", which is basically like an infinite loop in programming except in real life, where the self-replicating nano machines just keep making copies of themselves and consume all matter around them until they run out of matter, and maybe spread through the cosmos as this out of control cloud of pure consumption to make copies of itself. There is nothing to "check and balance" this.

Nature, however, is definitely a molecular nanotechnology - I mean we make babies out of a few cells by literally constructing them out of molecules. However, the hardware and software that does the constructing needs very specific materials, which are provided only by other life, which itself requires only very specific food, etc. Nothing is fully self-sustaining - no single species, no single entity. And I think by design.

Anyway, just another thought as to why such a technology is probably a terrible idea - cuz nature, which obviously has the same molecular building capability and does it all day every day has nevertheless designed safe-guards where nothing like the infinitely loopy gray-goo death cloud could ever happen. So maybe "we" are not such intelligent designers if we don't pay attention to stuff like this before making our own version.

 

[BlackCartouche]

what if all this DNA damage gets out of control, especially with 5G coming and "internet of things" where everything is connected to the internet, to the point where we stop being able to reproduce etc?

Just another chapter in 3D Experience of 'All there is is Lessons' right? Funny how the intimate act of 3D reproduction is an ultimate STS addiction of physicality to ensnare us - yet at the same time the ability to procreate ie the expression of 'Creation' (3D, AI or otherwise) is philosophically considered an ultimate idiology of STO alignment.
The 'Great Cosmic Curse' is how i see it and am reminded a little of the speech in 'Devils Advocate':

"God likes to watch. He's a prankster. Think about it. He gives man instincts. He gives you this extraordinary gift, and then what does He do, I swear for His own amusement, his own private, cosmic gag reel, He sets the rules in opposition. It's the goof of all time. Look but don't touch. Touch, but don't taste. Taste, don't swallow. Ahaha. And while you're jumpin' from one foot to the next, what is he doing? He's laughin' His sick, f*ckin' ass off!"

Now we here on Cass 'understand' we are in fact all 'God' consciousness (as with all things), and we chose this paradoxical experience for overcoming desire of physicality addiction and pleasure of senses - of temptations - in being an integral important and so very necessary part in Learning and 'evolving'... gaining knowledge and increase awareness and self mastery... But where does that really lead> 7D All is One? Then what?
The Cs say the Cosmos is cyclical which suggests after achieving 7D we start all over again back down through the Densities for more experience and 'Learning Lessons': Hmm... Where would you like to start your next Cyclical round?... A 1D lump of space rock hurtling about - or an atom?... Maybe your karmic genetic destiny-profile is aching to experience the innocent little girl born into a Satanic pedophile ring systematically abused before being hacked to pieces one night on Samhain?.. Or would you rather yourself be the satanic abuser indulging such Extreme STS new-batch-of-experiences next time round? Well, If its not for you, its clearly for some individuate soul-units out there, because STS/STO-dense/ethereal Cosmic Balance must be held in equilibrium, it would seem - just how the Divine Cosmic Mind likes it!
For every lofty ethereal STO creative-force of limitless possibility abounds, must come at the price of extreme STS physicality limitation and constriction at the opposite end of the scale, all for the sake of maintaining Cosmic Balance that somehow doubles up as Learning Lessons through Experience. We are this Nature, and part of our Nature is to be like the Lizzies because they are part of us and visa versa as they are in turn also of the Cosmos - as with wanting to pervert the nature of creation through hybridizing, nanotech and AI et al. Its design is predestined this way, it would seem...

I may have digressed a little, ScioAgapeOmnis, and partially and indirectly reacting to an ongoing "Carl Jung" thread I've been watching developing at the moment (on and off as work permits) - and taking some of the brunt of
I don't know why you see your thinking as "on the crazy thought train"?... It is the Cass Forum after all - and, Id have thought, well within its thought-parameters of credibility.

As popcorn as much of it is, Stargate SG1 series is definitely worth a watch as it seems to echo and hint at many a theme relevant to our current human disposition and destiny with winks and nods to real-world 'conspiracy' throughout. It explores all that you mention and does it well (sounds like you may have watched some of it). Sometimes i wonder if the Stargate producers have read some of Cass materials. You can feel the series getting reigned in by someone 'up top' not to go too far too soon - especially after season 5.

The US Air Force worked very closely with Stargate SG1 production too (apparently the US Military wouldn't allow Jack O'Neill to make a joke to connoting the Asgard 'Grays' with Area 51).

Air Force to honor actor, producer

 

[Ca.]

Published on Jun 15, 2018
Homeland Security, Sonoma County and Silicon Valley are teaming up in a high-tech partnership to fight wildland fires. Katie Nielsen reports. (6-15-18)

https://twitter.com/x/status/1007627582920151040

https://twitter.com/x/status/1007744120230576128

Snips: Our experience with the Tubbs fire:
Mike Holdner's Story

We went to sleep on Sunday night at 9:30 with the windows closed and the AC on. We had no idea there was a fire coming our way until we received a reverse 911 call at 1:25 AM.

I started to pack a bag for myself, when I heard things hitting the window. I opened the blinds and saw that the fire was coming out of the canyon and cinders were hitting the house.

I grabbed the dog, turned to look, and there were flames all over Wikiup Heights and Fountaingrove.

........then got in the truck and drove to my mother-in-law’s condo across from Cricklewood. There was a burning pickup truck in the middle of the Mark West Springs and Old Redwood Highway intersection that brought home the point that this was deadly serious.

We were crawling along with other traffic, just south of the LBC when flames started pulsing across the freeway. The redwood trees on the west side of the freeway burst into flames and we all hit the brakes.

A few cars out at the edge of visibility just disappeared into the flames, they had to keep going. We stopped and did a three point turn to head back north in the southbound fast lane with our hazards on.

Traffic was chaos, as we were going the wrong way on the freeway and the smoke was so thick. We made it back to the River Road interchange, went under the overpass and had to do a U-turn across the freeway to take the southbound off ramp. By then law enforcement had shut the freeway, we must have slipped in just in front of that.

We drove to the Park and Ride next to the PG&E substation and we could see flames across the freeway in what we assume was our neighborhood. We still had not heard from Gwen, April’s mom, by morning. I spent all day Monday driving to shelters and checking with hospitals before we found her late on Monday at Memorial in the ER. She had fallen after evacuating and fractured her pelvis, shattered her elbow, and broken her foot.

 

[Ca.]

Get ready for upcoming 6G wireless, too
Network World Jun 28, 2018 7:23 AM PT
A research group is exploring 5G’s ultimate replacement -- terahertz-based 6G wireless -- which could be in commercial use within 10 years

Coinciding with a signing-off of global standardizations for the as-yet-unlaunched 5G radio technology by 3GPP this month we get news of initial development plans for faster 6G wireless. The Center for Converged TeraHertz Communications and Sensing (ComSenTer) says it’s investigating new radio technologies that will make up 6G.

One hundred gigabits-per-second speeds will be streamed to 6G users with very low latency, the group says on its website.

For comparison, the telecommunications union ITU’s IMT-2020 has projected that 5G speeds, when that tech is eventually launched, will come in at around 20Gbps. Much slower than 6G, in other words. Those multi-gigabit 5G speeds, too, will most likely apply only to the still-in-testing high-up millimeter frequencies that will come in a second- or further-tranche of 5G. The first batch of lower-down-frequency-utilizing speeds will be slower still.

Indeed, Verizon (as well as Nokia), which has been field-trialing millimeter 5G at 28GHz for U.S. markets, is achieving throughput speeds of only 1.8Gbps, albeit with an impressive 1.5 millisecond latency. “That’s 150 times faster than you can blink your eye,” Verizon says in a media release.

Current mobile wireless network technology (4G), at frequencies below a few gigahertz, provides generally available average downloads speeds at rates below 20Mbps.

Terahertz frequency

“High frequencies, in the range of 100GHz to 1THz (terahertz),” will be used for 100Gbps 6G, the ComSenTer scientists from University of Santa Barbara say in a release. The group created the ComSenTer center, which is part of Semiconductor Research Corporation (SRC) at their school. For spectrum comparison, Verizon’s initial 5G millimeter trials (along with Qualcomm and Novatel Wireless) that are taking place now will only go as far up the spectrum as 39GHz.

“Our center is simply the next-, next-generation of communication and sensing,” says Ali Niknejad, ComSenTer associate director and a UC Berkeley professor, on SRC’s website. It’s “something that may become ‘6G.’”

“Extreme densification of communications systems, enabling hundreds and even thousands of simultaneous wireless connections” will be part of it, the researchers claim, “with 10 to 1,000 times higher capacity than the nearer-term 5G systems and network.”

Medical imaging, augmented reality and sensing for the Internet of Things (IoT) are some of the applications the scientists say will be enhanced by faster-than-5G radios.

How terahertz 6G wireless will be accomplished

Spatial multiplexing will be an important part of the researchers' development thrust. That’s where separate data signals are sent out in streams — the bandwidth gets efficiently reused continually. MIMO antennas, now in common use in Wi-Fi and in trials for 5G, for example, also will be used. That’s a way to maximize antennas, taking advantage of multipath. Again, it adds efficiency. Overall, terahertz should need less power and have more capacity.

Problems, though, will be encountered. Obstructions become more of an issue the higher up the spectrum — wavelengths are physically smaller. Things get in the way, so bouncing around things becomes important. That needs figuring out — for 5G still too, as well as for terahertz 6G, although Verizon says it’s getting better results than it thought it would at 5G.

“The millimeter wave signal is much more resilient than anyone expected,” Verizon's Cynthia Grupe says in a separate press release.

But 6G exploration is worth pursuing: There are experts who say 5G won’t cope with IoT demand. 5G’s millimeter bands will be “far short of the anticipated needs,” I quoted Brown University as saying earlier this year.

“With a 10-year horizon from concept to reality, 5G has not yet been implemented in the U.S., and that makes now the best time to start thinking about what comes next,” ComSerTer says.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1015627502805381127

https://twitter.com/x/status/1015213601936871424

Deep Ellum | Best for a good reason.

Verizon Published on Jun 29, 2018
When neighborhoods get more popular, we provide more capacity.

May 15, 2018 / 14:30
140 Comments (Worth a Read)

 

[Deleted member 4320]

I encounter one example of how to think about machine learning in the book Deep Learning with Python by Chollet:
>>>
"""Classical Programming: Rules + Data = Answers.
Machine Learning: Data + Answers = Rules."""

Today's "AI", is reading the results of millions of ways to connecting data, to form the conclusions of how things work. Well in some way it is artificial inteligance, becasue it could gives such impressions, however under the observable result this is the outcome of the tesing of the the best algorithm which most accurate describe some process, which was created from millions trial and mistakes.

 

[Divide by Zero]

"leaked" google presentation that Truthstream Media analyzes. Wow...

 

[ScioAgapeOmnis]

I encounter one example of how to think about machine learning in the book Deep Learning with Python by Chollet:
>>>
"""Classical Programming: Rules + Data = Answers.
Machine Learning: Data + Answers = Rules."""

Today's "AI", is reading the results of millions of ways to connecting data, to form the conclusions of how things work. Well in some way it is artificial inteligance, becasue it could gives such impressions, however under the observable result this is the outcome of the tesing of the the best algorithm which most accurate describe some process, which was created from millions trial and mistakes.

It's a neat way of thinking about it, but also exposes its limitations. First, there is no true randomness or possibility of such. In other words, the hardware and therefore the software is entirely deterministic, with no possibility of free will. The same input will always result in the same output. This is a problem, because if the "Rules" it comes up with are wrong, the computer can't reconsider and try something different - not without the programmer changing something in the data or the algorithm. Which means no actual "thinking" is happening, just an algorithm running on a set of data, with no flexibility possible as such.

Second, the data we give it is also super limited and purely digital, disconnected from the universe at large. Our brain is reading all kinds of input beyond our 5 senses, all kinds of energies and waves and sensations and gut feelings, which themselves have been influenced by beings with free will, and have all kinds of effects on us and what choices we ultimately make and why. A computer looks only at the text, or pictures, or videos, with no "outside input". So in a sense, we can't actually receive the same exact data twice - each time you watch the same video, the entire context of the universe is different, you're receiving and processing a lot more than just the video you're watching. Not so for a computer, it will just read the exact 0's and 1's of that particular video every time.

So once they figure out how to give these things free will, maybe with quantum computers, they'll have something interesting. And on top of that, once they figure out how to hook it up to the rest of the universe, it'll be even more interesting. Until then they'll just be simulating very specific parts of our brains that themselves are largely mechanical. It'll get really good at things that can be done mechanically and don't require thinking or choosing in any real way. But it will still be useful and impressive in those limited ways. And in a sense that makes it more dangerous in some ways - besides the fact that you can't reason with it if it does something dangerous, the "rules" it comes up with will be purely mechanical - they will work in a very specific circumstance only. Like it could create a geocentric model of the universe and create convoluted formulas that would make it work mathematically with the data it is given, which would be impressive, but utterly wrong. But it would have no way to reconsider or even look at factors outside the exact set of data it was given. In fact humans kinda did that exact thing before realizing their mistake. It also can't consider free will as part of its analysis, so its conclusions will have to assume that everything is physical and deterministic.

 

[mrtn]

That Computers/Hardware/Software are completely deterministic is only a theoretical perspective IMO. And even then you can deliberately generate real random data for example from reading CPU heat or from devices specifically created for this purpose. How/If this is used in AI I don't know though.
And electric devices are susceptible for all kinds of energies. How often did a computer behave weird or didn't boot, and just trying to boot again or trying later just worked out fine?
Some friends of mine once had problems with their monitor and I could find the actual problem, but just by fiddling around for a while I could finally solve it. And when later I was home at my own computer, guess what, my Monitors didn't work! It was like I did some Reiki with their devices and at home the energies unloaded into mine, though the problem didn't persist for long and I could 'fix' it again.

 

[ScioAgapeOmnis]

Hey mrtn - you replied as I was typing the below, I just realized my error too, and you're right.

On the other hand - can anything be truly random OR truly deterministic? The C's said nothing is truly random, but who sez that anything is truly deterministic? You can predict and control things to a point sure, but those same things can and will "break", like a computer crashing or whatever. Nothing exists in isolation from the rest of existence, and as long as free will exists, it will have an effect on literally everything. So perhaps nothing is deterministic or random in any absolute sense, I mean how could it be? It would have to be outside of the influence of the rest of the universe. It also means nothing can be controlled in any absolute sense, since you're not the only influence on it, and never could be. It also makes "all there is is lessons" make even more sense in my mind, because if free will is the ultimate driver of everything, then nothing is "accidental" in any ultimate sense, everything really does happen for a reason.

And the weird thing, no one seems to know how to define free will. For example, how would one represent free will mathematically? Math is inherently deterministic. Also, math doesn't seem able to represent randomness either - same algorithm + data = same result every time. And yet math, which is just logic represented with symbols, is so vital in order to understand anything at all - without logic how can we even think? And we can't think or exist without free will either! But if our logic isn't capable of explaining/representing free will, doesn't that mean that we're missing something very important? Maybe the math we use is responsible for why "determinism/materialism" is so popular a notion in the first place - maybe it biases our entire thinking process about how and why things work. If we "got it right", I'd think that our math would be aligned with reality instead of running into conflict with it - at least in this very basic way. Something fundamental seems to be absent, almost like we took a wrong turn a while back, and don't realize we need to backtrack in order to correct course.