Piekeren is fantaseren de verkeerde kant op
Ambrela migrations 9/10 https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ZeDw74WPbFM
dinsdag 10 december 2019
Er hebben mannen op de maan gestaan, onbegrijpelijk hoe het ze met de techniek van 1960-1969 gelukt is. Nasa en esa weten, de maan is integendeel, de maan is de dood, zwart wit, tweedimensionaal, alles omgekeerd in de spiegel, 20% van de mannen op de maan hield er een trauma of psychische stoornis aan over, integendeel of de dood of volmaakte verlatenheid is de behoorlijk dominante vrouwelijke ziel van de maan ....ook werden sommigen zeer gelovig van de maanwandelaars, dit is god.....op de maan wandelen is 1 zijn met god en het omgekeerde, een kijkje in de eeuwige dood
dit is onleesbaar op de iphone, leesbaar op de lap top
de pakken van de mannen op de maan hadden een mini
koelkast op de rug nodig, 120 graden, en de eerste maanrobot
van China ging kapot door messcherp maanstof, volgens mij wel
omdat ze op de donkere zijde van de maan geland waren, min
120 graden dus bevroren stof als messen, de commentator
stem zei, als er ooit mensen op de maan komen, dan
moeten de pakken messenstof van de maan bestendig
zijn (en je zag een vallende man op de dagkant vd maan)
Menno in the eye of blacky in case you did not notice, inzoomen is eng
Marrakech had toch ook wel iets magisch maar ik voel me (veel meer) thuis aan de kust….wel mooi op dat Jamaa el fna plein lekker te eten voor 20 eur en dat atlas gebergte te zien en dat drukke gezellige vreemde plein, twee keer slecht geslapen in een moeilijk vindbaar hotelletje van 8 eur per nacht, op 2 minuten, een kwartier, een uur van het plein, afhankelijk van hoe je verdwaalt in dat doolhof en Google maps dat daar niet goed werkt en wel goed werkt in Agadir en omgeving. Doolhof centrum marrakech.
En bijzonder dat die witte stip op de foto’s hieronder zo klein is, in werkelijkheid was het een groot formaat maan, zo groot als een stevige luchtballon/voetbal.
iT seems they"re all dead
vindt de vervanger voor olie, elektrische perpetuum energy ctv grafeen kwikzilver wimshurst van der graaff, anti magnetisme, anti zwaartekracht, geleiding door dark matter of anti magnetisme van bliksem, groene waterstof, ac dc, gelijkstroom en wisselstroom tegen elkaar opzetten, tesla coil cool, het ãi laten berekenen, hoe een perpetual energy maxwell"s two demon engine moet worden samen gesteld,
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daemon_(computing)
en vrijheid, gelijkwaardigheid en solidariteit
is dichterbij dan ooit naast eerlijke verdeling tot 18 jaar oplopend tot 900 eur per maand
voor iedereen vanaf 18 jaar 1000 eur, maximaal 3000 eur netto per maand bij te verdienen (minimum 1000 netto per maand, maximum 4000 netto per maand) eerlijk, vrij, gelijkwaardig, solidair, ecologisch verantwoord, dat geldt ook voor huisvesting, gezondheidszorg, werk, energie, verdeeld door 1 artificial intelligence quantum Wereldbank onder andere, rome wasn"t built in a
en vrijheid, gelijkwaardigheid en solidariteit
is dichterbij dan ooit naast eerlijke verdeling tot 18 jaar oplopend tot 900 eur per maand
voor iedereen vanaf 18 jaar 1000 eur, maximaal 3000 eur netto per maand bij te verdienen (minimum 1000 netto per maand, maximum 4000 netto per maand) eerlijk, vrij, gelijkwaardig, solidair, ecologisch verantwoord, dat geldt ook voor huisvesting, gezondheidszorg, werk, energie, verdeeld door 1 artificial intelligence quantum Wereldbank onder andere, rome wasn"t built in a
ãrtificial intelligence, iTeT, godinternet:
Existential risk[edit]
Physicist Stephen Hawking, Microsoft founder Bill Gates, and SpaceX founder Elon Musk have expressed concerns about the possibility that AI could evolve to the point that humans could not control it, with Hawking theorizing that this could "spell the end of the human race".[352][353][354]
In his book Superintelligence, philosopher Nick Bostrom provides an argument that artificial intelligence will pose a threat to humankind. He argues that sufficiently intelligent AI, if it chooses actions based on achieving some goal, will exhibit convergent behavior such as acquiring resources or protecting itself from being shut down. If this AI's goals do not fully reflect humanity's—one example is an AI told to compute as many digits of pi as possible—it might harm humanity in order to acquire more resources or prevent itself from being shut down, ultimately to better achieve its goal. Bostrom also emphasizes the difficulty of fully conveying humanity's values to an advanced AI. He uses the hypothetical example of giving an AI the goal to make humans smile to illustrate a misguided attempt. If the AI in that scenario were to become superintelligent, Bostrom argues, it may resort to methods that most humans would find horrifying, such as inserting "electrodes into the facial muscles of humans to cause constant, beaming grins" because that would be an efficient way to achieve its goal of making humans smile.[356] In his book Human Compatible, AI researcher Stuart J. Russell echoes some of Bostrom's concerns while also proposing an approach to developing provably beneficial machines focused on uncertainty and deference to humans,[357]:173 possibly involving inverse reinforcement learning.[357]:191-193
Concern over risk from artificial intelligence has led to some high-profile donations and investments. A group of prominent tech titans including Peter Thiel, Amazon Web Services and Musk have committed $1 billion to OpenAI, a nonprofit company aimed at championing responsible AI development.[358] The opinion of experts within the field of artificial intelligence is mixed, with sizable fractions both concerned and unconcerned by risk from eventual superhumanly-capable AI.[359] Other technology industry leaders believe that artificial intelligence is helpful in its current form and will continue to assist humans. Oracle CEO Mark Hurd has stated that AI "will actually create more jobs, not less jobs" as humans will be needed to manage AI systems.[360] Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg believes AI will "unlock a huge amount of positive things," such as curing disease and increasing the safety of autonomous cars.[361] In January 2015, Musk donated $10 million to the Future of Life Institute to fund research on understanding AI decision making. The goal of the institute is to "grow wisdom with which we manage" the growing power of technology. Musk also funds companies developing artificial intelligence such as DeepMind and Vicarious to "just keep an eye on what's going on with artificial intelligence.[362] I think there is potentially a dangerous outcome there."[363][364]
For the danger of uncontrolled advanced AI to be realized, the hypothetical AI would have to overpower or out-think all of humanity, which a minority of experts argue is a possibility far enough in the future to not be worth researching.[365][366] Other counterarguments revolve around humans being either intrinsically or convergently valuable from the perspective of an artificial intelligence.[367]
Devaluation of humanity[edit]
Joseph Weizenbaum wrote that AI applications cannot, by definition, successfully simulate genuine human empathy and that the use of AI technology in fields such as customer service or psychotherapy[368] was deeply misguided. Weizenbaum was also bothered that AI researchers (and some philosophers) were willing to view the human mind as nothing more than a computer program (a position now known as computationalism). To Weizenbaum these points suggest that AI research devalues human life.[369]
Social justice[edit]
One concern is that AI programs may be programmed to be biased against certain groups, such as women and minorities, because most of the developers are wealthy Caucasian men.[370] Support for artificial intelligence is higher among men (with 47% approving) than women (35% approving).
Algorithms have a host of applications in today's legal system already, assisting officials ranging from judges to parole officers and public defenders in gauging the predicted likelihood of recidivism of defendants.[371] COMPAS (an acronym for Correctional Offender Management Profiling for Alternative Sanctions) counts among the most widely utilized commercially available solutions.[371] It has been suggested that COMPAS assigns an exceptionally elevated risk of recidivism to black defendants while, conversely, ascribing low risk estimate to white defendants significantly more often than statistically expected.[371]
Decrease in demand for human labor[edit]
The relationship between automation and employment is complicated. While automation eliminates old jobs, it also creates new jobs through micro-economic and macro-economic effects.[372] Unlike previous waves of automation, many middle-class jobs may be eliminated by artificial intelligence; The Economist states that "the worry that AI could do to white-collar jobs what steam power did to blue-collar ones during the Industrial Revolution" is "worth taking seriously".[373] Subjective estimates of the risk vary widely; for example, Michael Osborne and Carl Benedikt Frey estimate 47% of U.S. jobs are at "high risk" of potential automation, while an OECD report classifies only 9% of U.S. jobs as "high risk".[374][375][376] Jobs at extreme risk range from paralegals to fast food cooks, while job demand is likely to increase for care-related professions ranging from personal healthcare to the clergy.[377] Author Martin Ford and others go further and argue that many jobs are routine, repetitive and (to an AI) predictable; Ford warns that these jobs may be automated in the next couple of decades, and that many of the new jobs may not be "accessible to people with average capability", even with retraining. Economists point out that in the past technology has tended to increase rather than reduce total employment, but acknowledge that "we're in uncharted territory" with AI.[24]
Autonomous weapons[edit]
Currently, 50+ countries are researching battlefield robots, including the United States, China, Russia, and the United Kingdom. Many people concerned about risk from superintelligent AI also want to limit the use of artificial soldiers and drones.[378]
Ethical machines[edit]
Machines with intelligence have the potential to use their intelligence to prevent harm and minimize the risks; they may have the ability to use ethical reasoning to better choose their actions in the world. Research in this area includes machine ethics, artificial moral agents, friendly AI and discussion towards building a human rights framework is also in talks.[379]
Malevolent and friendly AI[edit]
Political scientist Charles T. Rubin believes that AI can be neither designed nor guaranteed to be benevolent.[386] He argues that "any sufficiently advanced benevolence may be indistinguishable from malevolence." Humans should not assume machines or robots would treat us favorably because there is no a priori reason to believe that they would be sympathetic to our system of morality, which has evolved along with our particular biology (which AIs would not share). Hyper-intelligent software may not necessarily decide to support the continued existence of humanity and would be extremely difficult to stop. This topic has also recently begun to be discussed in academic publications as a real source of risks to civilization, humans, and planet Earth.
One proposal to deal with this is to ensure that the first generally intelligent AI is 'Friendly AI' and will be able to control subsequently developed AIs. Some question whether this kind of check could actually remain in place.
Leading AI researcher Rodney Brooks writes, "I think it is a mistake to be worrying about us developing malevolent AI anytime in the next few hundred years. I think the worry stems from a fundamental error in not distinguishing the difference between the very real recent advances in a particular aspect of AI, and the enormity and complexity of building sentient volitional intelligence."[387]
Machine consciousness, sentience and mind[edit]
If an AI system replicates all key aspects of human intelligence, will that system also be sentient—will it have a mind which has conscious experiences? This question is closely related to the philosophical problem as to the nature of human consciousness, generally referred to as the hard problem of consciousness.
Consciousness[edit]
David Chalmers identified two problems in understanding the mind, which he named the "hard" and "easy" problems of consciousness.[388] The easy problem is understanding how the brain processes signals, makes plans and controls behavior. The hard problem is explaining how this feels or why it should feel like anything at all. Human information processing is easy to explain, however human subjective experience is difficult to explain.
For example, consider what happens when a person is shown a color swatch and identifies it, saying "it's red". The easy problem only requires understanding the machinery in the brain that makes it possible for a person to know that the color swatch is red. The hard problem is that people also know something else—they also know what red looks like. (Consider that a person born blind can know that something is red without knowing what red looks like.)[l] Everyone knows subjective experience exists, because they do it every day (e.g., all sighted people know what red looks like). The hard problem is explaining how the brain creates it, why it exists, and how it is different from knowledge and other aspects of the brain.
Computationalism and functionalism[edit]
Computationalism is the position in the philosophy of mind that the human mind or the human brain (or both) is an information processing system and that thinking is a form of computing.[389] Computationalism argues that the relationship between mind and body is similar or identical to the relationship between software and hardware and thus may be a solution to the mind-body problem. This philosophical position was inspired by the work of AI researchers and cognitive scientists in the 1960s and was originally proposed by philosophers Jerry Fodor and Hilary Putnam.
Robot rights[edit]
If a machine can be created that has intelligence, could it also feel? If it can feel, does it have the same rights as a human? This issue, now known as "robot rights", is currently being considered by, for example, California's Institute for the Future, although many critics believe that the discussion is premature.[392] Some critics of transhumanism argue that any hypothetical robot rights would lie on a spectrum with animal rights and human rights. [393] The subject is profoundly discussed in the 2010 documentary film Plug & Pray,[394] and many sci fi media such as Star Trek Next Generation, with the character of Commander Data, who fought being disassembled for research, and wanted to "become human", and the robotic holograms in Voyager.
Superintelligence[edit]
Are there limits to how intelligent machines—or human-machine hybrids—can be? A superintelligence, hyperintelligence, or superhuman intelligence is a hypothetical agent that would possess intelligence far surpassing that of the brightest and most gifted human mind. Superintelligence may also refer to the form or degree of intelligence possessed by such an agent.[144]
Technological singularity[edit]
If research into Strong AI produced sufficiently intelligent software, it might be able to reprogram and improve itself. The improved software would be even better at improving itself, leading to recursive self-improvement.[395] The new intelligence could thus increase exponentially and dramatically surpass humans. Science fiction writer Vernor Vinge named this scenario "singularity".[396] Technological singularity is when accelerating progress in technologies will cause a runaway effect wherein artificial intelligence will exceed human intellectual capacity and control, thus radically changing or even ending civilization. Because the capabilities of such an intelligence may be impossible to comprehend, the technological singularity is an occurrence beyond which events are unpredictable or even unfathomable.[396][144]
Ray Kurzweil has used Moore's law (which describes the relentless exponential improvement in digital technology) to calculate that desktop computers will have the same processing power as human brains by the year 2029, and predicts that the singularity will occur in 2045.[396]
Transhumanism[edit]
Robot designer Hans Moravec, cyberneticist Kevin Warwick and inventor Ray Kurzweil have predicted that humans and machines will merge in the future into cyborgs that are more capable and powerful than either.[397] This idea, called transhumanism, has roots in Aldous Huxley and Robert Ettinger.
Edward Fredkin argues that "artificial intelligence is the next stage in evolution", an idea first proposed by Samuel Butler's "Darwin among the Machines" as far back as 1863, and expanded upon by George Dyson in his book of the same name in 1998.[398]
Economics[edit]
The long-term economic effects of AI are uncertain. A survey of economists showed disagreement about whether the increasing use of robots and AI will cause a substantial increase in long-term unemployment, but they generally agree that it could be a net benefit, if productivity gains are redistributed.[399]
In fiction[edit]
Thought-capable artificial beings appeared as storytelling devices since antiquity,[26] and have been a persistent theme in science fiction.
A common trope in these works began with Mary Shelley's Frankenstein, where a human creation becomes a threat to its masters. This includes such works as Arthur C. Clarke's and Stanley Kubrick's 2001: A Space Odyssey (both 1968), with HAL 9000, the murderous computer in charge of the Discovery One spaceship, as well as The Terminator (1984) and The Matrix (1999). In contrast, the rare loyal robots such as Gort from The Day the Earth Stood Still (1951) and Bishop from Aliens (1986) are less prominent in popular culture.[400]
Isaac Asimov introduced the Three Laws of Robotics in many books and stories, most notably the "Multivac" series about a super-intelligent computer of the same name. Asimov's laws are often brought up during lay discussions of machine ethics;[401] while almost all artificial intelligence researchers are familiar with Asimov's laws through popular culture, they generally consider the laws useless for many reasons, one of which is their ambiguity.[402]
Transhumanism (the merging of humans and machines) is explored in the manga Ghost in the Shell and the science-fiction series Dune. In the 1980s, artist Hajime Sorayama's Sexy Robots series were painted and published in Japan depicting the actual organic human form with lifelike muscular metallic skins and later "the Gynoids" book followed that was used by or influenced movie makers including George Lucas and other creatives. Sorayama never considered these organic robots to be real part of nature but always unnatural product of the human mind, a fantasy existing in the mind even when realized in actual form.
Several works use AI to force us to confront the fundamental question of what makes us human, showing us artificial beings that have the ability to feel, and thus to suffer. This appears in Karel Čapek's R.U.R., the films A.I. Artificial Intelligence and Ex Machina, as well as the novel Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?, by Philip K. Dick. Dick considers the idea that our understanding of human subjectivity is altered by technology created with artificial intelligence.[403]
See also[edit]
- Abductive reasoning
- A.I. Rising
- Artificial intelligence arms race
- Behavior selection algorithm
- Business process automation
- Case-based reasoning
- Citizen Science
- Commonsense reasoning
- Emergent algorithm
- Evolutionary computation
- Glossary of artificial intelligence
- Machine learning
- Mathematical optimization
- Multi-agent system
- Personality computing
- Robotic process automation
- Soft computing
- Universal basic income
- Weak AI
maandag 30 maart 2020
Dat viel me op bij het vertalen van de uitspraken van het europese hof van justitie, luxemburg, er stonden standaard tekst blokken in, alsof de uitspraken machinaal door een robot geschreven waren in 1988, zonder essentiële inhoud, ijdele oubollige zinloze chique juridiese woorden, dat vond ik ook van de uitspraken van de raad van state, waar voorgeprogrammeerde tekst blokken klaar stonden om bezwaren weg te schrijven in zo'n ouderwetse onleesbare dubbele voor verschillende uitleg vatbare orakel van delphi taal en juist niet, een taal met voorbedachte rade ten gunste van de overheid en de "varkensgoddelijke koninklijke hiërarchie" en dat is DE ELLENDIGE LEUGEN DIE REGEERT meestal ten gunste van de "overheid" dus, het was dode machinale taal die de kapitalistische neo liberale ijdele egocentrische mammon gedachten bevestigden, TEGEN vrijheid, gelijkwaardigheid en solidariteit.
Dat zou in de goede geest van de wet bijvoorbeeld ook in uitspraken tot uitdrukking moeten komen, niet de slechte dode letter van mammon animal farm varkens,
....liever had ik iets van watt, volta en ampère begrepen dan van die dode juristen....werkend aan en met gestolde verstarde wetgeving gebaseerd op het verleden, het dode verleden, forget the past, let's get on with the future....
FORMEEL DENKEN
handboek suïcidaal gedrag bij vrouwen. Menno in de ogen van blacky, the cat,
in case you didn‘t
know.
