For now it's science fiction. You seem to be missing the entire premise of my opinion on this, which is the technology we use presently will not be the technology we use in the future. Hence why it's impossible to use your current knowledge on the subject to accurately predict the future of it. That would be like a caveman who's using a spear trying to comprehend nuclear fission weapons. I'm not arguing someone in our lifetime will create true AI but it's a strong possibility in the distant future.

Maybe. Maybe not. Your argument is that same as saying, "Even though we don't have teleporters now, doesn't mean we won't someday". The problem is that there is all sorts of technology that is perfectly plausible in science fiction, but not it real life. Not every engineering problem can be solved just by throwing time, money, and brains at it. At some point, the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle is gonna cawk block you. Same with warp drives. Same with time travel. Etc.

Right now, true AI is a pipe dream. It may always be a pipe dream. We don't really know. Sure, we can design and build computers that are the best chess players in the world, or the best at playing Jeopardy, but these are tractable and definable problems that we can then write very specific and detailed code to implement. The computer doesn't know it's playing chess. It just knows how to analyze the board after each move and find the response that is most likely to yield the desired result of winning. Implementing true AI is a really high hurdle and we don't really know how to do that right now or even if we ever will.

Forget what you read in pop media or see out of Hollywood about AI. It's still science fiction at this point and may always be.

https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20...w-better.shtml

Are you brain dead? He owned a company that merged with another company that became PayPal and Zip2 which is similar to Google Maps

I honestly think that Musk is trying to make his companies more innovative, rather than profitable. If my tax dollars went to him, I don't think I'd care that much.

I want his firms to find better tech in the renewable energy sector - especially solar. The more r&d we put into solar, the closer we'll get to something like a Dyson Sphere on our own sun. Not saying it'll happen in our lifetime, but technology has shown to grow at an exponential rate, so something similar could very-well happen in our lifetime.

Your statements in the most general sense are not incorrect, but they don't apply to this specific person and company. Yes a gun can be used to kill and it can be used to protect, etc.

We can have philosophical discussion about technology, how it has positive and negative side, but the point is that this particular individual is doing is not revolutionary in terms of technology. In addition, his PR campaign is based on promoting existing technology and pretending that it will make a big difference on energy consumption. These are plain lies and I don't like my fellow miscers being misled by a bunch of BS.

Let's call BS where we see it and speak about actual solutions. That's the way to forward, not buying this guy's modern snakeoil.I wish I had the answer to that. Renewable are a part of the answer, so is distributed power generation instead of the centralized model.

The "right" answer would be to say we should all consume less energy. Part of that is our habits which are formed by our culture. That's what I mean by pushing this technology agenda is not very healthy.

Most people don't give a fuk about how much power they consume, cause this is murkiah, we went to the moon and all that chit. People really aren't worried because they truly believe we're not fuked. This is not even really about climate change, this is about fossil fuel dependency, how much money we spend on it and then just flush it down the drain.

I do my best to design the various electrical systems for a building or plant in a way to reduce energy consumption without affecting the user. A lot of it is a matter of perception.

There is so much enthusiasm and positivity in this thread, I just wish it was directed towards other approaches than thinking musk is here to save humanity.

That's not AI, that's just bad code.

I'm all in favor of testing/debugging critical code until it's safe.

That's different that what Musk is worried about. He's afraid that someday we'll write code that turns "sentient" and which in turn see us as a threat to be eliminated and then proceeds to implement such a plan in ways we could not have envisioned when we programmed it. That's very much science fiction.

Of course, there is nothing to stop Dr. Evil from creating an army of fembots determined to kill all humans right now. That's a pretty simple task and easily coded. that's malicious software/hardware. Still not AI though.

AI would be something like the specialized software controlling the electric turbines at the Hoover Dam to suddenly have an epiphany that mankind was a threat to White Rhinos in Africa, and therefore must be eliminated to preserve the White Rhino from extinction, so it creates a virus that it can spread to every system it interfaces with, which will in turn infect all of the systems they interface with etc., until such a point that a myriad of critical systems around the world controlling water and electricity and transportation systems and anything else needed to kill humans were under its control and were sufficiently able to cause widespread death among humans, while not adversely affecting White Rhinos, at which time the software at the Hoover Dam would trigger the pre-emptive "attack" on humans. This would truly be intelligent software, capable of acting well beyond the scope of its purpose, in ways we could not have imagined for purposes well beyond anything we could have built fail safes for. I think that would be a sufficient level of intelligence to worry about. That's what Musk is worried about. He thinks it's just around the corner. I'm not sure anyone in the field agrees with him, nor could even conceive of how such a thing could occur. At the end of the day, as long as its a machine, I think this this worry is misplaced. Maybe when we get around to integrating machines and humans into cyborgs, it'll be a whole different story... maybe that's the real threat he sees. The creative part of our minds being subservient to the logical and unemotional calculations of billions of logic gates.

he has no idea about juristictions and the cost, google thought they knew it before google fiber blew up in their face lol.

and he ended up marrying her...

https://youtu.be/B2wRvhbJIQQ?t=1m6s

Spoiler: They're now divorced.

With regards to AI, its almost like you guys don't realize neural networks exist... or that real "AI" is a paradigm shift away from traditional algorithmic intelligence. It is true that currently, what we refer to as AI is basically just specialized algorithms, some possibly capable of dynamic reorganization, which solve specific problems. But at some point, we will cross a critical threshold and either create high QUALITY artificial intelligence that is basically extremely clever and nimble and BETTER at solving problems than we are in a universal sense, or we will create SPEED artificial intelligence in which the AI can process so much information and try so many permutations of solutions as to come up with better answers in the same amount of time. For example if you completely and utterly mapped the human brain, neuron for neuron, and then coded up a perfect physics engine that accounted for all biochemistry, you could essentially emulate a human brain, provided you had enough processing power. Then lets say you get that up and running and it turns out because its based on a human brain, its values are similar to human values, so no worries right? Well what if we ask this emulation to figure out a more efficient way to emulate AI, to solve the problem of creating AI in a more elegant manner than a whole brain emulation. We provide the emulated brain with more CPU power and more energy and it cranks out a new solution, this time its not a direct emulation though, this is something new, something better than we came up with originally. How do you know this second generation AI has the same values we do? This process will inevitably iterate. The AI musk is warning off is not a 10ghz 12 core computer running a sick algorithm that is capable of predicting how often a sloot is going to sloot and why its always going to be with chad. The AI that is a threat to humanity is the one we ask our smartest computer to design, the one that is capable of solving general learning problems. It will be vastly better at strategy, vastly more intelligent and cunning, and we will have no way of forcing it to tell us why it is doing what it is doing. If we don't have it utterly sandboxed from the outside world, it could really wreak havoc.

the hyperloop is interesting. suck most of the air out of the tube to reduce friction and have the trainpods hover over the track thus reducing friction. I tried reading up about the magnet stuff that will propel it forward but thats where things got a little complicated for me lol.

Do you believe that there's a supernatural force inside human beings that's impossible for science to replicate, like as a soul? If you don't believe that then aren't we just a complicated biocomputer that can eventually be reverse engineered and replicated?

amber heard, will make him mlon eusk

Trying to increase acceptance and enthusiasm for lab-grown meat might be among the most useful paths forward, too. Once the cost comes down, of course.

Musk is god

You are pretty out of depth with the content you are trying to think and talk critically on.

He's a snake oil hype man who got lucky with PayPal.

Dude is a snake oil hype man. He leaches money off investors on his hype projects.

It isn't going to last. Oil is cheap and we have plenty of it. Electric cars are a holdover fad for the time being.

It'll be 500 years from now before anyone starts seriously considering alternatives. We might not even be here anymore.

His talent is in making a ton of money himself over vapor and basically leaching tax / investor money.

He's not a tech guru

Yep, Toyota has already scaled back Prius sales for the time being as well. It's a dying industry.

its government subsidized company. if it had to stand on its own it would fail. youre an idiot, go back to playing video games.

he's a charlatan who talks too much. don't get hyped over seeing other planets. will take several centuries just to develop the tech.

You're going to have to back up that assertion. Do you dispute my definition of the sort of AI that Musk is worried about?https://techcrunch.com/2017/07/19/th...nderstands-ai/

eh I wouldn't want to board a rocketship designed by a bunch of FA virgins who work for him

oh look business, intellectual and technological geniuses all over this forum!

This is what I mean by saying education has to come first. Good luck convincing the average person to buy a ribeye grown in the lab. These are the same people who can only drink coke or pepsi cause they are partial to the taste. I mean chit lol I prefer coke personally, but if you told me pepsi consumes 10 times less energy I can be convinced to switch camps.

Perception matters. People need to understand that consuming less energy does not take choices away from them. In fact if they were more conscious about how, when and how much they used energy, they would make MORE choices and feel more in control.

I'll give you a very simple electrical example. Take the lighting system for a very basic office space. The traditional approach is to place a chitton of lights in the ceiling without much control. In a recent project for UCLA, we took the approach of reducing the ceiling mounted lights to a great extent, using daylight sensors that dim the lights by small margins (1% at a time) to reduce the lighting level when there is sunlight and gave each person an individual TASK light which they control through a dimmer individually. Simple right? But the effect is considerable. Our lighting energy profile was 30% less than the allowed wattage by the state of CA and keep in mind they already have extremely stringent requirements for energy.

The result: lower power consumption, sunlight reducing the lighting power consumption without actually changing the lighting level and giving individual control to each person. Haven't had one complaint from the users of that space which is saying a LOT cause office people are notorious for bitching and moaning.

I can give you other examples, but these kind of energy saving ideas are applied across the board to ALL building systems that consume electricity... specially when you have our team on the project to push the envelope because that's how we do bro. These energy savings are drastic compared to the overall energy savings EVs provide. I'm not talking out of my arse here, this is what has actually been done successfully, with recorded data to back up the results.

Machines can't contemplate their own existence, so no, I don't think we are simply bio-electric machines.

i am an earthling through and through. i'm not going to live on some other planet light years away. wtf? so the space plane can fail and we're goners?

or worst yet, arrive on new planet to find creatures bigger than dinosaurs. naaaaahhhh cuz. i'm comfortable on earth.

Because it is more important to grow than it is to make a profit. Investors know that, but apparently the misc does not.

http://www.cnbc.com/2017/04/10/tesla...automaker.html

and if you think this is stupid, understand that our entire economy is propped up by people assuming companies will grow and gain more value. Look no further than the exploding stock market to see that it is not based on profit or reality.

Lol @ being cucked into believing something that comes out of the earth is bad for the earthDoesn't care about money
Worth billions

Pick 1 potato