Big projects. - page 9
You are missing trading opportunities:
- Free trading apps
- Over 8,000 signals for copying
- Economic news for exploring financial markets
Registration
Log in
You agree to website policy and terms of use
If you do not have an account, please register
It's a strange thing. You supposedly know what I'm talking about... and based on that, you attribute your speculation to me. But it's your distorted view that has turned my words upside down.
All right, I'm going to take a really big project that I'm trying to implement at the moment.
The goal is to collect enough data from the world's markets to make accurate predictions over a long period of time. Imagine that there is such a data set, which really predicts the selected instrument. I will not be surprised if this data set is collected from different platforms and from different instruments for predicting the FOUNDDOLLAR spot.
Some signapura penny OI+african lira+new guinea cent+and antarctic pinning would give a good quality forecasting opportunity for the pound. As an example......
Sut project to collect as much data as possible from the floats, if anyone shares this direction and can help in the collection, I would be only too happy to!!!!!
All right, I'm going to take a really big project that I'm trying to implement at the moment.
The goal is to get enough data from the world's markets to make accurate predictions over a long enough time frame. Imagine that there is such a data set, which really predicts the selected instrument. I will not be surprised if this data set is collected from different platforms and from different instruments for predicting the FOUNDDOLLAR spot.
Some signapura penny OI+african lira+new guinea cent+and antarctic pinning would give a good quality forecasting opportunity for the pound. As an example......
Sut project to collect as much data as possible from the playgrounds, if anyone shares this direction and can help with the collection, I would be only too happy to!!!!!
we are going to code AI here for world peace, or the enslavement of neighbouring civilisations, what's that got to do with landed trades?))
Alan Turing's test is designed to test for consistency between machine intelligence and human intelligence.
To prevent cheating, it is Speech, because a computer can do tasks just as well as a human.
Are you serious? Problem solving is nothing, as long as he talks?
Do you think the judge should think that if one of the interviewees answers like an idiot, it's just a person with Down's syndrome and not a computer? )
Why the down syndrome? I told you, it can be bad with language. Have you ever tried to communicate with a foreigner who does not speak Russian or English? I have. From the outside, it does not look like a conversation between intelligent people). But this is an extreme of course, but more often just talking in a broken language, when the words are twisted, and the meaning is distorted.
But in this experiment, if the judge knows in advance that the participants speak English, it makes the task easier. And the test itself becomes less objective.
Let's divide the danger of AI into two categories: "complex system failure" and "acquired self-awareness".
I spoke above about the failure of a complex system. If the brakes fail and the machine starts crushing people, it does not mean that it has realised itself and is taking revenge on humanity. People will always find a way to deal with such machinery.
I was responding to the first point from your previous post. I.e. man deliberately created a killer robot and trained it. Failure was not mentioned there. Especially since failure is the least evil.
Why the down syndrome all of a sudden. I wrote that he might not know the language very well. Have you ever tried to explain yourself to a foreigner who speaks neither Russian nor English? I have. From the outside, it does not look like a conversation between intelligent people). But this is an extreme of course, but more often just talking in a broken language, when the words are twisted, and the meaning is distorted.
But in this experiment, if the judge knows in advance that the participants speak English, it makes it easier.
Once again about the essence of the test. The test evaluates the intelligence of a machine by comparing its answers and those of a human. The judge does not know who is who, and his task is to determine from the answers who is a machine and who is a human. If the experiment is being conducted by adequate scientists, they will not compare the intellect of a savage or a madman with the intellect of a computer. Why? Scientists will pit a normal person against a computer they have created. It is the judge's responsibility to understand and judge the adequacy of the answers. If he does not understand the language of one of the participants, then he himself is not suitable for the experiment. Alternatively, the person who understands the language of the questions needs to be replaced.
Once again: the task of the test is to determine the program's ability to imitate a human being. It is a test of a machine, not a person. If the judge accepts the machine's inadequate responses as showing the unique specificity of a human, then the judge himself is inadequate and unsuitable for this test.
I see your point. In your mind, a self-developing machine mind can acquire logic that no one else understands, and having an advanced intelligence will remain an unrecognised AI. However, our environment itself forces it to understand human logic and speak the same language as humans. After all, it will evolve on our planet, in our society and in constant interaction with us. If it is indeed AI, it will definitely pass the test.