Excellent talk post!

The theory of Quantum Consciousness is facinating.

I think that the theories of Gustav Bernroider as well as Roger Penrose and Stuart Hameroff are probably close the the true nature of consciousness.

Unless we are all just simulations being run on a future supercomputer.

As to the question, "Is death the end of everything?" I say no--only because of a highly subjective, personal experience which will never convince anyone else--I believe (that's small "b" believe) that there is an unseen connection (didn't there used to be a spellcheck in here?) between all life--possibly the whole universe--through which we continue in some fashion.

It may surprise some that I am not an atheist since I so joyfully attack dogmaitc theists. I'm a walking contracidtion.

Definitely and *quailty discussion.

>> ^djsunkid:

According to the wiki entry on the cray has roughly half the processing power of an Xbox.


"On May 24, 2011, Cray announced the Cray XK6 hybrid supercomputer. The Cray XK6 system, capable of scaling to 500,000 processors and 50 petaflops of peak performance, combines Cray's Gemini interconnect, AMD's multi-core scalar processors, and NVIDIA's many-core GPU processors."

A Cray ain't no xBox anymore...

>> ^Chaucer:

This was only the first round score. It went on:
http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2011/01/13/ibm-watson-takes-jeopardy
-champs/
"Though Watson ended the exhibition in the lead with $4,400 compared to Jenning’s $3,400 and Rutter’s $1,200, a continuation of that battle shown on internal televisions during lunch revealed that Jenning had pulled ahead after scoring a Daily Double. Watson still isn’t perfect, it seems."
>> ^entr0py:
>> ^Chaucer:
Actually, this story has been going around that the computer won. Which is WRONG! If you get the rest of the story, you'll know that the computer ends up getting stomped by Jennings by the end of the segment.

You're probably thinking of a different test. Watson did win the game shown in the video. Though they only played single Jeopardy. http://www.engadget.com/2011/01/13/ibms-wat
son-supercomputer-destroys-all-humans-in-jeopardy-pract/
Final Score
Watson : $4,400
Ken : $3,400
Brad : $1,200.



I hope they do more of these with v2, v3, v4, Skynet, etc.

This was only the first round score. It went on:
http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2011/01/13/ibm-watson-takes-jeopardy-champs/

"Though Watson ended the exhibition in the lead with $4,400 compared to Jenning’s $3,400 and Rutter’s $1,200, a continuation of that battle shown on internal televisions during lunch revealed that Jenning had pulled ahead after scoring a Daily Double. Watson still isn’t perfect, it seems."

>> ^entr0py:

>> ^Chaucer:
Actually, this story has been going around that the computer won. Which is WRONG! If you get the rest of the story, you'll know that the computer ends up getting stomped by Jennings by the end of the segment.

You're probably thinking of a different test. Watson did win the game shown in the video. Though they only played single Jeopardy. http://www.engadget.com/2011/01/13/ibms-wat
son-supercomputer-destroys-all-humans-in-jeopardy-pract/
Final Score
Watson : $4,400
Ken : $3,400
Brad : $1,200.

>> ^Chaucer:

Actually, this story has been going around that the computer won. Which is WRONG! If you get the rest of the story, you'll know that the computer ends up getting stomped by Jennings by the end of the segment.


You're probably thinking of a different test. Watson did win the game shown in the video. Though they only played single Jeopardy. http://www.engadget.com/2011/01/13/ibms-watson-supercomputer-destroys-all-humans-in-jeopardy-pract/

Final Score
Watson : $4,400
Ken : $3,400
Brad : $1,200.

>> ^Chaucer:

Actually, this story has been going around that the computer won. Which is WRONG! If you get the rest of the story, you'll know that the computer ends up getting stomped by Jennings by the end of the segment.


URL for the story?

>> ^Payback:

>> ^ant:
>> ^quantumushroom:
I for one welcome our new...ah fuck it.

There's a group called "ah fuck it"?

You have another explanation for the popularity of Sarah Palin?


Yeah, because she's hot? j/k!

>> ^ant:

>> ^quantumushroom:
I for one welcome our new...ah fuck it.

There's a group called "ah fuck it"?


You have another explanation for the popularity of Sarah Palin?

>> ^entr0py:

>> ^bmacs27:

>> ^ant:

>> ^Zyrxil:

You can only buzz in after the answer is read.


Didn't they used to in the past? What happens if you did it early?


I think there might be a delay before you can buzz again. So it is disadvantageous to buzz early.


That's true, but the delay is only 1/4th of a second. So those contestants you see just furiously spamming the buzzer aren't stupid, it's still a valid strategy. At least you're almost guaranteed to get a buzz in within the first quarter second.

I think this is why the squishy humans have any chance to answer. It's got to be difficult for an AI to precisely judge when a question is over. I wouldn't be surprised if Watson uses the buzzer spam method.


I like to spam.

>> ^bmacs27:

>> ^ant:
>> ^Zyrxil:
You can only buzz in after the answer is read.

Didn't they used to in the past? What happens if you did it early?

I think there might be a delay before you can buzz again. So it is disadvantageous to buzz early.


That's true, but the delay is only 1/4th of a second. So those contestants you see just furiously spamming the buzzer aren't stupid, it's still a valid strategy. At least you're almost guaranteed to get a buzz in within the first quarter second.

I think this is why the squishy humans have any chance to answer. It's got to be difficult for an AI to precisely judge when a question is over. I wouldn't be surprised if Watson uses the buzzer spam method.

Oh, it seems Watson now has an actual buzzer that he has to hit with his robo digit. I'd say giving that thing a finger is a fatal step in the wrong direction.

>> ^spawnflagger:

From the latter half of the video it seems Watson will only buzz in if the probability of a correct answer is very high (green). If they set the cut-off lower, say 60%, it would have buzzed in much more often.

By the title of the video, I assumed that "destroy" meant the humans would have 0 points... It would have been much more intimidating if they had a "Cyberdyne Systems Model 101" standing between the 2 humans instead of a screensaver.


KILL KILL KILL!

>> ^quantumushroom:

I for one welcome our new...ah fuck it.


There's a group called "ah fuck it"?

>> ^quantumushroom:

I for one welcome our new...ah fuck it.


...trivia-spewing, voice-recognizing, prove-Ken-Jennings-just-has-good-recall, computer overlords?

Your video, IBM's Watson supercomputer destroys all humans in Jeopardy, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

>> ^ant:

>> ^Zyrxil:
You can only buzz in after the answer is read.

Didn't they used to in the past? What happens if you did it early?


I think there might be a delay before you can buzz again. So it is disadvantageous to buzz early.