The tech lay-offs are miniscule compared to H1-B visas

[gandikotam]

The US media is making a huge hullabaloo about the tech lay-offs. Most of the axed are making millions as salaries. According to one estimate 190k jobs were lost since last year in the tech sector. This is less than 3 years of H1B work visas issued. When you can replace a million dollar dream-worker with a scantly paid foreign worker, why not try that route?

Then there is the hoopla about AI that has been around since the days of Alan Turing. What they mean by AI is the indexing and retrieval of text documents which is hard-core computer science. Voice recognition is tangentially AI. But the buzz-word AI turns heads and fetches funding.

It is interesting to note that two of the tech giants are managed by Indian-Americans. Their standard refrain is "We take the responsibility" like good generals. What it translates to is anybody's guess. Besides it shows that Indians, even if they are products of IIT's and IIM's, are not inherently superior to their American counterparts. The difference is a MIT graduate strives to build better technology by working in the trenches and the IIT/IIM graduate thinks he can manage him better than anyone else.

[Madhu]

Post by gandikotam
The US media is making a huge hullabaloo about the tech lay-offs. Most
of the axed are making millions as salaries. According to one estimate
190k jobs were lost since last year in the tech sector. This is less
than 3 years of H1B work visas issued. When you can replace a million
dollar dream-worker with a scantly paid foreign worker, why not try
that route?

Arbitration on H1-B wage labour HR is the spiritual successor of the
lucrative slave trade operation, and the same supevisory spirits are in
operation. The jobs themselves are irrelevant as the game is
essentially derivatives

Post by gandikotam
Then there is the hoopla about AI that has been around since the days
of Alan Turing. What they mean by AI is the indexing and retrieval of
text documents which is hard-core computer science.

It is more sinister than that. It presents a way to implement a model
of behaviour (though the story is "its about learning models") and
enforce the model on the population, (through a story of self-validation
outliers can be killed off).

Post by gandikotam
Voice recognition is tangentially AI. But the buzz-word AI turns heads
and fetches funding.

Endtimes money printed out of the wazoo, and traded on the futures of
the souls which are contractually delivered to satan into the lake of
fire

Post by gandikotam
It is interesting to note that two of the tech giants are managed by
Indian-Americans. Their standard refrain is "We take the
responsibility" like good generals. What it translates to is anybody's
guess.

When I was starting a career I used to lament that indians could never
make it to the top, and I am now made a liar. However it is appropriate
that these public facing ceo- idols are raised up because it is the
people of their nations who are the product (delivered to satan to end
up in the lake of fire)

Post by gandikotam
Besides it shows that Indians, even if they are products of IIT's and
IIM's, are not inherently superior to their American counterparts. The
difference is a MIT graduate strives to build better technology by
working in the trenches and the IIT/IIM graduate thinks he can manage
him better than anyone else.

The caste of indians of born managers, they have power over the karma of
the souls they manage who are constained to be subservient, the end is
of course to deliver the souls to satan to be end up with him in the
lake of fire)

[gandikotam]

Post by Madhu

Post by gandikotam
The US media is making a huge hullabaloo about the tech lay-offs. Most
of the axed are making millions as salaries. According to one estimate
190k jobs were lost since last year in the tech sector. This is less
than 3 years of H1B work visas issued. When you can replace a million
dollar dream-worker with a scantly paid foreign worker, why not try
that route?

Arbitration on H1-B wage labour HR is the spiritual successor of the
lucrative slave trade operation, and the same supevisory spirits are in
operation. The jobs themselves are irrelevant as the game is
essentially derivatives

I interpret "derivatives" as:
Friedman in his book on "Flat Earth" praised the H1B system claiming
for every visa worker, 5 or 6 jobs would be created for the benefit of
non-visa workers who do the menial jobs like cleaning houses, dry cleaning,
chauffering, etc.

Post by Madhu

Post by gandikotam
Then there is the hoopla about AI that has been around since the days
of Alan Turing. What they mean by AI is the indexing and retrieval of
text documents which is hard-core computer science.

It is more sinister than that. It presents a way to implement a model
of behaviour (though the story is "its about learning models") and
enforce the model on the population, (through a story of self-validation
outliers can be killed off).

I think what you say is not true about face recognition which has been
controversial for its false positives. There is no behavioral aspect to it.
The neural nets employed are as good as the examples they are trained with.
They call it AI even though the neural nets don't build any models.

Post by Madhu

Post by gandikotam
Voice recognition is tangentially AI. But the buzz-word AI turns heads
and fetches funding.

Endtimes money printed out of the wazoo, and traded on the futures of
the souls which are contractually delivered to satan into the lake of
fire

Post by gandikotam
It is interesting to note that two of the tech giants are managed by
Indian-Americans. Their standard refrain is "We take the
responsibility" like good generals. What it translates to is anybody's
guess.

When I was starting a career I used to lament that indians could never
make it to the top, and I am now made a liar. However it is appropriate
that these public facing ceo- idols are raised up because it is the
people of their nations who are the product (delivered to satan to end
up in the lake of fire)

Yes last century there used to fewer Indians in the managerial positions.
Now they are in left, right and center. Even senators and congresspersons.
Not many Americans want to manage the economy that is saddled with $31T
deficit. Only fools go where the wise fear to step in.

Post by Madhu

Post by gandikotam
Besides it shows that Indians, even if they are products of IIT's and
IIM's, are not inherently superior to their American counterparts. The
difference is a MIT graduate strives to build better technology by
working in the trenches and the IIT/IIM graduate thinks he can manage
him better than anyone else.

The caste of indians of born managers, they have power over the karma of
the souls they manage who are constained to be subservient, the end is
of course to deliver the souls to satan to be end up with him in the
lake of fire)

They are the same players as in India. Patels, Reddy's, Kamma's, etc.

[Madhu]

I interpret "derivatives" as: Friedman in his book on "Flat Earth"
praised the H1B system claiming for every visa worker, 5 or 6 jobs
would be created for the benefit of non-visa workers who do the menial
jobs like cleaning houses, dry cleaning, chauffering, etc.

OK (though I was looking the 5 or 6 jobs that are created on the other
side of the H1B, --the worker as the "asset" derivatives in the usual
sense of derivatives market on the asset)

I think what you say is not true about face recognition which has been
controversial for its false positives. There is no behavioral aspect
to it. The neural nets employed are as good as the examples they are
trained with. They call it AI even though the neural nets don't build
any models.

(I never took a course on NN, and I havent touched any machine learning
text since 2006 -- so I don't claim to be correct. but i understood the
point with the blackbox behavoour was though there is no explicit model,
the NN itself is taken as the "model". my own (meta) point was when a
system is implemented and human behaviour is regulated by the black-box
input-outputs the model is imposed "on" the real world rather than the
other way round as is perceived.

[gandikotam]

Post by Madhu

I interpret "derivatives" as: Friedman in his book on "Flat Earth"
praised the H1B system claiming for every visa worker, 5 or 6 jobs
would be created for the benefit of non-visa workers who do the menial
jobs like cleaning houses, dry cleaning, chauffering, etc.

OK (though I was looking the 5 or 6 jobs that are created on the other
side of the H1B, --the worker as the "asset" derivatives in the usual
sense of derivatives market on the asset)

I think what you say is not true about face recognition which has been
controversial for its false positives. There is no behavioral aspect
to it. The neural nets employed are as good as the examples they are
trained with. They call it AI even though the neural nets don't build
any models.

(I never took a course on NN, and I havent touched any machine learning
text since 2006 -- so I don't claim to be correct. but i understood the
point with the blackbox behavoour was though there is no explicit model,
the NN itself is taken as the "model". my own (meta) point was when a
system is implemented and human behaviour is regulated by the black-box
input-outputs the model is imposed "on" the real world rather than the
other way round as is perceived.

When I was in school, they used to teach model-based reasoning. They used
to build deep models. I think it was Lenat who got major funding from US
govt. to build an AI that has common sense among other things. I heard
it was abandoned at some point. The problem with models is most people
can't articulate them well enough. So expert systems as they are called
couldn't capture the expertise of people with know-how adequately. Then
came case-based reasoning that seems to have fit the bill. I am sure it
has some pitfalls. NN's seem to have broken the brain blood barrier so to say.
NN's to me is brute force. As you said, if some people expect others
to modify their behavior to please the AI, then it is something of concern.
One could say while taking a driver's license picture no make up which
won't sit well with some. Similarly credit-rating services using AI can
be tweaked to overlook false negatives to make the sale. Ultimately
the shop keepers decide how much credit a person deserves, not AI.

Regards

[Arindam Banerjee]

Post by gandikotam

Post by Madhu

I interpret "derivatives" as: Friedman in his book on "Flat Earth"
praised the H1B system claiming for every visa worker, 5 or 6 jobs
would be created for the benefit of non-visa workers who do the menial
jobs like cleaning houses, dry cleaning, chauffering, etc.

OK (though I was looking the 5 or 6 jobs that are created on the other
side of the H1B, --the worker as the "asset" derivatives in the usual
sense of derivatives market on the asset)

I think what you say is not true about face recognition which has been
controversial for its false positives. There is no behavioral aspect
to it. The neural nets employed are as good as the examples they are
trained with. They call it AI even though the neural nets don't build
any models.

(I never took a course on NN, and I havent touched any machine learning
text since 2006 -- so I don't claim to be correct. but i understood the
point with the blackbox behavoour was though there is no explicit model,
the NN itself is taken as the "model". my own (meta) point was when a
system is implemented and human behaviour is regulated by the black-box
input-outputs the model is imposed "on" the real world rather than the
other way round as is perceived.

When I was in school, they used to teach model-based reasoning. They used
to build deep models. I think it was Lenat who got major funding from US
govt. to build an AI that has common sense among other things. I heard
it was abandoned at some point. The problem with models is most people
can't articulate them well enough. So expert systems as they are called
couldn't capture the expertise of people with know-how adequately. Then
came case-based reasoning that seems to have fit the bill. I am sure it
has some pitfalls. NN's seem to have broken the brain blood barrier so to say.
NN's to me is brute force. As you said, if some people expect others
to modify their behavior to please the AI, then it is something of concern.
One could say while taking a driver's license picture no make up which
won't sit well with some. Similarly credit-rating services using AI can
be tweaked to overlook false negatives to make the sale. Ultimately
the shop keepers decide how much credit a person deserves, not AI.

How much AI it takes for that, is the q.

Post by gandikotam
Regards

[gandikotam]

Post by Arindam Banerjee

Post by gandikotam

Post by Madhu

I interpret "derivatives" as: Friedman in his book on "Flat Earth"
praised the H1B system claiming for every visa worker, 5 or 6 jobs
would be created for the benefit of non-visa workers who do the menial
jobs like cleaning houses, dry cleaning, chauffering, etc.

OK (though I was looking the 5 or 6 jobs that are created on the other
side of the H1B, --the worker as the "asset" derivatives in the usual
sense of derivatives market on the asset)

I think what you say is not true about face recognition which has been
controversial for its false positives. There is no behavioral aspect
to it. The neural nets employed are as good as the examples they are
trained with. They call it AI even though the neural nets don't build
any models.

(I never took a course on NN, and I havent touched any machine learning
text since 2006 -- so I don't claim to be correct. but i understood the
point with the blackbox behavoour was though there is no explicit model,
the NN itself is taken as the "model". my own (meta) point was when a
system is implemented and human behaviour is regulated by the black-box
input-outputs the model is imposed "on" the real world rather than the
other way round as is perceived.

When I was in school, they used to teach model-based reasoning. They used
to build deep models. I think it was Lenat who got major funding from US
govt. to build an AI that has common sense among other things. I heard
it was abandoned at some point. The problem with models is most people
can't articulate them well enough. So expert systems as they are called
couldn't capture the expertise of people with know-how adequately. Then
came case-based reasoning that seems to have fit the bill. I am sure it
has some pitfalls. NN's seem to have broken the brain blood barrier so to say.
NN's to me is brute force. As you said, if some people expect others
to modify their behavior to please the AI, then it is something of concern.
One could say while taking a driver's license picture no make up which
won't sit well with some. Similarly credit-rating services using AI can
be tweaked to overlook false negatives to make the sale. Ultimately
the shop keepers decide how much credit a person deserves, not AI.

How much AI it takes for that, is the q.

You must be humoring us. AI has always been there since the days of
Marvin Minsky who wrote a book on Perceptrons -- sort of neurons in
the neural nets. But he took a detour and worked on expert systems,
I believe, that use if-then-else rules. Capturing the right amount of
detail is a challenge. Beside, Raj Reddy worked on hearsay, a kind of voice
recognition. I read Kurzwell books on mathematical modeling for
voice recognition that was very successful. I think any AI, other than
NN's, is bound to be slower than a real time conversation as the knowledge
base to search becomes too unwieldy after some time.

I think there are moral issues about AI. When AI driven car
does some accident, whom to blame, etc.? There are also
legal opinions that are case-based. Technically no-need for jury trials.
These days home work assignments of students are being done
with AI. chatGPT has captured the imagination of many a big tech
company like Microsoft and Google. Creating canned essays
on school topics seem to be the rage. If cell phones have taken
away our attention span, AI will rob us off common sense.

Regards

Regards

Post by Arindam Banerjee

Post by gandikotam
Regards

[Arindam Banerjee]

Post by gandikotam

Post by Arindam Banerjee

Post by gandikotam

Post by Madhu

I interpret "derivatives" as: Friedman in his book on "Flat Earth"
praised the H1B system claiming for every visa worker, 5 or 6 jobs
would be created for the benefit of non-visa workers who do the menial
jobs like cleaning houses, dry cleaning, chauffering, etc.

OK (though I was looking the 5 or 6 jobs that are created on the other
side of the H1B, --the worker as the "asset" derivatives in the usual
sense of derivatives market on the asset)

I think what you say is not true about face recognition which has been
controversial for its false positives. There is no behavioral aspect
to it. The neural nets employed are as good as the examples they are
trained with. They call it AI even though the neural nets don't build
any models.

(I never took a course on NN, and I havent touched any machine learning
text since 2006 -- so I don't claim to be correct. but i understood the
point with the blackbox behavoour was though there is no explicit model,
the NN itself is taken as the "model". my own (meta) point was when a
system is implemented and human behaviour is regulated by the black-box
input-outputs the model is imposed "on" the real world rather than the
other way round as is perceived.

When I was in school, they used to teach model-based reasoning. They used
to build deep models. I think it was Lenat who got major funding from US
govt. to build an AI that has common sense among other things. I heard
it was abandoned at some point. The problem with models is most people
can't articulate them well enough. So expert systems as they are called
couldn't capture the expertise of people with know-how adequately. Then
came case-based reasoning that seems to have fit the bill. I am sure it
has some pitfalls. NN's seem to have broken the brain blood barrier so to say.
NN's to me is brute force. As you said, if some people expect others
to modify their behavior to please the AI, then it is something of concern.
One could say while taking a driver's license picture no make up which
won't sit well with some. Similarly credit-rating services using AI can
be tweaked to overlook false negatives to make the sale. Ultimately
the shop keepers decide how much credit a person deserves, not AI.

How much AI it takes for that, is the q.

You must be humoring us. AI has always been there since the days of
Marvin Minsky who wrote a book on Perceptrons -- sort of neurons in
the neural nets. But he took a detour and worked on expert systems,
I believe, that use if-then-else rules.

What else is AI?
I knew AI would take off back in 2007, when I did the architecture and some routines for ultrafast message passing between unlimited number of robots, thus creating the netvous system of an android, say.
As always the case, with me, that work was appropriated by my paymasters with minimal benefit to myself.
I would like some IT company to take interest in this work, let us really go and make a superhuman yet a child.


Capturing the right amount of

Post by gandikotam
detail is a challenge. Beside, Raj Reddy worked on hearsay, a kind of voice
recognition. I read Kurzwell books on mathematical modeling for
voice recognition that was very successful. I think any AI, other than
NN's, is bound to be slower than a real time conversation as the knowledge
base to search becomes too unwieldy after some time.

Well, here is where my work could be useful.
Drones became super efficient after 2010, as I knew they would be.

Post by gandikotam
I think there are moral issues about AI. When AI driven car
does some accident, whom to blame, etc.?

The insurance companies will sort that out.

Post by gandikotam
There are also
legal opinions that are case-based. Technically no-need for jury trials.

Or doctors for that matter.

Post by gandikotam
These days home work assignments of students are being done
with AI. chatGPT has captured the imagination of many a big tech
company like Microsoft and Google. Creating canned essays
on school topics seem to be the rage. If cell phones have taken
away our attention span, AI will rob us off common sense.

At that rate,yes. People will only have the wits left to adore media celebs and look presentable.
But for me, AI is to be used in difficult areas, like under sea or outer space.
Deep conspiracies against my new ideas prevent that - anything to keep me down.
People are very satisfied with what they have, no change required thank you.
Definitely no-no to any hint of upsetting the boat.

Post by gandikotam
Regards
Regards

Post by Arindam Banerjee

Post by gandikotam
Regards

[gandikotam]

Post by Arindam Banerjee

Post by gandikotam

Post by Arindam Banerjee

Post by gandikotam

Post by Madhu

I interpret "derivatives" as: Friedman in his book on "Flat Earth"
praised the H1B system claiming for every visa worker, 5 or 6 jobs
would be created for the benefit of non-visa workers who do the menial
jobs like cleaning houses, dry cleaning, chauffering, etc.

OK (though I was looking the 5 or 6 jobs that are created on the other
side of the H1B, --the worker as the "asset" derivatives in the usual
sense of derivatives market on the asset)

I think what you say is not true about face recognition which has been
controversial for its false positives. There is no behavioral aspect
to it. The neural nets employed are as good as the examples they are
trained with. They call it AI even though the neural nets don't build
any models.

(I never took a course on NN, and I havent touched any machine learning
text since 2006 -- so I don't claim to be correct. but i understood the
point with the blackbox behavoour was though there is no explicit model,
the NN itself is taken as the "model". my own (meta) point was when a
system is implemented and human behaviour is regulated by the black-box
input-outputs the model is imposed "on" the real world rather than the
other way round as is perceived.

When I was in school, they used to teach model-based reasoning. They used
to build deep models. I think it was Lenat who got major funding from US
govt. to build an AI that has common sense among other things. I heard
it was abandoned at some point. The problem with models is most people
can't articulate them well enough. So expert systems as they are called
couldn't capture the expertise of people with know-how adequately. Then
came case-based reasoning that seems to have fit the bill. I am sure it
has some pitfalls. NN's seem to have broken the brain blood barrier so to say.
NN's to me is brute force. As you said, if some people expect others
to modify their behavior to please the AI, then it is something of concern.
One could say while taking a driver's license picture no make up which
won't sit well with some. Similarly credit-rating services using AI can
be tweaked to overlook false negatives to make the sale. Ultimately
the shop keepers decide how much credit a person deserves, not AI.

How much AI it takes for that, is the q.

You must be humoring us. AI has always been there since the days of
Marvin Minsky who wrote a book on Perceptrons -- sort of neurons in
the neural nets. But he took a detour and worked on expert systems,
I believe, that use if-then-else rules.

What else is AI?
I knew AI would take off back in 2007, when I did the architecture and some routines for ultrafast message passing between unlimited number of robots, thus creating the netvous system of an android, say.
As always the case, with me, that work was appropriated by my paymasters with minimal benefit to myself.
I would like some IT company to take interest in this work, let us really go and make a superhuman yet a child.
Capturing the right amount of

Post by gandikotam
detail is a challenge. Beside, Raj Reddy worked on hearsay, a kind of voice
recognition. I read Kurzwell books on mathematical modeling for
voice recognition that was very successful. I think any AI, other than
NN's, is bound to be slower than a real time conversation as the knowledge
base to search becomes too unwieldy after some time.

Well, here is where my work could be useful.
Drones became super efficient after 2010, as I knew they would be.

Post by gandikotam
I think there are moral issues about AI. When AI driven car
does some accident, whom to blame, etc.?

The insurance companies will sort that out.

They can't bring back casualties of traffic accidents caused by AI.

Post by Arindam Banerjee

Post by gandikotam
There are also
legal opinions that are case-based. Technically no-need for jury trials.

Or doctors for that matter.

Post by gandikotam
These days home work assignments of students are being done
with AI. chatGPT has captured the imagination of many a big tech
company like Microsoft and Google. Creating canned essays
on school topics seem to be the rage. If cell phones have taken
away our attention span, AI will rob us off common sense.

At that rate,yes. People will only have the wits left to adore media celebs and look presentable.

Well said. No AI can match the creativity of humans that seems to be endless.
Whatever Star Trek TV series envisioned, we are seeing today and will continue to
see in the future. Some people claim the purpose of technology is to
free up humans so they can dream and envision a future that is hopefully
more pleasant.

Post by Arindam Banerjee
But for me, AI is to be used in difficult areas, like under sea or outer space.
Deep conspiracies against my new ideas prevent that - anything to keep me down.

There are some who believe ET's gave electronics to humans that has revolutionized
our lives. AI, after all, is based on human thinking. So there is so much it can do.

Post by Arindam Banerjee
People are very satisfied with what they have, no change required thank you.
Definitely no-no to any hint of upsetting the boat.

Post by gandikotam
Regards
Regards

Post by Arindam Banerjee

Post by gandikotam
Regards

[Arindam Banerjee]

Post by gandikotam

Post by Arindam Banerjee

Post by gandikotam

Post by Arindam Banerjee

Post by gandikotam

Post by Madhu

I interpret "derivatives" as: Friedman in his book on "Flat Earth"
praised the H1B system claiming for every visa worker, 5 or 6 jobs
would be created for the benefit of non-visa workers who do the menial
jobs like cleaning houses, dry cleaning, chauffering, etc.

OK (though I was looking the 5 or 6 jobs that are created on the other
side of the H1B, --the worker as the "asset" derivatives in the usual
sense of derivatives market on the asset)

I think what you say is not true about face recognition which has been
controversial for its false positives. There is no behavioral aspect
to it. The neural nets employed are as good as the examples they are
trained with. They call it AI even though the neural nets don't build
any models.

(I never took a course on NN, and I havent touched any machine learning
text since 2006 -- so I don't claim to be correct. but i understood the
point with the blackbox behavoour was though there is no explicit model,
the NN itself is taken as the "model". my own (meta) point was when a
system is implemented and human behaviour is regulated by the black-box
input-outputs the model is imposed "on" the real world rather than the
other way round as is perceived.

When I was in school, they used to teach model-based reasoning. They used
to build deep models. I think it was Lenat who got major funding from US
govt. to build an AI that has common sense among other things. I heard
it was abandoned at some point. The problem with models is most people
can't articulate them well enough. So expert systems as they are called
couldn't capture the expertise of people with know-how adequately. Then
came case-based reasoning that seems to have fit the bill. I am sure it
has some pitfalls. NN's seem to have broken the brain blood barrier so to say.
NN's to me is brute force. As you said, if some people expect others
to modify their behavior to please the AI, then it is something of concern.
One could say while taking a driver's license picture no make up which
won't sit well with some. Similarly credit-rating services using AI can
be tweaked to overlook false negatives to make the sale. Ultimately
the shop keepers decide how much credit a person deserves, not AI.

How much AI it takes for that, is the q.

You must be humoring us. AI has always been there since the days of
Marvin Minsky who wrote a book on Perceptrons -- sort of neurons in
the neural nets. But he took a detour and worked on expert systems,
I believe, that use if-then-else rules.

What else is AI?
I knew AI would take off back in 2007, when I did the architecture and some routines for ultrafast message passing between unlimited number of robots, thus creating the netvous system of an android, say.
As always the case, with me, that work was appropriated by my paymasters with minimal benefit to myself.
I would like some IT company to take interest in this work, let us really go and make a superhuman yet a child.
Capturing the right amount of

Post by gandikotam
detail is a challenge. Beside, Raj Reddy worked on hearsay, a kind of voice
recognition. I read Kurzwell books on mathematical modeling for
voice recognition that was very successful. I think any AI, other than
NN's, is bound to be slower than a real time conversation as the knowledge
base to search becomes too unwieldy after some time.

Well, here is where my work could be useful.
Drones became super efficient after 2010, as I knew they would be.

Post by gandikotam
I think there are moral issues about AI. When AI driven car
does some accident, whom to blame, etc.?

The insurance companies will sort that out.

They can't bring back casualties of traffic accidents caused by AI.

Post by Arindam Banerjee

Post by gandikotam
There are also
legal opinions that are case-based. Technically no-need for jury trials.

Or doctors for that matter.

Post by gandikotam
These days home work assignments of students are being done
with AI. chatGPT has captured the imagination of many a big tech
company like Microsoft and Google. Creating canned essays
on school topics seem to be the rage. If cell phones have taken
away our attention span, AI will rob us off common sense.

At that rate,yes. People will only have the wits left to adore media celebs and look presentable.

Well said. No AI can match the creativity of humans that seems to be endless.
Whatever Star Trek TV series envisioned, we are seeing today and will continue to
see in the future. Some people claim the purpose of technology is to
free up humans so they can dream and envision a future that is hopefully
more pleasant.

Post by Arindam Banerjee
But for me, AI is to be used in difficult areas, like under sea or outer space.
Deep conspiracies against my new ideas prevent that - anything to keep me down.

There are some who believe ET's gave electronics to humans that has revolutionized
our lives. AI, after all, is based on human thinking. So there is so much it can do.

Of course. It is an important machine to be respected but not worshipped as superior.

Post by gandikotam

Post by Arindam Banerjee
People are very satisfied with what they have, no change required thank you.
Definitely no-no to any hint of upsetting the boat.

Post by gandikotam
Regards
Regards

Post by Arindam Banerjee

Post by gandikotam
Regards

[gandikotam]

Post by Arindam Banerjee

Post by gandikotam

Post by Arindam Banerjee

Post by gandikotam

Post by Arindam Banerjee

Post by gandikotam

Post by Madhu

I interpret "derivatives" as: Friedman in his book on "Flat Earth"
praised the H1B system claiming for every visa worker, 5 or 6 jobs
would be created for the benefit of non-visa workers who do the menial
jobs like cleaning houses, dry cleaning, chauffering, etc.

OK (though I was looking the 5 or 6 jobs that are created on the other
side of the H1B, --the worker as the "asset" derivatives in the usual
sense of derivatives market on the asset)

I think what you say is not true about face recognition which has been
controversial for its false positives. There is no behavioral aspect
to it. The neural nets employed are as good as the examples they are
trained with. They call it AI even though the neural nets don't build
any models.

(I never took a course on NN, and I havent touched any machine learning
text since 2006 -- so I don't claim to be correct. but i understood the
point with the blackbox behavoour was though there is no explicit model,
the NN itself is taken as the "model". my own (meta) point was when a
system is implemented and human behaviour is regulated by the black-box
input-outputs the model is imposed "on" the real world rather than the
other way round as is perceived.

When I was in school, they used to teach model-based reasoning. They used
to build deep models. I think it was Lenat who got major funding from US
govt. to build an AI that has common sense among other things. I heard
it was abandoned at some point. The problem with models is most people
can't articulate them well enough. So expert systems as they are called
couldn't capture the expertise of people with know-how adequately. Then
came case-based reasoning that seems to have fit the bill. I am sure it
has some pitfalls. NN's seem to have broken the brain blood barrier so to say.
NN's to me is brute force. As you said, if some people expect others
to modify their behavior to please the AI, then it is something of concern.
One could say while taking a driver's license picture no make up which
won't sit well with some. Similarly credit-rating services using AI can
be tweaked to overlook false negatives to make the sale. Ultimately
the shop keepers decide how much credit a person deserves, not AI.

How much AI it takes for that, is the q.

You must be humoring us. AI has always been there since the days of
Marvin Minsky who wrote a book on Perceptrons -- sort of neurons in
the neural nets. But he took a detour and worked on expert systems,
I believe, that use if-then-else rules.

What else is AI?
I knew AI would take off back in 2007, when I did the architecture and some routines for ultrafast message passing between unlimited number of robots, thus creating the netvous system of an android, say.
As always the case, with me, that work was appropriated by my paymasters with minimal benefit to myself.
I would like some IT company to take interest in this work, let us really go and make a superhuman yet a child.
Capturing the right amount of

Post by gandikotam
detail is a challenge. Beside, Raj Reddy worked on hearsay, a kind of voice
recognition. I read Kurzwell books on mathematical modeling for
voice recognition that was very successful. I think any AI, other than
NN's, is bound to be slower than a real time conversation as the knowledge
base to search becomes too unwieldy after some time.

Well, here is where my work could be useful.
Drones became super efficient after 2010, as I knew they would be.

Post by gandikotam
I think there are moral issues about AI. When AI driven car
does some accident, whom to blame, etc.?

The insurance companies will sort that out.

They can't bring back casualties of traffic accidents caused by AI.

Post by Arindam Banerjee

Post by gandikotam
There are also
legal opinions that are case-based. Technically no-need for jury trials.

Or doctors for that matter.

Post by gandikotam
These days home work assignments of students are being done
with AI. chatGPT has captured the imagination of many a big tech
company like Microsoft and Google. Creating canned essays
on school topics seem to be the rage. If cell phones have taken
away our attention span, AI will rob us off common sense.

At that rate,yes. People will only have the wits left to adore media celebs and look presentable.

Well said. No AI can match the creativity of humans that seems to be endless.
Whatever Star Trek TV series envisioned, we are seeing today and will continue to
see in the future. Some people claim the purpose of technology is to
free up humans so they can dream and envision a future that is hopefully
more pleasant.

Post by Arindam Banerjee
But for me, AI is to be used in difficult areas, like under sea or outer space.
Deep conspiracies against my new ideas prevent that - anything to keep me down.

There are some who believe ET's gave electronics to humans that has revolutionized
our lives. AI, after all, is based on human thinking. So there is so much it can do.

Arindam

Post by Arindam Banerjee
Of course. It is an important machine to be respected but not worshipped as superior.

AI is perfect example of GIGO (Garbage In Garbage Out) as AI bots require rules or
training data in gazillions to be accurate. In recent news, I read that chatGPT
was able to calculate mortgage payments given the inputs of price, interest rate, etc.
This is hardly an AI thing as there are multiple mortgage calculators in the net
that don't claim to be AI. Then there are some who think sentence completion in
the search box is done better by AI. I can see that Google is doing the same,
even though it misses some. I surmise the convenience of one-stop-shop, which is currently
Google , will lure the people to chatGPT. If they make it a subscription service,
then I am out.

Post by Arindam Banerjee

Post by gandikotam

Post by Arindam Banerjee
People are very satisfied with what they have, no change required thank you.
Definitely no-no to any hint of upsetting the boat.

Post by gandikotam
Regards
Regards

Post by Arindam Banerjee

Post by gandikotam
Regards

[Arindam Banerjee]

Post by gandikotam

Post by Arindam Banerjee

Post by gandikotam

Post by Arindam Banerjee

Post by gandikotam

Post by Arindam Banerjee

Post by gandikotam

Post by Madhu

I interpret "derivatives" as: Friedman in his book on "Flat Earth"
praised the H1B system claiming for every visa worker, 5 or 6 jobs
would be created for the benefit of non-visa workers who do the menial
jobs like cleaning houses, dry cleaning, chauffering, etc.

OK (though I was looking the 5 or 6 jobs that are created on the other
side of the H1B, --the worker as the "asset" derivatives in the usual
sense of derivatives market on the asset)

I think what you say is not true about face recognition which has been
controversial for its false positives. There is no behavioral aspect
to it. The neural nets employed are as good as the examples they are
trained with. They call it AI even though the neural nets don't build
any models.

(I never took a course on NN, and I havent touched any machine learning
text since 2006 -- so I don't claim to be correct. but i understood the
point with the blackbox behavoour was though there is no explicit model,
the NN itself is taken as the "model". my own (meta) point was when a
system is implemented and human behaviour is regulated by the black-box
input-outputs the model is imposed "on" the real world rather than the
other way round as is perceived.

When I was in school, they used to teach model-based reasoning. They used
to build deep models. I think it was Lenat who got major funding from US
govt. to build an AI that has common sense among other things. I heard
it was abandoned at some point. The problem with models is most people
can't articulate them well enough. So expert systems as they are called
couldn't capture the expertise of people with know-how adequately. Then
came case-based reasoning that seems to have fit the bill. I am sure it
has some pitfalls. NN's seem to have broken the brain blood barrier so to say.
NN's to me is brute force. As you said, if some people expect others
to modify their behavior to please the AI, then it is something of concern.
One could say while taking a driver's license picture no make up which
won't sit well with some. Similarly credit-rating services using AI can
be tweaked to overlook false negatives to make the sale. Ultimately
the shop keepers decide how much credit a person deserves, not AI.

How much AI it takes for that, is the q.

You must be humoring us. AI has always been there since the days of
Marvin Minsky who wrote a book on Perceptrons -- sort of neurons in
the neural nets. But he took a detour and worked on expert systems,
I believe, that use if-then-else rules.

What else is AI?
I knew AI would take off back in 2007, when I did the architecture and some routines for ultrafast message passing between unlimited number of robots, thus creating the netvous system of an android, say.
As always the case, with me, that work was appropriated by my paymasters with minimal benefit to myself.
I would like some IT company to take interest in this work, let us really go and make a superhuman yet a child.
Capturing the right amount of

Post by gandikotam
detail is a challenge. Beside, Raj Reddy worked on hearsay, a kind of voice
recognition. I read Kurzwell books on mathematical modeling for
voice recognition that was very successful. I think any AI, other than
NN's, is bound to be slower than a real time conversation as the knowledge
base to search becomes too unwieldy after some time.

Well, here is where my work could be useful.
Drones became super efficient after 2010, as I knew they would be.

Post by gandikotam
I think there are moral issues about AI. When AI driven car
does some accident, whom to blame, etc.?

The insurance companies will sort that out.

They can't bring back casualties of traffic accidents caused by AI.

Post by Arindam Banerjee

Post by gandikotam
There are also
legal opinions that are case-based. Technically no-need for jury trials.

Or doctors for that matter.

Post by gandikotam
These days home work assignments of students are being done
with AI. chatGPT has captured the imagination of many a big tech
company like Microsoft and Google. Creating canned essays
on school topics seem to be the rage. If cell phones have taken
away our attention span, AI will rob us off common sense.

At that rate,yes. People will only have the wits left to adore media celebs and look presentable.

Well said. No AI can match the creativity of humans that seems to be endless.
Whatever Star Trek TV series envisioned, we are seeing today and will continue to
see in the future. Some people claim the purpose of technology is to
free up humans so they can dream and envision a future that is hopefully
more pleasant.

Post by Arindam Banerjee
But for me, AI is to be used in difficult areas, like under sea or outer space.
Deep conspiracies against my new ideas prevent that - anything to keep me down.

There are some who believe ET's gave electronics to humans that has revolutionized
our lives. AI, after all, is based on human thinking. So there is so much it can do.

Arindam

Post by Arindam Banerjee
Of course. It is an important machine to be respected but not worshipped as superior.

AI is perfect example of GIGO (Garbage In Garbage Out) as AI bots require rules or
training data in gazillions to be accurate. In recent news, I read that chatGPT
was able to calculate mortgage payments given the inputs of price, interest rate, etc.
This is hardly an AI thing as there are multiple mortgage calculators in the net
that don't claim to be AI. Then there are some who think sentence completion in
the search box is done better by AI. I can see that Google is doing the same,
even though it misses some. I surmise the convenience of one-stop-shop, which is currently
Google , will lure the people to chatGPT. If they make it a subscription service,
then I am out.

Really nothing intelligent about any such AI, if by intelligence we include originality and relevance.
They collect stuff based on rules and present them for lazy people and idiots.
Problem is that there are too many rich idiots.

Post by gandikotam

Post by Arindam Banerjee

Post by gandikotam

Post by Arindam Banerjee
People are very satisfied with what they have, no change required thank you.
Definitely no-no to any hint of upsetting the boat.

Post by gandikotam
Regards
Regards

Post by Arindam Banerjee

Post by gandikotam
Regards

[gandikotam]

Post by Arindam Banerjee

Post by gandikotam

Post by Arindam Banerjee

Post by gandikotam

Post by Arindam Banerjee

Post by gandikotam

Post by Arindam Banerjee

Post by gandikotam

Post by Madhu

I interpret "derivatives" as: Friedman in his book on "Flat Earth"
praised the H1B system claiming for every visa worker, 5 or 6 jobs
would be created for the benefit of non-visa workers who do the menial
jobs like cleaning houses, dry cleaning, chauffering, etc.

OK (though I was looking the 5 or 6 jobs that are created on the other
side of the H1B, --the worker as the "asset" derivatives in the usual
sense of derivatives market on the asset)

I think what you say is not true about face recognition which has been
controversial for its false positives. There is no behavioral aspect
to it. The neural nets employed are as good as the examples they are
trained with. They call it AI even though the neural nets don't build
any models.

(I never took a course on NN, and I havent touched any machine learning
text since 2006 -- so I don't claim to be correct. but i understood the
point with the blackbox behavoour was though there is no explicit model,
the NN itself is taken as the "model". my own (meta) point was when a
system is implemented and human behaviour is regulated by the black-box
input-outputs the model is imposed "on" the real world rather than the
other way round as is perceived.

When I was in school, they used to teach model-based reasoning. They used
to build deep models. I think it was Lenat who got major funding from US
govt. to build an AI that has common sense among other things. I heard
it was abandoned at some point. The problem with models is most people
can't articulate them well enough. So expert systems as they are called
couldn't capture the expertise of people with know-how adequately. Then
came case-based reasoning that seems to have fit the bill. I am sure it
has some pitfalls. NN's seem to have broken the brain blood barrier so to say.
NN's to me is brute force. As you said, if some people expect others
to modify their behavior to please the AI, then it is something of concern.
One could say while taking a driver's license picture no make up which
won't sit well with some. Similarly credit-rating services using AI can
be tweaked to overlook false negatives to make the sale. Ultimately
the shop keepers decide how much credit a person deserves, not AI.

How much AI it takes for that, is the q.

You must be humoring us. AI has always been there since the days of
Marvin Minsky who wrote a book on Perceptrons -- sort of neurons in
the neural nets. But he took a detour and worked on expert systems,
I believe, that use if-then-else rules.

What else is AI?
I knew AI would take off back in 2007, when I did the architecture and some routines for ultrafast message passing between unlimited number of robots, thus creating the netvous system of an android, say.
As always the case, with me, that work was appropriated by my paymasters with minimal benefit to myself.
I would like some IT company to take interest in this work, let us really go and make a superhuman yet a child.
Capturing the right amount of

Post by gandikotam
detail is a challenge. Beside, Raj Reddy worked on hearsay, a kind of voice
recognition. I read Kurzwell books on mathematical modeling for
voice recognition that was very successful. I think any AI, other than
NN's, is bound to be slower than a real time conversation as the knowledge
base to search becomes too unwieldy after some time.

Well, here is where my work could be useful.
Drones became super efficient after 2010, as I knew they would be.

Post by gandikotam
I think there are moral issues about AI. When AI driven car
does some accident, whom to blame, etc.?

The insurance companies will sort that out.

They can't bring back casualties of traffic accidents caused by AI.

Post by Arindam Banerjee

Post by gandikotam
There are also
legal opinions that are case-based. Technically no-need for jury trials.

Or doctors for that matter.

Post by gandikotam
These days home work assignments of students are being done
with AI. chatGPT has captured the imagination of many a big tech
company like Microsoft and Google. Creating canned essays
on school topics seem to be the rage. If cell phones have taken
away our attention span, AI will rob us off common sense.

At that rate,yes. People will only have the wits left to adore media celebs and look presentable.

Well said. No AI can match the creativity of humans that seems to be endless.
Whatever Star Trek TV series envisioned, we are seeing today and will continue to
see in the future. Some people claim the purpose of technology is to
free up humans so they can dream and envision a future that is hopefully
more pleasant.

Post by Arindam Banerjee
But for me, AI is to be used in difficult areas, like under sea or outer space.
Deep conspiracies against my new ideas prevent that - anything to keep me down.

There are some who believe ET's gave electronics to humans that has revolutionized
our lives. AI, after all, is based on human thinking. So there is so much it can do.

Arindam

Post by Arindam Banerjee
Of course. It is an important machine to be respected but not worshipped as superior.

AI is perfect example of GIGO (Garbage In Garbage Out) as AI bots require rules or
training data in gazillions to be accurate. In recent news, I read that chatGPT
was able to calculate mortgage payments given the inputs of price, interest rate, etc.
This is hardly an AI thing as there are multiple mortgage calculators in the net
that don't claim to be AI. Then there are some who think sentence completion in
the search box is done better by AI. I can see that Google is doing the same,
even though it misses some. I surmise the convenience of one-stop-shop, which is currently
Google , will lure the people to chatGPT. If they make it a subscription service,
then I am out.

Arindam

Post by Arindam Banerjee
Really nothing intelligent about any such AI, if by intelligence we include originality and relevance.
They collect stuff based on rules and present them for lazy people and idiots.
Problem is that there are too many rich idiots.

Do they become idiots after or before getting rich? I didn't know that Google's first page is sponsored
links. If at all, they show the less relevant links in the subsequent pages. I have a blogspot running for
many years. It still doesn't appear in the search pages. Also other search engines like Yahoo skip the
blogspot pages. It is very disappointing but for the free blogspot. Most people use it to backup their
less important stuff.

Post by Arindam Banerjee

Post by gandikotam

Post by Arindam Banerjee

Post by gandikotam

Post by Arindam Banerjee
People are very satisfied with what they have, no change required thank you.
Definitely no-no to any hint of upsetting the boat.

Post by gandikotam
Regards
Regards

Post by Arindam Banerjee

Post by gandikotam
Regards

[Arindam Banerjee]

Post by gandikotam

Post by Arindam Banerjee

Post by gandikotam

Post by Arindam Banerjee

Post by gandikotam

Post by Arindam Banerjee

Post by gandikotam

Post by Arindam Banerjee

Post by gandikotam

Post by Madhu

I interpret "derivatives" as: Friedman in his book on "Flat Earth"
praised the H1B system claiming for every visa worker, 5 or 6 jobs
would be created for the benefit of non-visa workers who do the menial
jobs like cleaning houses, dry cleaning, chauffering, etc.

OK (though I was looking the 5 or 6 jobs that are created on the other
side of the H1B, --the worker as the "asset" derivatives in the usual
sense of derivatives market on the asset)

I think what you say is not true about face recognition which has been
controversial for its false positives. There is no behavioral aspect
to it. The neural nets employed are as good as the examples they are
trained with. They call it AI even though the neural nets don't build
any models.

(I never took a course on NN, and I havent touched any machine learning
text since 2006 -- so I don't claim to be correct. but i understood the
point with the blackbox behavoour was though there is no explicit model,
the NN itself is taken as the "model". my own (meta) point was when a
system is implemented and human behaviour is regulated by the black-box
input-outputs the model is imposed "on" the real world rather than the
other way round as is perceived.

When I was in school, they used to teach model-based reasoning. They used
to build deep models. I think it was Lenat who got major funding from US
govt. to build an AI that has common sense among other things. I heard
it was abandoned at some point. The problem with models is most people
can't articulate them well enough. So expert systems as they are called
couldn't capture the expertise of people with know-how adequately. Then
came case-based reasoning that seems to have fit the bill. I am sure it
has some pitfalls. NN's seem to have broken the brain blood barrier so to say.
NN's to me is brute force. As you said, if some people expect others
to modify their behavior to please the AI, then it is something of concern.
One could say while taking a driver's license picture no make up which
won't sit well with some. Similarly credit-rating services using AI can
be tweaked to overlook false negatives to make the sale. Ultimately
the shop keepers decide how much credit a person deserves, not AI.

How much AI it takes for that, is the q.

You must be humoring us. AI has always been there since the days of
Marvin Minsky who wrote a book on Perceptrons -- sort of neurons in
the neural nets. But he took a detour and worked on expert systems,
I believe, that use if-then-else rules.

What else is AI?
I knew AI would take off back in 2007, when I did the architecture and some routines for ultrafast message passing between unlimited number of robots, thus creating the netvous system of an android, say.
As always the case, with me, that work was appropriated by my paymasters with minimal benefit to myself.
I would like some IT company to take interest in this work, let us really go and make a superhuman yet a child.
Capturing the right amount of

Post by gandikotam
detail is a challenge. Beside, Raj Reddy worked on hearsay, a kind of voice
recognition. I read Kurzwell books on mathematical modeling for
voice recognition that was very successful. I think any AI, other than
NN's, is bound to be slower than a real time conversation as the knowledge
base to search becomes too unwieldy after some time.

Well, here is where my work could be useful.
Drones became super efficient after 2010, as I knew they would be.

Post by gandikotam
I think there are moral issues about AI. When AI driven car
does some accident, whom to blame, etc.?

The insurance companies will sort that out.

They can't bring back casualties of traffic accidents caused by AI.

Post by Arindam Banerjee

Post by gandikotam
There are also
legal opinions that are case-based. Technically no-need for jury trials.

Or doctors for that matter.

Post by gandikotam
These days home work assignments of students are being done
with AI. chatGPT has captured the imagination of many a big tech
company like Microsoft and Google. Creating canned essays
on school topics seem to be the rage. If cell phones have taken
away our attention span, AI will rob us off common sense.

At that rate,yes. People will only have the wits left to adore media celebs and look presentable.

Well said. No AI can match the creativity of humans that seems to be endless.
Whatever Star Trek TV series envisioned, we are seeing today and will continue to
see in the future. Some people claim the purpose of technology is to
free up humans so they can dream and envision a future that is hopefully
more pleasant.

Post by Arindam Banerjee
But for me, AI is to be used in difficult areas, like under sea or outer space.
Deep conspiracies against my new ideas prevent that - anything to keep me down.

There are some who believe ET's gave electronics to humans that has revolutionized
our lives. AI, after all, is based on human thinking. So there is so much it can do.

Arindam

Post by Arindam Banerjee
Of course. It is an important machine to be respected but not worshipped as superior.

AI is perfect example of GIGO (Garbage In Garbage Out) as AI bots require rules or
training data in gazillions to be accurate. In recent news, I read that chatGPT
was able to calculate mortgage payments given the inputs of price, interest rate, etc.
This is hardly an AI thing as there are multiple mortgage calculators in the net
that don't claim to be AI. Then there are some who think sentence completion in
the search box is done better by AI. I can see that Google is doing the same,
even though it misses some. I surmise the convenience of one-stop-shop, which is currently
Google , will lure the people to chatGPT. If they make it a subscription service,
then I am out.

Arindam

Post by Arindam Banerjee
Really nothing intelligent about any such AI, if by intelligence we include originality and relevance.
They collect stuff based on rules and present them for lazy people and idiots.
Problem is that there are too many rich idiots.

Do they become idiots after or before getting rich? I didn't know that Google's first page is sponsored
links. If at all, they show the less relevant links in the subsequent pages. I have a blogspot running for
many years. It still doesn't appear in the search pages. Also other search engines like Yahoo skip the
blogspot pages. It is very disappointing but for the free blogspot. Most people use it to backup their
less important stuff.

They are rich because they are mean people who are focussed and united in their blinkered way. They grab money somehow and circilate it among each other, thus not letting it out of their collective grasp.
For legitimacy they give awards and fame to their tribal suckups who may have some talent, often frossly inflated.
They ignore all those who do not suck up to them. And that means they avoid those with genuine talents, who they think are their natural enemies as their new ideas could be upsetting. So they hate me unitedly, and as you note, similar sorts as well.
Why are they idiots?
Because fame and money is all they understand, they are stunted otherwise. As they are so stunted by bad habits and notions, they cannot understand that great new ideas will make even more money for them.

Post by gandikotam

Post by Arindam Banerjee

Post by gandikotam

Post by Arindam Banerjee

Post by gandikotam

Post by Arindam Banerjee
People are very satisfied with what they have, no change required thank you.
Definitely no-no to any hint of upsetting the boat.

Post by gandikotam
Regards
Regards

Post by Arindam Banerjee

Post by gandikotam
Regards

[Arindam Banerjee]

Post by gandikotam

Post by Arindam Banerjee

Post by gandikotam

Post by Arindam Banerjee

Post by gandikotam

Post by Arindam Banerjee

Post by gandikotam

Post by Arindam Banerjee

Post by gandikotam

Post by Madhu

I interpret "derivatives" as: Friedman in his book on "Flat Earth"
praised the H1B system claiming for every visa worker, 5 or 6 jobs
would be created for the benefit of non-visa workers who do the menial
jobs like cleaning houses, dry cleaning, chauffering, etc.

OK (though I was looking the 5 or 6 jobs that are created on the other
side of the H1B, --the worker as the "asset" derivatives in the usual
sense of derivatives market on the asset)

I think what you say is not true about face recognition which has been
controversial for its false positives. There is no behavioral aspect
to it. The neural nets employed are as good as the examples they are
trained with. They call it AI even though the neural nets don't build
any models.

(I never took a course on NN, and I havent touched any machine learning
text since 2006 -- so I don't claim to be correct. but i understood the
point with the blackbox behavoour was though there is no explicit model,
the NN itself is taken as the "model". my own (meta) point was when a
system is implemented and human behaviour is regulated by the black-box
input-outputs the model is imposed "on" the real world rather than the
other way round as is perceived.

When I was in school, they used to teach model-based reasoning. They used
to build deep models. I think it was Lenat who got major funding from US
govt. to build an AI that has common sense among other things. I heard
it was abandoned at some point. The problem with models is most people
can't articulate them well enough. So expert systems as they are called
couldn't capture the expertise of people with know-how adequately. Then
came case-based reasoning that seems to have fit the bill. I am sure it
has some pitfalls. NN's seem to have broken the brain blood barrier so to say.
NN's to me is brute force. As you said, if some people expect others
to modify their behavior to please the AI, then it is something of concern.
One could say while taking a driver's license picture no make up which
won't sit well with some. Similarly credit-rating services using AI can
be tweaked to overlook false negatives to make the sale. Ultimately
the shop keepers decide how much credit a person deserves, not AI.

How much AI it takes for that, is the q.

You must be humoring us. AI has always been there since the days of
Marvin Minsky who wrote a book on Perceptrons -- sort of neurons in
the neural nets. But he took a detour and worked on expert systems,
I believe, that use if-then-else rules.

What else is AI?
I knew AI would take off back in 2007, when I did the architecture and some routines for ultrafast message passing between unlimited number of robots, thus creating the netvous system of an android, say.
As always the case, with me, that work was appropriated by my paymasters with minimal benefit to myself.
I would like some IT company to take interest in this work, let us really go and make a superhuman yet a child.
Capturing the right amount of

Post by gandikotam
detail is a challenge. Beside, Raj Reddy worked on hearsay, a kind of voice
recognition. I read Kurzwell books on mathematical modeling for
voice recognition that was very successful. I think any AI, other than
NN's, is bound to be slower than a real time conversation as the knowledge
base to search becomes too unwieldy after some time.

Well, here is where my work could be useful.
Drones became super efficient after 2010, as I knew they would be.

Post by gandikotam
I think there are moral issues about AI. When AI driven car
does some accident, whom to blame, etc.?

The insurance companies will sort that out.

They can't bring back casualties of traffic accidents caused by AI.

Post by Arindam Banerjee

Post by gandikotam
There are also
legal opinions that are case-based. Technically no-need for jury trials.

Or doctors for that matter.

Post by gandikotam
These days home work assignments of students are being done
with AI. chatGPT has captured the imagination of many a big tech
company like Microsoft and Google. Creating canned essays
on school topics seem to be the rage. If cell phones have taken
away our attention span, AI will rob us off common sense.

At that rate,yes. People will only have the wits left to adore media celebs and look presentable.

Well said. No AI can match the creativity of humans that seems to be endless.
Whatever Star Trek TV series envisioned, we are seeing today and will continue to
see in the future. Some people claim the purpose of technology is to
free up humans so they can dream and envision a future that is hopefully
more pleasant.

Post by Arindam Banerjee
But for me, AI is to be used in difficult areas, like under sea or outer space.
Deep conspiracies against my new ideas prevent that - anything to keep me down.

There are some who believe ET's gave electronics to humans that has revolutionized
our lives. AI, after all, is based on human thinking. So there is so much it can do.

Arindam

Post by Arindam Banerjee
Of course. It is an important machine to be respected but not worshipped as superior.

AI is perfect example of GIGO (Garbage In Garbage Out) as AI bots require rules or
training data in gazillions to be accurate. In recent news, I read that chatGPT
was able to calculate mortgage payments given the inputs of price, interest rate, etc.
This is hardly an AI thing as there are multiple mortgage calculators in the net
that don't claim to be AI. Then there are some who think sentence completion in
the search box is done better by AI. I can see that Google is doing the same,
even though it misses some. I surmise the convenience of one-stop-shop, which is currently
Google , will lure the people to chatGPT. If they make it a subscription service,
then I am out.

Arindam

Post by Arindam Banerjee
Really nothing intelligent about any such AI, if by intelligence we include originality and relevance.
They collect stuff based on rules and present them for lazy people and idiots.
Problem is that there are too many rich idiots.

Do they become idiots after or before getting rich? I didn't know that Google's first page is sponsored
links. If at all, they show the less relevant links in the subsequent pages. I have a blogspot running for
many years. It still doesn't appear in the search pages. Also other search engines like Yahoo skip the
blogspot pages. It is very disappointing but for the free blogspot. Most people use it to backup their
less important stuff.

They are rich because they are mean people who are focussed and united in their blinkered way. They grab money somehow and circilate it among each other, thus not letting it out of their collective grasp.
For legitimacy they give awards and fame to their tribal suckups who may have some talent, often frossly inflated.

Oops, it should be grossly above!

They ignore all those who do not suck up to them. And that means they avoid those with genuine talents, who they think are their natural enemies as their new ideas could be upsetting. So they hate me unitedly, and as you note, similar sorts as well.
Why are they idiots?
Because fame and money is all they understand, they are stunted otherwise.

And power too, gotta add. More than fame.

As they are so stunted by bad habits and notions, they cannot understand that great new ideas will make even more money for them.

To answer your question, they become idiotic after they become rich. Dull, too.

Post by gandikotam

Post by Arindam Banerjee

Post by gandikotam

Post by Arindam Banerjee

Post by gandikotam

Post by Arindam Banerjee
People are very satisfied with what they have, no change required thank you.
Definitely no-no to any hint of upsetting the boat.

Post by gandikotam
Regards
Regards

Post by Arindam Banerjee

Post by gandikotam
Regards

[gandikotam]

Post by Arindam Banerjee

Post by gandikotam

Post by Arindam Banerjee

Post by gandikotam

Post by Arindam Banerjee

Post by gandikotam

Post by Arindam Banerjee

Post by gandikotam

Post by Arindam Banerjee

Post by gandikotam

Post by Madhu

I interpret "derivatives" as: Friedman in his book on "Flat Earth"
praised the H1B system claiming for every visa worker, 5 or 6 jobs
would be created for the benefit of non-visa workers who do the menial
jobs like cleaning houses, dry cleaning, chauffering, etc.

OK (though I was looking the 5 or 6 jobs that are created on the other
side of the H1B, --the worker as the "asset" derivatives in the usual
sense of derivatives market on the asset)

I think what you say is not true about face recognition which has been
controversial for its false positives. There is no behavioral aspect
to it. The neural nets employed are as good as the examples they are
trained with. They call it AI even though the neural nets don't build
any models.

(I never took a course on NN, and I havent touched any machine learning
text since 2006 -- so I don't claim to be correct. but i understood the
point with the blackbox behavoour was though there is no explicit model,
the NN itself is taken as the "model". my own (meta) point was when a
system is implemented and human behaviour is regulated by the black-box
input-outputs the model is imposed "on" the real world rather than the
other way round as is perceived.

When I was in school, they used to teach model-based reasoning. They used
to build deep models. I think it was Lenat who got major funding from US
govt. to build an AI that has common sense among other things. I heard
it was abandoned at some point. The problem with models is most people
can't articulate them well enough. So expert systems as they are called
couldn't capture the expertise of people with know-how adequately. Then
came case-based reasoning that seems to have fit the bill. I am sure it
has some pitfalls. NN's seem to have broken the brain blood barrier so to say.
NN's to me is brute force. As you said, if some people expect others
to modify their behavior to please the AI, then it is something of concern.
One could say while taking a driver's license picture no make up which
won't sit well with some. Similarly credit-rating services using AI can
be tweaked to overlook false negatives to make the sale. Ultimately
the shop keepers decide how much credit a person deserves, not AI.

How much AI it takes for that, is the q.

You must be humoring us. AI has always been there since the days of
Marvin Minsky who wrote a book on Perceptrons -- sort of neurons in
the neural nets. But he took a detour and worked on expert systems,
I believe, that use if-then-else rules.

What else is AI?
I knew AI would take off back in 2007, when I did the architecture and some routines for ultrafast message passing between unlimited number of robots, thus creating the netvous system of an android, say.
As always the case, with me, that work was appropriated by my paymasters with minimal benefit to myself.
I would like some IT company to take interest in this work, let us really go and make a superhuman yet a child.
Capturing the right amount of

Post by gandikotam
detail is a challenge. Beside, Raj Reddy worked on hearsay, a kind of voice
recognition. I read Kurzwell books on mathematical modeling for
voice recognition that was very successful. I think any AI, other than
NN's, is bound to be slower than a real time conversation as the knowledge
base to search becomes too unwieldy after some time.

Well, here is where my work could be useful.
Drones became super efficient after 2010, as I knew they would be.

Post by gandikotam
I think there are moral issues about AI. When AI driven car
does some accident, whom to blame, etc.?

The insurance companies will sort that out.

They can't bring back casualties of traffic accidents caused by AI.

Post by Arindam Banerjee

Post by gandikotam
There are also
legal opinions that are case-based. Technically no-need for jury trials.

Or doctors for that matter.

Post by gandikotam
These days home work assignments of students are being done
with AI. chatGPT has captured the imagination of many a big tech
company like Microsoft and Google. Creating canned essays
on school topics seem to be the rage. If cell phones have taken
away our attention span, AI will rob us off common sense.

At that rate,yes. People will only have the wits left to adore media celebs and look presentable.

Well said. No AI can match the creativity of humans that seems to be endless.
Whatever Star Trek TV series envisioned, we are seeing today and will continue to
see in the future. Some people claim the purpose of technology is to
free up humans so they can dream and envision a future that is hopefully
more pleasant.

Post by Arindam Banerjee
But for me, AI is to be used in difficult areas, like under sea or outer space.
Deep conspiracies against my new ideas prevent that - anything to keep me down.

There are some who believe ET's gave electronics to humans that has revolutionized
our lives. AI, after all, is based on human thinking. So there is so much it can do.

Arindam

Post by Arindam Banerjee
Of course. It is an important machine to be respected but not worshipped as superior.

AI is perfect example of GIGO (Garbage In Garbage Out) as AI bots require rules or
training data in gazillions to be accurate. In recent news, I read that chatGPT
was able to calculate mortgage payments given the inputs of price, interest rate, etc.
This is hardly an AI thing as there are multiple mortgage calculators in the net
that don't claim to be AI. Then there are some who think sentence completion in
the search box is done better by AI. I can see that Google is doing the same,
even though it misses some. I surmise the convenience of one-stop-shop, which is currently
Google , will lure the people to chatGPT. If they make it a subscription service,
then I am out.

Arindam

Post by Arindam Banerjee
Really nothing intelligent about any such AI, if by intelligence we include originality and relevance.
They collect stuff based on rules and present them for lazy people and idiots.
Problem is that there are too many rich idiots.

Do they become idiots after or before getting rich? I didn't know that Google's first page is sponsored
links. If at all, they show the less relevant links in the subsequent pages. I have a blogspot running for
many years. It still doesn't appear in the search pages. Also other search engines like Yahoo skip the
blogspot pages. It is very disappointing but for the free blogspot. Most people use it to backup their
less important stuff.

They are rich because they are mean people who are focussed and united in their blinkered way. They grab money somehow and circilate it among each other, thus not letting it out of their collective grasp.
For legitimacy they give awards and fame to their tribal suckups who may have some talent, often frossly inflated.

Oops, it should be grossly above!

Arindam

Post by Arindam Banerjee

They ignore all those who do not suck up to them. And that means they avoid those with genuine talents, who they think are their natural enemies as their new ideas could be upsetting. So they hate me unitedly, and as you note, similar sorts as well.

So true. This kind of corruption is not just limited to individuals. The establishment takes care of their kind and type. In a recent news, MSFT has been given a huge grant by American DARPA to develop quantum computing in an effort to lead China and other countries. Is that necessary? Why can't they give you the money to further your research and implement your ideas more fully to demonstrate them in front of media? The grant is a drop in MSFT's revenue, but still DARPA wants access to whatever MSFT develops. It is a different matter that quantum computing is a pipe dream. By the way, MSFT disbanded their virtual reality goggles team because pentagon didn't want to buy them. Apparently the laid off ones became a public charge meaning claiming unemployment benefits. It simply doesn't make sense from where we stand but ample sense to the powers that be.

Post by Arindam Banerjee

Why are they idiots?
Because fame and money is all they understand, they are stunted otherwise.

And power too, gotta add. More than fame.

As they are so stunted by bad habits and notions, they cannot understand that great new ideas will make even more money for them.

To answer your question, they become idiotic after they become rich. Dull, too.

Post by gandikotam

Post by Arindam Banerjee

Post by gandikotam

Post by Arindam Banerjee

Post by gandikotam

Post by Arindam Banerjee
People are very satisfied with what they have, no change required thank you.
Definitely no-no to any hint of upsetting the boat.

Post by gandikotam
Regards
Regards

Post by Arindam Banerjee

Post by gandikotam
Regards

[Arindam Banerjee]

Post by gandikotam

Post by Arindam Banerjee

Post by gandikotam

Post by Arindam Banerjee

Post by gandikotam

Post by Arindam Banerjee

Post by gandikotam

Post by Arindam Banerjee

Post by gandikotam

Post by Arindam Banerjee

Post by gandikotam

Post by Madhu

I interpret "derivatives" as: Friedman in his book on "Flat Earth"
praised the H1B system claiming for every visa worker, 5 or 6 jobs
would be created for the benefit of non-visa workers who do the menial
jobs like cleaning houses, dry cleaning, chauffering, etc.

OK (though I was looking the 5 or 6 jobs that are created on the other
side of the H1B, --the worker as the "asset" derivatives in the usual
sense of derivatives market on the asset)

I think what you say is not true about face recognition which has been
controversial for its false positives. There is no behavioral aspect
to it. The neural nets employed are as good as the examples they are
trained with. They call it AI even though the neural nets don't build
any models.

(I never took a course on NN, and I havent touched any machine learning
text since 2006 -- so I don't claim to be correct. but i understood the
point with the blackbox behavoour was though there is no explicit model,
the NN itself is taken as the "model". my own (meta) point was when a
system is implemented and human behaviour is regulated by the black-box
input-outputs the model is imposed "on" the real world rather than the
other way round as is perceived.

When I was in school, they used to teach model-based reasoning. They used
to build deep models. I think it was Lenat who got major funding from US
govt. to build an AI that has common sense among other things. I heard
it was abandoned at some point. The problem with models is most people
can't articulate them well enough. So expert systems as they are called
couldn't capture the expertise of people with know-how adequately. Then
came case-based reasoning that seems to have fit the bill. I am sure it
has some pitfalls. NN's seem to have broken the brain blood barrier so to say.
NN's to me is brute force. As you said, if some people expect others
to modify their behavior to please the AI, then it is something of concern.
One could say while taking a driver's license picture no make up which
won't sit well with some. Similarly credit-rating services using AI can
be tweaked to overlook false negatives to make the sale. Ultimately
the shop keepers decide how much credit a person deserves, not AI.

How much AI it takes for that, is the q.

You must be humoring us. AI has always been there since the days of
Marvin Minsky who wrote a book on Perceptrons -- sort of neurons in
the neural nets. But he took a detour and worked on expert systems,
I believe, that use if-then-else rules.

What else is AI?
I knew AI would take off back in 2007, when I did the architecture and some routines for ultrafast message passing between unlimited number of robots, thus creating the netvous system of an android, say.
As always the case, with me, that work was appropriated by my paymasters with minimal benefit to myself.
I would like some IT company to take interest in this work, let us really go and make a superhuman yet a child.
Capturing the right amount of

Post by gandikotam
detail is a challenge. Beside, Raj Reddy worked on hearsay, a kind of voice
recognition. I read Kurzwell books on mathematical modeling for
voice recognition that was very successful. I think any AI, other than
NN's, is bound to be slower than a real time conversation as the knowledge
base to search becomes too unwieldy after some time.

Well, here is where my work could be useful.
Drones became super efficient after 2010, as I knew they would be.

Post by gandikotam
I think there are moral issues about AI. When AI driven car
does some accident, whom to blame, etc.?

The insurance companies will sort that out.

They can't bring back casualties of traffic accidents caused by AI.

Post by Arindam Banerjee

Post by gandikotam
There are also
legal opinions that are case-based. Technically no-need for jury trials.

Or doctors for that matter.

Post by gandikotam
These days home work assignments of students are being done
with AI. chatGPT has captured the imagination of many a big tech
company like Microsoft and Google. Creating canned essays
on school topics seem to be the rage. If cell phones have taken
away our attention span, AI will rob us off common sense.

At that rate,yes. People will only have the wits left to adore media celebs and look presentable.

Well said. No AI can match the creativity of humans that seems to be endless.
Whatever Star Trek TV series envisioned, we are seeing today and will continue to
see in the future. Some people claim the purpose of technology is to
free up humans so they can dream and envision a future that is hopefully
more pleasant.

Post by Arindam Banerjee
But for me, AI is to be used in difficult areas, like under sea or outer space.
Deep conspiracies against my new ideas prevent that - anything to keep me down.

There are some who believe ET's gave electronics to humans that has revolutionized
our lives. AI, after all, is based on human thinking. So there is so much it can do.

Arindam

Post by Arindam Banerjee
Of course. It is an important machine to be respected but not worshipped as superior.

AI is perfect example of GIGO (Garbage In Garbage Out) as AI bots require rules or
training data in gazillions to be accurate. In recent news, I read that chatGPT
was able to calculate mortgage payments given the inputs of price, interest rate, etc.
This is hardly an AI thing as there are multiple mortgage calculators in the net
that don't claim to be AI. Then there are some who think sentence completion in
the search box is done better by AI. I can see that Google is doing the same,
even though it misses some. I surmise the convenience of one-stop-shop, which is currently
Google , will lure the people to chatGPT. If they make it a subscription service,
then I am out.

Arindam

Post by Arindam Banerjee
Really nothing intelligent about any such AI, if by intelligence we include originality and relevance.
They collect stuff based on rules and present them for lazy people and idiots.
Problem is that there are too many rich idiots.

Do they become idiots after or before getting rich? I didn't know that Google's first page is sponsored
links. If at all, they show the less relevant links in the subsequent pages. I have a blogspot running for
many years. It still doesn't appear in the search pages. Also other search engines like Yahoo skip the
blogspot pages. It is very disappointing but for the free blogspot. Most people use it to backup their
less important stuff.

They are rich because they are mean people who are focussed and united in their blinkered way. They grab money somehow and circilate it among each other, thus not letting it out of their collective grasp.
For legitimacy they give awards and fame to their tribal suckups who may have some talent, often frossly inflated.

Oops, it should be grossly above!

Arindam

Post by Arindam Banerjee

They ignore all those who do not suck up to them. And that means they avoid those with genuine talents, who they think are their natural enemies as their new ideas could be upsetting. So they hate me unitedly, and as you note, similar sorts as well.

So true. This kind of corruption is not just limited to individuals. The establishment takes care of their kind and type. In a recent news, MSFT has been given a huge grant by American DARPA to develop quantum computing in an effort to lead China and other countries. Is that necessary? Why can't they give you the money to further your research and implement your ideas more fully to demonstrate them in front of media?

They do make advances in computing all the time. To give boost to the bunkum quantum theories, they are now passing off the computing gains as owing to quantum theory! All potential dissidents supportive of truth are automatically gagged, with such persecuted examples as the international hero Assange. Lies and liars rule.

They do not want to give me any publicity, for if they do I will get popular or at least controversial and that would not suit their physics and metaphysics and last but not least their total global dominance. I will show how wrong they have been for generations, and how things can be fixed for a better, much better world. Sounds good, but...

We have to understand that the rich care one thing more than about getting wealthier, and that is losing their status, so they unite in eliminating any perceived opposition to their power and wealth. They have no use for research that is out of their control. So what I get from their minions us not funding, but death threats.


In short the powers that be have nothing but raw hatred for any potential self sacrificing Christ figure, like Christ himself who was crucified for objecting to the defilement of the Holy Temple by greedy entities. As I may be seen as one such threat to their cosy lifestyles, they will do what they can to suppress me and my works. Since I do not work for them, they cannot steal or use my inventions and discoveries, so they pretend to ignore, as a joint strategy!

As for myself I dedicate my life and works to the Divine, for the good of all. In return I get blessings and practical help. No need for me to suck up to the rich idiots.

Post by gandikotam
The grant is a drop in MSFT's revenue, but still DARPA wants access to whatever MSFT develops. It is a different matter that quantum computing is a pipe dream. By the way, MSFT disbanded their virtual reality goggles team because pentagon didn't want to buy them. Apparently the laid off ones became a public charge meaning claiming unemployment benefits. It simply doesn't make sense from where we stand but ample sense to the powers that be.

Post by Arindam Banerjee

Why are they idiots?
Because fame and money is all they understand, they are stunted otherwise.

And power too, gotta add. More than fame.

As they are so stunted by bad habits and notions, they cannot understand that great new ideas will make even more money for them.

To answer your question, they become idiotic after they become rich. Dull, too.

Post by gandikotam

Post by Arindam Banerjee

Post by gandikotam

Post by Arindam Banerjee

Post by gandikotam

Post by Arindam Banerjee
People are very satisfied with what they have, no change required thank you.
Definitely no-no to any hint of upsetting the boat.

Post by gandikotam
Regards
Regards

Post by Arindam Banerjee

Post by gandikotam
Regards