stay away from here woz. take your trolls with you dickhead

**Roko's Basilisk**:
*"In July 2010, LessWrong contributor Roko posted a thought experiment similar to Pascal's Wager to the site in which an otherwise benevolent future AI system tortures simulations of those who did not work to bring the system into existence. This idea came to be known as "Roko's basilisk," based on Roko's idea that merely hearing about the idea would give the hypothetical AI system stronger incentives to employ blackmail."* - *<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LessWrong#Roko's_basilisk>*

topic of roundtable 10:40 - 11:20ish or longer, Hyperintelligent AI and Roco's Basilisk

introduced by @-Uvizius Dok Nurquan-

An excerpt from Vernor Vinge's (originator of the concept of the Technological Singularity) Essay, "The Coming Technological Singularity: How to Survive in the Post-Human Era" (source: *<http://www.aleph.se/Trans/Global/Singularity/sing.html>*):

@-Joe

URL to essay added ^

you guys are speculating way too much in AI. nobody fucking knows for now

Tehe

the greatest experts in AI will think you guys are way too naive about making such strong postulations

none of it is predictable atm

mooores law is irrelevant to machine learning

the problem is data, more than it is the transistor density

FPGAs are huge for what they are supposed to be

CPUs are stalling in their weight in processing

trinary is not quantum computing

yea, that is correct

oops lmao

quantum ccmputing is useful for a very select number of problems

very few

ternary computers are not the same as quantum computers.

ternary is useless

nope that's not why

machine learning improves with data and structure, not much else. dumping more GPUs and CPUs is easy

not many ML products, and even few fewer are actually even profitable

ML is just a process of algos and stat methods, and they make use of perceptrons (neurons)

@ArmenianLegend *<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiocarbon_dating>*

Humans are *attempting* to produce technological genesis. They are only like Adam for so long before becoming gods.

Does the Bible account for the Big Bang @ArmenianLegend Or, it is dismissed as false science?

No comment? @ArmenianLegend 🤐

Maybe the expansion of the Universe?

“Is not He who created the heavens and the earth Able to create the likes of them? Yes; and He is the Knowing Creator. His command is only when He intends a thing that He says to it, ‘Be,’ and it is.” (Quran 36:81-82)

“Have those who disbelieved not considered that the heavens and the earth were a joined entity, then We separated them, and made from water every living thing? Then will they not believe?” (Quran 21:30)

“And the heaven We created with might, and indeed We are (its) expander.” (Quran 51:47)

Catholic priest (backed by Einstein) founded that theory, yeah?

The origin of the theory is not really a matter. What matters is if it is true or not. And, not only does it make sense, but is the most widely accepted view on the physical process of the Universe from its beginning.

Now, to say it came from NOTHING is absurd imo.

@NiCKeLeSS Wassup