|
Nintendo Kid posted:For the purposes of humanity's use, artificial intelligence that's actually a philosopher's zombie is equivalent to one that's "truly" self-aware. Arguably, "real" self-awareness is totally unnecessary. And here we run into the philosophical questions. If all that's needed is something useful that we can define as "thinking," then we've had AI since the earliest computers. If we want something that we can define as recreating how we define our own intelligence to a greater or lesser degree, then self-awareness (and a testable definition thereof) is required.
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2014 05:25
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 8, 2024 04:58 |
|
|
Nintendo Kid posted:I've heard tell that East Coast architects recently invented buildings that seem to scrape the sky and provide ample space on small plots of land. The argument that SF should be even denser is very different than the argument that SF can magically grow outside the bounds of the county of SF.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2014 05:27
|
|
|
Surely there'd be no possible way to tell whether you've created genuine consciousness or a p-zombie, since by definition the latter is indistinguishable from the former to outside observers.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2014 05:28
|
|
|
Hodgepodge posted:And here we run into the philosophical questions. If all that's needed is something useful that we can define as "thinking," then we've had AI since the earliest computers. That's why "strong AI" continually gets redefined to "better computerized thinking than we currently have". Many ideas of what strong AI could do or would be needed for in say 1972 are now things we use every day (I seem to recall a big one was "efficiently sorting through massive databases using natural language" or something like that, today there's many free web services that do this). Trabisnikof posted:The argument that SF should be even denser is very different than the argument that SF can magically grow outside the bounds of the county of SF. Noone's making the latter argument. Also most of SF is decidedly un-dense, and deadly in case of earthquake to boot. Torka posted:Surely there'd be no possible way to tell whether you've created genuine consciousness or a p-zombie anyway, since by definition the latter is indistinguishable from the former to outside observers. Precisely.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2014 05:28
|
|
|
quote is not edit
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2014 05:29
|
|
|
Nintendo Kid posted:Noone's making the latter argument. Also most of SF is decidedly un-dense, and deadly in case of earthquake to boot. The post I quoted was making that argument. Also, SF is dense by US standards. Only NYC is denser and NYC is over 8x bigger.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2014 05:39
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:The post I quoted was making that argument. It's dense because you have 13-14 people being forced to share a single house and except for SOMA/Market street lacks big high rise buildings.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2014 05:40
|
|
|
etalian posted:It's dense because you have 13-14 people being forced to share a single house and except for SOMA/Market street lacks big high rise buildings. If by "being forced" you mean choosing to live there rather than a less expensive community on the same mass transit network? Also while SF has higher than average rental rates home owners are still a huge segment of the market. Edit: Avg House-hold size in SF is 2.26 people so you're wrong. Trabisnikof fucked around with this message at 05:47 on Jul 31, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2014 05:44
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:The post I quoted was making that argument. Brooklyn, which isn't known for its high-rises, is twice as dense as San Fransisco.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2014 05:59
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:The post I quoted was making that argument. Many suburbs of NYC are also denser than San Francisco. Also no, the post was not requiring SF to expand in land size alone. Not to mention that many American cities have cores denser than SF and also a goodly expanse of low density land attached.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2014 06:03
|
|
|
Many parts of NYC also can and should be even more dense than they are now.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2014 06:08
|
|
|
Nintendo Kid posted:Many suburbs of NYC are also denser than San Francisco. Also no, the post was not requiring SF to expand in land size alone. That's the point I'm trying to make. All those other cities with denser cores have larger tax bases to handle the density. San Francisco is a city of less than 1 Million people there aren't other US cities as dense as SF is already and as relatively small. Focusing on housing in SF ignores the stagnant housing markets in the 8 other Bay Area counties.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2014 06:27
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:That's the point I'm trying to make. All those other cities with denser cores have larger tax bases to handle the density. This is utterly nonsensical. You don't need to create a larger tax base from less dense land to have dense development, unless the government owns and builds on all the land.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2014 06:29
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:The argument that SF should be even denser is very different than the argument that SF can magically grow outside the bounds of the county of SF. The argument that SF is meaningfully limited by ocean is about as coherent an argument as the argument that SF should grow away from the water. They're both absurd, and my post was made hoping someone like you would jump on it. If the ocean wasn't there, there'd be another collar city and SF would still be land-limited.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2014 07:57
|
|
|
Kalman posted:The argument that SF is meaningfully limited by ocean is about as coherent an argument as the argument that SF should grow away from the water. They're both absurd, and my post was made hoping someone like you would jump on it. If the ocean wasn't there, there'd be another collar city and SF would still be land-limited. Except then SF might be physically larger. SF is 49 sq miles. NYC is 300. Even San Jose is 179 sq miles. San Francisco has several neighborhoods with population densities above 60,000+ ppl/sq mile and several large parks and abandoned military bases that artificially depress their population density statistics. Meanwhile SF is still adding more housing units than San Mateo or Marin counties....
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2014 08:12
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:Except then SF might be physically larger. SF is 49 sq miles. NYC is 300. Even San Jose is 179 sq miles. San Francisco has several neighborhoods with population densities above 60,000+ ppl/sq mile and several large parks and abandoned military bases that artificially depress their population density statistics. You're assuming that if SF was landlocked that cities wouldn't have filled in the hypothetical dirt that doesn't currently exist, unlike every other piece of dirt surrounding SF that does currently exist where other cities took that space. You get why that's a stupid assumption, I hope.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2014 08:32
|
|
|
Kalman posted:You're assuming that if SF was landlocked that cities wouldn't have filled in the hypothetical dirt that doesn't currently exist, unlike every other piece of dirt surrounding SF that does currently exist where other cities took that space. Things aren't so simple. Oakland, SF's neighbor expanded massively after the 1906 earthquake, gobbling up smaller cities and growing to be physically the same size as SF but even now only 1/2 the population. Meanwhile Golden Gate Park, the Presidio, Hunter's Point and Treasure Island all deflate SF's density numbers. Since that land is either artificially low density due to park status or blighted by radioactive waste.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2014 09:32
|
|
|
Let's continue referring to the city of San Francisco and the metropolitan area of San Francisco interchangably to make this argument even more pointless and confusing!
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2014 15:13
|
|
|
Impotently rage about Silicon Valley: A D&D special report
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2014 15:19
|
|
|
I vote we replace the Silicon Valley with a Silicon Arcology.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2014 15:28
|
|
|
A Fancy 400 lbs posted:I vote we replace the Silicon Valley with a Silicon Arcology. Pave the bay.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2014 15:50
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:Also, SF is dense by US standards. Only NYC is denser I dunno, I think most of this thread qualifies at this point.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2014 18:08
|
|
|
A Fancy 400 lbs posted:I vote we replace the Silicon Valley with a Silicon Arcology. I know we're referencing Shadowrun, chummer, but isn't an actual arcology a good thing? (also, is there even a San Fransisco anymore in Shadowrun?)
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2014 18:27
|
|
|
Hodgepodge posted:I know we're referencing Shadowrun, chummer, but isn't an actual arcology a good thing? It's supposed to be a good thing. I'm not holding my breath.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2014 18:32
|
|
I CANNOT EJACULATE WITHOUT SEEING NATIVE AMERICANS BRUTALISED!
|
blowfish posted:It's supposed to be a good thing. The John Hancock Center in Chicago is effectively an arcology, and it's pretty nice.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2014 18:42
|
|
|
Nintendo Kid posted:The John Hancock Center in Chicago is effectively an arcology, and it's pretty nice. Is it more of an arcology than any other high rise residential building?
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2014 18:54
|
|
|
blowfish posted:Is it more of an arcology than any other high rise residential building? Most high rise residential buildings don't have nearly that much office and retail space. The supermarket on the 44th floor is even designed so that it's primarily accessible to the condo residents; although the office workers who don't live in the building can still use a second entrance to it. And during elections, the residential portion of the tower is its own precinct with the voting location being within the building. Typical high rise residential buildings only have minimal retail/services on the first few floors and maybe a few offices.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2014 19:06
|
|
|
Hodgepodge posted:I know we're referencing Shadowrun, chummer, but isn't an actual arcology a good thing? Oh, I totally forgot that they did that in Shadowrun. I was being serious, arcologies are boss as gently caress and Paolo Soleri was a genius.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2014 20:03
|
|
|
A Fancy 400 lbs posted:Oh, I totally forgot that they did that in Shadowrun. I was being serious, arcologies are boss as gently caress and Paolo Soleri was a genius. Oh. Carry on then. (I suppose D&D has had its fill of P&P references lately anyhow).
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2014 02:04
|
|
|
I like Shadowrun, I just prefer the Denver area and ex-Chicago as settings.
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2014 04:06
|
|
|
Lmfao.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2014 13:32
|
|
|
Has Justine Tunney posted in this thread yet? I imagine her level of megalomania wouldn't allow for her to not eventually start commenting in here
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2014 16:47
|
|
|
Amused to Death posted:Has Justine Tunney posted in this thread yet? I imagine her level of megalomania wouldn't allow for her to not eventually start commenting in here
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2014 20:39
|
|
|
serious norman posted:Lmfao. It's probably because Lowtax stopped doing those ironic Hentai game reviews. Something Awful I once had respect for you.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2014 20:44
|
|
|
Nessus posted:I assume she is fishmech. This will just be my working assumption from here on out.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2014 17:26
|
|
|
Berke Negri posted:This will just be my working assumption from here on out. Fishmech hates Uber though, and I don't think Tunney could bring herself to do that even to throw people off her trail.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2014 18:23
|
|
|
Nessus posted:I assume she is fishmech. fishmech is Albert Schweitzer compared to Tunney.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2014 18:44
|
|
|
Tech industry big-wig hitting us with the real concerns of today: https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/496012177103663104
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2014 00:17
|
|
|
Augustin Iturbide posted:Tech industry big-wig hitting us with the real concerns of today: What's sad is he's an outlier in the tech elite for saying "unfortunately" instead of "fortunately".
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2014 00:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 8, 2024 04:58 |
|
|
Augustin Iturbide posted:Tech industry big-wig hitting us with the real concerns of today: Well, if you think over aeons, it's basically not that unsurprising a concept - it's a lot easier to send unmanned probes everywhere, and I suspect AI-containing probes are how we'd explore the galaxy at some point. Sublight ones. It's not so much a concern as something to consider.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2014 01:43
|
|
