RebelMind
-
Posts
12 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by RebelMind
-
-
I'll reply later....
Good one, NB.
-
I would say he's lying, but only in this particular instance. In other words, he's lying now, but he doesn't always lie.
-
-
Is this all-powerful, all-knowing being of yours capable of tracing his own beginnings? If this being is omniscient, it should be a piece of cake.
-
If you mean the massive question marks; they mentioned that it functioned as an indicator that the computer was very uncertain.
No, I actually meant that Toronto is not a US city. I read somewhere that Chicago was it's next answer. If it could have eliminated Toronto, because it didn't match the category, then it would have gotten it right. Of course, there are several cities in the US named Toronto, so that might serve as a partial explanation. But as The Wrath said, it doesn't erase the fact that it overwhelmed the competition.
-
I think it's amazing. Besides being able to win its owners piles of money on Jeopardy, imagine the benefit of having a computer to which you can simply ask a question, and then get an answer to it. Get a Watson in your basement (easier said than done, I know), rig up speakers and mics throughout the house (or office) and you have answers on command, any answer, almost as fast as if you thought of it yourself.
Whether or not the humans win the match is not the standard to measure human success and achievement; the fact that a machine was built that could engage in such a contest is.
Btw, has Watson answered any questions incorrectly?
Last night, with the final jeopardy category of "US Cities", Watson's answer was "What is Toronto???????". Seems like the programmers missed something there.
-
You're proposing forced expropriation of my wealth. I've pleaded that you stop that and instead appeal to my faculty of reason. And I've declared that I will defend what I've earned from you if you try to bypass my reason. You simply ignore me? That is astonishing to me. That this thread has gone on as long as it has without someone becoming visibly upset as I am, I regard that as an embarrassment. I'm sorry if that is harsh, or you think I'm not treating your arguments with enough respect. It is only because you are declaring that mankind in general should not be allowed to reason independently from you. You, who have read some history books, and think you have learned from them that I can not be trusted to provide for my own security. That you and anyone else who has read the same books must provide it for me against my will. Why can't I provide for my own security? I haven't read those books, so I don't understand and I'm not prepared to spend what it takes to keep my freedom? Nonsense.
If you quote some of the things that Grames is saying, I think there is a good chance that he will respond to your posts.
-
Niners 5, Steelers 6. 5>6? I thought not.
Of course, if you want to talk about which team has actually PLAYED in the most Super Bowls...
Cowboys 8, Steelers 7, Niners 5
8 > both 7 and 5
-
Isn't anti-social and un-social mere semantics?
Anti = Against
Un = Not
Are you saying that "against" is synonymous with "not"?
-
Yeah, I've read all of those quotes and books. That is about "truth" not "objective truth".
What would be an example of non-objective truth?
-
First, which one of us is the walrus?
I believe John said it was him. Then later on, he said it was Paul.
Hi everyone. I, too, am an Objectivist, and am new to the forum. It all started with Gene Burns (Libertarian NY radio talk show host at the time), moved on to Robert J Ringer(Author of "Restoring The American Dream"), and thankfully, ended up with Ayn Rand.
Reblogged: To Whom Are "Third Rails" Really Dangerous?
in The Objectivism Meta-Blog Discussion
Posted
Do they work for the FDIC?