How broadly applicable is it? From what I've read of machine learning powered classroom monitoring systems from Hikvision and the like require regular retraining (eg: new 360 degree photos) for each student as they age and change. Seems like an idea that is 90% of the way there, and is mainly propped up by the central govt subsidizing these systems despite their severe limitations.
The only way the US can win is by moving past the culture wars and returning to an accelerating society. Other Western countries have already given up (Germany, Italy, and Portugal have sided with China by signing up for the Belt and Road and using Huawei equipment. Probably more countries to come)
I really hope the chaos we're going through is a cathartic release from the period of economic stagnation that we've been in for the past 40 - 50 years. I disagree with AOC on almost everything but her Green New Deal had one aspect worth praising. There was a bit harking for a return to American Greatness (Apollo program, etc.) Not too far from Trump's "Make America Great Again". The US is still united in its underlying goals but people are divided on how we get there.
"Americans will always do the right thing." - Winston Churchill.
The US is returning to space again, this time built on the ambitions of two of the world's most successful living entrepreneurs (Bezos and Musk). Perhaps this will be the inspiring force driving Americans back to a focus on technological innovation. Anything is possible, but this is my bet.
This is the problem with Americans, banking on pie in the sky fantasies from billionaires. Meanwhile promising kids get killed in school and people die needlessly due to lack of healthcare, at enormous costs to society. Basic, fundamental stuff!
But that has always been the way how Capitalism works. It's never meant to serve the mass as only the fittest, or the luckiest shall I say to avoid the meritocracy mentality, will reap the majority of benefits. In most industries we look at, there are only very few main players that will completely dominate 80-90% of the market, while the rest are just there to pick up the remaining 10% scraps. Same situation in current society where the 1% elites own the majority of wealth compared to the 99%. This is just how Capitalism works as everything in the system is structured this way to facilitate achieving such an outcome.
People complain about inequalities but then unwilling to modify or upgrade the current capitalism model to a higher more advanced version. Everything has its own lifecycle in life, the current model has achieved many incredible results in the past but it may be approaching a maturity stage and is in need of an upgrade. America is always about pursuing the current capitalism model to the max so if one is navigating under this version and yet expecting something different in contrast, that would be unrealistic. Again under this model and structure if you leave something running for a while, it always ends up with very few luckiest players who will receive the most. It might work well when under small to medium population as the negative effects are negligent, but as the number keeps on growing, the ratio of amount of people between the 1% and 99% will become drastically different and those negative effects will also increase tenfold. Globalization process will only help speeding this up and accelerating it more.
How do you solve this? If putting a cap on the elites' earnings, arguably it may stop innovations as they may lose the incentives to invest. But everything in life is a trade off, you get one thing by giving up another. Even things that are seemingly good now can become destructive if you leave it running by itself for too long without re-balancing it. Real world example is medicine, it may help your health but if you take too much or too long it may kill you, same with our food if you eat too much you become obese then you die. Excess is good only to a certain point then it will become bad. This is the law of nature that is timeless and never going to change, anyone who goes against this rule they will cease to exist it's that simple.
Our real world is dynamic and ever changing, we could have a model that worked very well from 30-40 years ago but it would have also produced a lot of baggages and side effects along the way, and one day it will reach a point where those side effects will take over what used to be good, the unexpected negativity will gain larger as they will become devastating and lead to self-destructive result of this model, that is if it's not re-adjusted or re-modeled in time to lessen those unwanted consequences. Anyone who believes they can keep running well on the same model to eternity without re-adjusting to avoid self-destruction are in complete disillusion. They are attempting to go against the unchanged universal law stated above and the end result will always be the same.
To solve inequalities, it's important to set a cap NOT at the maximum wealth level, but rather at the wealth difference ratio between the 1% (or arguably 10%) and the remaining 99% (or 90%). This way people at the top can keep growing but they will also need to pull those below them up as well, because let's face it we are all living daily depending on each other, nobody among the 1% would have gotten to the top or can keep remaining there without the 99%. This is very different than tax as it correlates and connects wealth ownerships directly between the two groups of population. Besides, tax is never intended for the goal of wealth distribution anyway or at least it is not being used efficiently for that purpose, most of it goes to funding other also critical but unrelated government projects and even wars.
However, any forms of such re-distribution is against ...
The maintainability of networks based on a vendor that can't produce secure firmware is highly questionable, nevermind it being insecure by definition.
Although I was in China for one week and enjoyed it, the culture feels very foreign to me because the people there seem so happy to give up privacy and any control of their government, as long as their middle class keeps growing. There is a lot of pride in China.
The problem of our not having long term planning is very real, and one of the nice things about our culture, having some degree of privacy and protections on data, will hold us back in the race to develop increasingly effective AI. I have been working in the field of AI for 30+ years and to see China catching up so fast is disturbing. We are ahead, I think, in basic research, but they are ahead in consumer facing AI. I think most people in the USA don’t read technical AI papers coming out of China and see demos of their consumer facing tech.
We really need to up our game, and do it quickly as far as more corporation and US government cooperation, more funding, etc. And long term, we absolutely have to start investing more resources in our educational system.
You can follow r/machinelearning on Reddit: they list current papers. On youtube, I haven't tried this but reasonable search terms might be "China AI shopping cafe face recognition".
At this very moment the Chinese are strategically moving mega tons of goods to foreign ports so they can re origin it to appear as though it is not from China. These people are lying, cheating dogs to the day they die.
What utter bullshit. China will lucky to a unified country in 10 years, from 1919 - 1948 China was ruled by Warlordism and civil war. Uncle Xi has destroyed what little credibility the CCP ever had.
21 comments
[ 2.8 ms ] story [ 57.6 ms ] threadChinese movies have gotten slightly better, like this year in 2019 having some blockbusters - but not international blockbusters.
Another data point on the quality front is the struggle of China being able to produce reliable jet engines. (Google it, recent news)
I really hope the chaos we're going through is a cathartic release from the period of economic stagnation that we've been in for the past 40 - 50 years. I disagree with AOC on almost everything but her Green New Deal had one aspect worth praising. There was a bit harking for a return to American Greatness (Apollo program, etc.) Not too far from Trump's "Make America Great Again". The US is still united in its underlying goals but people are divided on how we get there.
"Americans will always do the right thing." - Winston Churchill.
The US is returning to space again, this time built on the ambitions of two of the world's most successful living entrepreneurs (Bezos and Musk). Perhaps this will be the inspiring force driving Americans back to a focus on technological innovation. Anything is possible, but this is my bet.
People complain about inequalities but then unwilling to modify or upgrade the current capitalism model to a higher more advanced version. Everything has its own lifecycle in life, the current model has achieved many incredible results in the past but it may be approaching a maturity stage and is in need of an upgrade. America is always about pursuing the current capitalism model to the max so if one is navigating under this version and yet expecting something different in contrast, that would be unrealistic. Again under this model and structure if you leave something running for a while, it always ends up with very few luckiest players who will receive the most. It might work well when under small to medium population as the negative effects are negligent, but as the number keeps on growing, the ratio of amount of people between the 1% and 99% will become drastically different and those negative effects will also increase tenfold. Globalization process will only help speeding this up and accelerating it more.
How do you solve this? If putting a cap on the elites' earnings, arguably it may stop innovations as they may lose the incentives to invest. But everything in life is a trade off, you get one thing by giving up another. Even things that are seemingly good now can become destructive if you leave it running by itself for too long without re-balancing it. Real world example is medicine, it may help your health but if you take too much or too long it may kill you, same with our food if you eat too much you become obese then you die. Excess is good only to a certain point then it will become bad. This is the law of nature that is timeless and never going to change, anyone who goes against this rule they will cease to exist it's that simple.
Our real world is dynamic and ever changing, we could have a model that worked very well from 30-40 years ago but it would have also produced a lot of baggages and side effects along the way, and one day it will reach a point where those side effects will take over what used to be good, the unexpected negativity will gain larger as they will become devastating and lead to self-destructive result of this model, that is if it's not re-adjusted or re-modeled in time to lessen those unwanted consequences. Anyone who believes they can keep running well on the same model to eternity without re-adjusting to avoid self-destruction are in complete disillusion. They are attempting to go against the unchanged universal law stated above and the end result will always be the same.
To solve inequalities, it's important to set a cap NOT at the maximum wealth level, but rather at the wealth difference ratio between the 1% (or arguably 10%) and the remaining 99% (or 90%). This way people at the top can keep growing but they will also need to pull those below them up as well, because let's face it we are all living daily depending on each other, nobody among the 1% would have gotten to the top or can keep remaining there without the 99%. This is very different than tax as it correlates and connects wealth ownerships directly between the two groups of population. Besides, tax is never intended for the goal of wealth distribution anyway or at least it is not being used efficiently for that purpose, most of it goes to funding other also critical but unrelated government projects and even wars.
However, any forms of such re-distribution is against ...
Why should Europe follow American policy?
(I am European)
The maintainability of networks based on a vendor that can't produce secure firmware is highly questionable, nevermind it being insecure by definition.
Although I was in China for one week and enjoyed it, the culture feels very foreign to me because the people there seem so happy to give up privacy and any control of their government, as long as their middle class keeps growing. There is a lot of pride in China.
The problem of our not having long term planning is very real, and one of the nice things about our culture, having some degree of privacy and protections on data, will hold us back in the race to develop increasingly effective AI. I have been working in the field of AI for 30+ years and to see China catching up so fast is disturbing. We are ahead, I think, in basic research, but they are ahead in consumer facing AI. I think most people in the USA don’t read technical AI papers coming out of China and see demos of their consumer facing tech.
We really need to up our game, and do it quickly as far as more corporation and US government cooperation, more funding, etc. And long term, we absolutely have to start investing more resources in our educational system.
I fall into this category. Could you point to some examples?
China is big, poor and is getting old, quickly.
He might have mistaken China for Russia.