seanica
Joined 15 years ago
Joined 15 years ago
http://www.wikileaksparty.org.au/why-australians-should-be-w...
I just came back just now, just in case it was a co-incidence, and yep, it was not a co-incidence.
Your statement is what I mean. "Thinking things through" should be done during design. Once you have built system, its much harder to compensate for design flaws.
Programming is not designing. Designing is not programming. Fixing bugs is not designing.
You have to design into the UI system a means for it to compensate for changes in user behavior. You don't want a system that takes many uses to train. At the same time you don't want a system that is trained by a single use. For me this is the crux of the problem.
The happy medium that automatically detects deviations from a user's 'normal' behavior _and_ takes the correct action is very hard to design, as it involves AI fuzzy logic.
It's analogous to security flaws. If there is a flaw in the design, no amount of bug fixing will make the system secure, unless that 'bug fixing' changes the design.
That sounds like they would be proving a negative, which is impossible to do.
That won't stop them from trying. I hope there's a nearby friendly embassy. 8)
defn: "Information, esp. of a biased or misleading nature, used to promote or publicize a particular political cause or point of view"
http://mw1.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/propaganda
2: the spreading of ideas, information, or rumor for the purpose of helping or injuring an institution, a cause, or a person
3 : ideas, facts, or allegations spread deliberately to further one's cause or to damage an opposing cause; also : a public action having such an effect
> You don't think most countries have that kind of computing power?
The quote itself states that: "...or a large group with sufficient computing resources could pull it off."
I think you may have misunderstood my point of view. The point is, in his quote, the interviewee (Zachary Harris) singled out Iran. As it stands it is an out-of-the-blue assertion.