ofd

No, for front running.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Front_running Trading is based on a large part on the asymmetry of information. If everyone had the same information, there would be little to no trading left.

I would love to hear more about that. If you could find it, it would be most appreciated. I hope for the best and prepare for the worst. On one side, you can see a golden future, where hereditary diseases are wiped out, cancer is no more because of Crispr. A time where we can understand how to treat psychological traumata effectively and where there is much less suffering. It might as well go to the other direction where progress is stifled and we are under the thumb of some leftist ideology. I am more optimistic, because generation Z is already black- and redpilled more so than we were. There is a reason the mainstream is so afraid of the Intellectual Dark Web since they see that those ideas are getting more and more appeal. It's in the nature of kids to revolt against their parents (or so they say) and the revolt is for once on the side of reason with Peterson leading the charge telling his students how to fix their lifes.

This is true. But you have competition among companies, which also drives innovation. Once Toyota started their lean production mode (a comparatively minor technological advancement) it was at first ignored but then after some time copied all over the world. If you have competition and a minor advancement can help you decrease the marginal costs by a bit, that advancement will be implemented sooner or later. This is very true, but it's hard to quantify. Since the end of the cold war, you have seen a trend towards less interference, even the Nordic countries have begun to become a bit less restrictive, compared to the past 70 years. That's a good question, usually the both were connected. Keeping the family's fortunes together by marrying a partner from a good family was more important than good looks.

And for a good reason. Many of these irrational beliefs had a function. They create false positives that made it more likely that you survived. Hearing something rustle behind you doesn't mean in 99 out of 100 cases that there is a predator behind you. But in the one case it may have helped an ancestor to survive. If you take group selection into account, you have a good case explainging morality on a biological basis. Those groups that were altruistic towards each other had a higher chance of surviving as a group than groups that didn't behave like that. Over time, those moralistic genes became dominant and that's where we are today.

You can't stop market forces that are inherent to the market's logic. If some Northern countries decided to ban the use of expert systems on the workforce, other countries would happily adopt them and gain an advantage. The West has been practicing eugenics for the last centuries until recently by prohibiting cousin marriage and arranging marriages based on beneficial traits. The idea of a romantic marriage for middle and upper class strata of the society dates back to the mid 19th century. Before, people were chosen on rational grounds.

You can't stop market forces that are inherent to the market's logic. If some Northern countries decided to ban the use of expert systems on the workforce, other countries would happily adopt them and gain an advantage. The West has been practicing eugenics for the last centuries until recently by prohibiting cousin marriage and arranging marriages based on beneficial traits. The idea of a romantic marriage for middle and upper class strata of the society dates back to the mid 19th century. Before, people were chosen on rational grounds.

That limits the options to Asian Waifus and White Tradthots.

That depends on which ethical school of thought you adher to. It's not a moral question. As long as you don't hurt anybody or defraud people it's a neutral action. However, neutral actions can have negative outcomes. That doesn't follow. Automation decreases the marginal cost of production. You can employ the same number of people and produce more goods at a lower price. Neither the demand nor implementation of automation are moral questions. They follow the inherent logic of an established free market. No. If at all, people have the reasonable expectation that their government create a framework which allows them to find jobs. It will be once those people start getting unruly, having no jobs and what not. Just in case you didn't notice, there are a lot more dumb than smart people. Furthermore, they have less inhibitions to use violence to get what they want.

You are welcome You are right, most people aren't aware of the changes that will come in the next few decades. Previously, when there was a technological change that disrupted industries, people could find jobs in new industries. When the car became more popular, workers found employment in car factories and so on. With expert systems or AIs it will be different because happens at all sections for people who have a similar profile. The measurement today is the time it takes to take a decision. Today, the metric is 2 seconds. If it takes you 2 seconds to make a decision, your job can be automated, given there is a framework. Over time that time will increase and more and more complex systems will be rolled out. Which in turn means, that all of a sudden people with a median IQ of 100 will have a hard time finding a job. The more that progresses, the higher the IQ percentile that will be affected.

Sorry, I wasn't clear. This was the first case of an AI calling a restaurant afaik. The operator on the restaurant's side wasn't aware that he didn't speak to an AI because this was the first instance so he had to assume that it was a person. I think it's a nice gimmick for google to show, while they work at more important issues related with AI. The main problem is not creating an expert system, it is developing a framework in which it can operate. Once that is establish, it can replace humans.

How else would they treat the AI?

I have seen the part where this was tried out and the system failed.

This is false. There are a lot of cases where you legitimately and morally don't want the truth to come out. Say you intend to buy a lot of shares. Then you have a legitimate interest not to let that be known. In a truly free ancap society you can purchase insurance against blackmail. How the private company deals with the blackmailer is their problem.

It's flawed for a simple reason. There is no reason to assume that something that came into existence has a cause or causes for coming into existence. Even if you could show that there was a cause, anything can follow from it. Mickey Mouse or a billion Indian Gods may have created it, there is no rational reason to prefer one option over the other.

Nope. I said prime numbers are full of patterns. Look up the zeta-function if you don't believe me. The word you looking for is transcendent. Sorry that science disagrees with your pet peeve theory. Since the 20s of last century we know that electrons don't move around atoms in circles. There are two ways to react to that. Study physics or make stuff up on the spot. Choose wisely. I am sure it appears that way to you.

I never say you could. The formula is highly regular. Look up what the equation sign means. This is how a hydrogen atom looks like.

It's not inherently so, but all the societal organisations that have stood the test of time were either tribalistic or feudalistic with authoritarian in nature. Which should be no surprise to any observer, man being a political primate. Living together in small groups is coded into our DNA, the idea of individual freedom is too recent to have been a factor that was selected for or against. In other words, any organisation of eusocial omnivore mammals will be very similar.

You are 150 years behind physics.

Nah. The formula creates pi / 4 and it is highly regular. You can use it just as well as pi. Your argument is invalid. Also look up the zeta function in case you were wondering about patterns for prime numbers.

Both prime numbers and the number are full of patterns. Citation strongly needed. The only sort of (universal) morality that was constructed via evolution is game theory, namely tit for tat.

Good luck trying to order something from a chinese place.

That's why you'd benefit most from simple methods of meditation like breathing meditation.

Is the Riemann conjecture true? Does P = NP? Milk before or after the tea?

A coding cookbook confronts you with typical problems you have to solve with a language and it presents the solutions how to solve them. Trying to solve them makes you proficient in different aspects of that specific language. It's meant for beginners who mastered a language and who are looking to get better. There are intermediate and pro cookbooks as well.

If you want to learn coding, get a general introduction first and then the cookbooks, which are available for many languages https://www.amazon.de/Java-Cookbook-Ian-F-Darwin/dp/144933704X