deezdelta said:

Yes. I can appreciate your argument from context and I believe you do have an argument. When I read it I think I get the gist but a little cleaning up would help strengthen my belief. The debate may be informal but that doesn't mean we have to be. While it may be the case that a little practice has in fact hurt some, I tend to agree with the basic concept of the old adage in this particular situation.

---

True, I got a little handy with the language ... I do that sometimes when I get excited :-D.
And thank you. Glad there was a point of understanding

iiilil said:

deezdelta said:

Yes. I can appreciate your argument from context and I believe you do have an argument. When I read it I think I get the gist but a little cleaning up would help strengthen my belief. The debate may be informal but that doesn't mean we have to be. While it may be the case that a little practice has in fact hurt some, I tend to agree with the basic concept of the old adage in this particular situation.

---

True, I got a little handy with the language ... I do that sometimes when I get excited :-D.
And thank you. Glad there was a point of understanding

---

Quote:

deezdelta said:
Notice how I didn't dissect the last line of your arguement. The one that say's "So, it is what it is... The hearts of man made manifest.".  Thats because even though there is no "intelligible logic" to the claim, I do know it to contain a high degree of truth.

---

DividedQuantum said:

The modern age is full of its share of catastrophes -- environmental, social, racial, economic, etc.  But perhaps the most ...  It's the single most important economic period in the history of the planet, and it's a whisper at best.  We're going to be forced to find a way to organize society around some locus other than employment, because when a robot can do it better, around the clock, and for no money -- that human position is gone forever.  This is the single biggest economic issue facing us over the next thirty years.

---

laughingdog said:

This guy seems to try to make a serious effort to sort some of it out.
http://www.truthdig.com/staff/chris_hedges

---

DividedQuantum said:

... supercilious idealism, I just feel like it's too little, too late.

---

Quote:

Google* is developing a quantum computer that it believes will outperform the world’s top supercomputers, according to an August 31 New Scientist article and sourced to researchers contacted by the magazine.

Google’s ambitious goal is to achieve “quantum supremacy”— which would be achieved when “quantum devices without error correction can perform a well-defined computational task beyond the capabilities of state-of-the-art classical computers,” as the authors of an arXiv paper (open access) explain.

The task in this case: simulate the behavior of a random arrangement of quantum circuits in a 48-qubit grid, which would require 2.252 petabytes of memory, almost double that of the top supercomputer in the world.

To do that, Google plans to build a whopping 50 qubit computer. So far, Google has only announced a modest nine qubit computer, but it has hired arXiv paper co-author John M. Martinis at the University of California, Santa Barbara (see “Google partners with UC Santa Barbara team to build new superconductor-based quantum information processors” on KurzweilAI) to try.

Success may prepare Google to construct something even bigger: a fully scalable machine,” says Ian Walmsley at the University of Oxford.

* With partners NASA Ames, SGT, and University of California, Santa Barbara


http://www.kurzweilai.net/googles-secret-plan-for-quantum-computer-supremacy

---