Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Nobody watched "Terminator" then? "Skynet " mean anything?
Both Terminator and I Robot make good warnings about NOT putting AI in charge of anything.
I wouldn't even allow driverless vehicles, except in extremely limited situations.
(Short haul, low speed movement of freight, between defined locations on defined routes.)
... I wouldn't even allow driverless vehicles, except in extremely limited situations.
(Short haul, low speed movement of freight, between defined locations on defined routes.)
You or I will not be given a choice.
Driverless vehicles are a new and evolving tech. The first hundred generations of this tech must be ignored, as the tech matures there will be a day when it proves to the insurance industry that it can be much safer than human-driven vehicles. Once that day approaches the insurance industry will effectively take the keys from us.
Combined with Agenda 21 it will allow for the reduction in the total gross number of vehicles on the road to reduce to a third of our current number of vehicles.
There will no longer be seen as a practical 'need' for each family to have three vehicles.
Sign up for your vehicle usage schedule on an app. When do you require a ride to work, when do you require a ride home, when do you require to go shopping, etc. A community-owned vehicle will pick you up and take you anywhere you need to go. Fewer accidents, less pollution, fewer vehicles in existence, cheaper for you and me.
Driverless vehicles are NOT AI. They are a complex system of programs, but such a task does not require an automobile to have any level of sentience.
That is an extremely insightful way to explain it.
It can be done with current computing systems, but the computational power is pretty extreme, and requires millions of outputs with millions of inputs feeding back into the system.
I doubt they will ever devote the resources for the feedback.
I am interested in the supervision of Moore's Law. I have been expecting it, for a while, but haven't seen any thing in writing, about it.
It is coming out, very slowly. Whether in ten years or twenty, it will begin to impact security systems. We will need to substantially increase keyspace and entropy to compensate. (I haven't really studied quantum encryption, but what I have heard isn't impressive.)
Moore's law hit a roadblock some years ago due to hitting technological limitations. Processor speeds really haven't increased significantly in years. I remember them (consumer models) going from 500Mhz to 3000Mhz pretty quickly in the grand scheme of things and then they've struggled to get much beyond that. They've kept the game going by adding cores, CPUs, and GPUs to systems but the underlying speed limit of how fast you can push electrons through a circuit is subject to the laws of physics just like everything else. They can stack the technology to make things faster but the speed is close to the limit on the technology we're using. You can power a car with a 100HP motor or you can power each wheel with one and create a 400HP vehicle but HP of the motor hasn't changed.
The reason companies and governments are chasing quantum encryption is that it offers something no other form of encryption can- instant notification to the cypher creator that the code has been hacked or viewed because the data is entangled at the subatomic level. Data requiring consecutive decryptions could be destroyed or re-encrypted at the simultaneous moment the first unauthorized decryption occurs, in theory quantum computing both destroys every form of encryption that came before it, and makes most forms of encryption that comes after it the possibility to be permanent. Until the "next thing" is invented.
Last edited by terracore; 08-24-2023 at 09:01 PM..
Moore's law hit a roadblock some years ago due to hitting technological limitations. Processor speeds really haven't increased significantly in years. I remember them (consumer models) going from 500Mhz to 3000Mhz pretty quickly in the grand scheme of things and then they've struggled to get much beyond that. They've kept the game going by adding cores, CPUs, and GPUs to systems but the underlying speed limit of how fast you can push electrons through a circuit is subject to the laws of physics just like everything else. They can stack the technology to make things faster but the speed is close to the limit on the technology we're using. You can power a car with a 100HP motor or you can power each wheel with one and create a 400HP vehicle but HP of the motor hasn't changed.
I had been expecting some articles, discussing how we were hitting the speed limits with our chips, and what to expect next. I just haven't seen them. Probably just missed them, since I have had a lot of irons in the fire.
Quote:
The reason companies and governments are chasing quantum encryption is that it offers something no other form of encryption can- instant notification to the cypher creator that the code has been hacked or viewed because the data is entangled at the subatomic level. Data requiring consecutive decryptions could be destroyed or re-encrypted at the simultaneous moment the first unauthorized decryption occurs, in theory quantum computing both destroys every form of encryption that came before it, and makes most forms of encryption that comes after it the possibility to be permanent. Until the "next thing" is invented.
I have recited an old saying, for years:
In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice, but in practice there is.
The reality is that quantum computing will not destroy every form of encryption, in our lifetime. As it gets better, we will have to adjust. Longer and more complex keys, better random number systems, etc. Reasonable expectations (not the ones bragged about by the proponents) are that we may eventually need to double our key length.
Right now, 103 bits (private key entropy) puts brute force keyspace searching beyond anything our planet can field. That increases by about one bit per year. Quantum computing, in another ten years, may be able to search that entire keyspace. Maybe. If you have secrets that need to be kept longer than that, you may have to improve your methods.
I don't have much interest in quantum encryption, since I don't think it will become available to the common citizen, within my life expectancy. (Two decades, more or less.)
Status:
"Hello Darlin, Nice to see you - Conway Twitty"
(set 4 days ago)
Location: 9764 Jeopardy Lane
791 posts, read 372,092 times
Reputation: 830
Quote:
Originally Posted by TRex2
I had been expecting some articles, discussing how we were hitting the speed limits with our chips, and what to expect next. I just haven't seen them. Probably just missed them, since I have had a lot of irons in the fire.
I have recited an old saying, for years:
In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice, but in practice there is.
The reality is that quantum computing will not destroy every form of encryption, in our lifetime. As it gets better, we will have to adjust. Longer and more complex keys, better random number systems, etc. Reasonable expectations (not the ones bragged about by the proponents) are that we may eventually need to double our key length.
Right now, 103 bits (private key entropy) puts brute force keyspace searching beyond anything our planet can field. That increases by about one bit per year. Quantum computing, in another ten years, may be able to search that entire keyspace. Maybe. If you have secrets that need to be kept longer than that, you may have to improve your methods.
I don't have much interest in quantum encryption, since I don't think it will become available to the common citizen, within my life expectancy. (Two decades, more or less.)
I like it...
I have recited an old saying, for years:
In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice, but in practice there is.
AI is a threat to information available online. Everyone collects our data, AI will be used to scour the internet and refine our data to form models of who we are and what we are. Businesses do this today but they are much slower than is possible with an AI engine. You know when you search your name on the internet and find false hits, AI wont and will feed that to a database for use by other systems. Software vendors sell screen scrape software, even name brand vendors, with robotic assistants today but they are slow and tedious. Linkedin.com = rocketreach.co - people seem unable to recognize you do not need to hack into someone's account, you just need to create an account that has access already - that is what they are selling.
I have recited an old saying, for years:
In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice, but in practice there is.
AI is a threat to information available online. Everyone collects our data, AI will be used to scour the internet and refine our data to form models of who we are and what we are. Businesses do this today but they are much slower than is possible with an AI engine. You know when you search your name on the internet and find false hits, AI wont and will feed that to a database for use by other systems. Software vendors sell screen scrape software, even name brand vendors, with robotic assistants today but they are slow and tedious. Linkedin.com = rocketreach.co - people seem unable to recognize you do not need to hack into someone's account, you just need to create an account that has access already - that is what they are selling.
It will be a threat on the other side of the coin, as well.
Older less sophisticated forms of AI have been used, for several years, to spin out Leftist propaganda and disinformation, and more recently, to support Covid vaccines, masking, and some other commercial interests. It isn't hard to distinguish them, if you know what to look for, and watch them (and question them) over a period of time.
You might want to watch Unknown: Killer Robots Yes AI can become a threat depending on what kind of AI the US and world have.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
