= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Because LWers adopting this rule would not produce a swarm of false positives (and therefore I won't do it).
This is what I thought. But ChristianKl is right: it doesn't need to. From the first false positive you're already doing damage with almost no cost to you. Sure your address will start to receive more spam, but it will be filtered like the spam you already have is.
But having it in the ISP, or as a really popular extension, would deal a big blow to spam.
no actually; they want to weed out people who notice spelling. If you notice spelling you also probably notice scams. (this is a commonly known pattern of email scams). if only good scammable people respond; all the better for them.
Today in Hacker News there's a research article speaking exactly of this.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11909111
Makes me think that a possible method to mitigate spam would be to answer each email with a LSTM-generated blob of text, so the attackers are swarmed with false positives and cannot continue the attack. Of course, this would have to be implemented by the email provider.
Thanks for doing this.
In response to
comment
by
on
2016 LessWrong Diaspora Survey Analysis: Part One (Meta and Demographics)
Gratitude thread.
What a load of work, Ingres. Thank you for doing this.
In response to
Attention! Financial scam targeting Less Wrong users
If I wanted to run an experiment to test how susceptible to scams the LW community actually was, this is exactly how I would do it.
I would probably use better spelling in the messages. It reduces credibility of the scammer.
= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d){kind=logo}
That's not really surprising. Google employs by far the most AI researchers and they have general AI as an actual goal. Deepmind in particular has been pushing for reinforcement learning and general game playing. Which is the first step towards building AI agents that optimize utility functions in complex real world environments, instead of just classifying images or text.
What specific corporation is winning at the moment isn't that relevant. Facebook isn't far behind and has more of a focus on language learning, memory, and reasoning, which are possibly the critical pieces to reaching general intelligence. Microsoft just made headlines for founding a new AI division. Amazon just announced a big competition for the best conversational AIs. Almost every major tech company is trying to get in on this game.
I don't think we are that far away from AGI.
At the very least 20 years. And yes Alphabet are the closest, but in 20 years a lot of things can change.