who cares, just dont shove political opinions into a software project that developers. we are devs not jobless sjw's running around the road with some useless sign board
> who cares, just dont shove political opinions into a software project that developers. we are devs not jobless sjw's running around the road with some useless sign board
Here we are, having a technical discussion and here you are, shoving politics into it.
Hi Peter, thanks for doing the AMA!
I have a Delaware registered LLC (10 years old), I managed to get even an EIN remotely.
However, I can't open a bank account remotely and so I have just been paying the registered agent fees and Delaware gov taxes for the LLC all these years.
I however, genuinely want to come to the states to open the bank account and actually expand my business into the US.
The LLC hasn't really had any annual meetings/etc. but taxes are always paid on time. How do I use my LLC to apply for a B1/B2 to visit the US?
OR should I just close it and try the normal route? Thanks in advance!
It's going to be difficult to answer this in this forum because really what you are asking is how can you get a B-1/B-2 visa because the existence of a non-operating LLC really has no bearing on that question.
My understanding of the B-1 visa is all you really need is a letter of employment. Might get tricky with you providing the letter of employment to yourself however.
gleam would be taken more seriously if they didnt plaster their strong political opinions on the project page..i do not understand why they need to talk about politics on a tech project page..this is not about agreeing or disagreeing with the viewpoints..just keep it out of your professional discourse if you want people to take you or your work seriously...otherwise it just deviates the discourse unnecessarily
"Black lives matter. Trans rights are human rights. No nazi bullsh*t."
Plaster? Are you referring to this singular line of text way down on their main page? If this statement precludes you from using the project I would imagine it is working as intended.
I am one amongst those who don't completely buy into the AI hype, yet.
In the grand scheme of things, AI right now can identify patterns. And this is possible because everything in the AI universe is tied to a number. Now, this mathematical view of the world does help solve a lot of problems, such as security, prediction, recommendations, etc., however, I don't think AI maybe able to completely, autonomously replace us humans.
For example, computers see the world using sensors that translate pictures into "pixels". In contrast, we don't see pixels, we see objects. We natively see objects. Now, in a computer's world, it can still do something called object recognition, but, again, this is based on the fundamental idea of pixels and a lot of math around is around this concept, which is vastly different from how humans perceive the world.
The problem is, because, everything is based on math, there isn't much native intelligence to a computer and someone needs to impart it mathematically into the computer's brain. Because, math and intelligence are two different things. This is why you're able to fool a computer with an A4 sheet printout of your face but, not a real human. You can only program so much logic into a math wizard. But, that doesn't necessarily translate into intelligence.
Take cars for instance, I drive a 6 speed manual transmission. In the real life, I'm also a street racer. I love manual because it gives me full control. Right when I'm about to hit the corner, I downshift knowing in advance (based on what I saw minutes earlier "objects" in front of me, not pixels) that there is a curve ahead and I may need to reduce my speed in 3 seconds, after which I will need the full power available to overtake the guy infront of me. With an automatic car, first you must brake, then the system will downshift for you, and then you hope it doesn't upshift in the wrong instance leading to a window for others to over-take you. Where is the intelligence in that?
I recently saw a Tesla auto-brake even before an accident happened. That was cool. But, let's say you're in a situation where the car in front of you is trying to block you so the thieves can then break into yours and steal your stuff/murder/etc.? This is not from a Hollywood movie, this is something that is very common in some parts of Asia. IF the Tesla brakes at that instance, you're screwed, probably even dead. So, then you take manual control. But, to me, all this AI isn't real AI unless the computer can understand the context of what's happening around you and reacting accordingly.
When I narrated this to a friend, his first reaction was "How can you expect a computer to..do this?" I don't care, because I, as a human can do all this. My friend's way of thinking is our problem - Starting out with the limitations of what a computer can or cannot do. Instead, we should be asking "If I can do this, why can't my computer?"
And until a computer can really do what we can do without assistance, it's all just a bunch of neat, shiny mathematical algorithms packaged inside a program doing X number of tasks it knows to do. Maybe some day it will, and I hope that day isn't very far.
you are correct, the article is over hyped. The current AI is very fragmented and computers can't do we do very easily. On the other hand computers do stuff very easily that we find very hard. As computers approach to things we do easily this is where it gets scary. Its like they have a super power over us.
What if someone were to deploy a virus into all Teslas. If you identify a human, then go identify them as a threat and go full speed at it. A simple tweak in the algorithm makes all teslas man hunters.
