Billions of dollars per year.
You're also incorrect, there's a set of positive claims that have been made concerning the shape, size, density, speed in multiple different vectors (around the sun, sun around the galaxy, galaxy relative to others) that are not objectively proven. The onus is on the one making the positive claims more than those who point out the flaws in those claims.
Revelations 7:1 for example is one of the many instances where it's described as "4 corners" of the earth.
Many instances where the discussion is of "the face" of the earth.
That can be interpreted in various ways, I get it. Could also consider descriptions of the firmament, but that is more of a "container" and there are models where a container works in spite of the shape of what is contained.
(I'm not hard on the idea of a flat earth, as it's not something that can really be proven except by leaving the planet and observing from the outside... my overall point here is that the concept is not as fallacious as we were taught in school. Also, the standard model has some serious issues when they are scrutinized, and even the solutions still lead back to the earth as a contained system, regardless of shape... most of all, there are bigger issues to worry about.)
Eratosthenes did the trigonometry before any concept of light refraction was known, and the numbers he found are still treated as correct.
The same effect can be created with a closer light source on a flat surface, if instead of assuming the light is coming like an = it were approaching as >. Just saying.
Which theory of gravity?
Quantum gravity does not exist, in spite of decades of research, there is no "graviton" and the "Higgs boson" only serves to provide mass.
Newtonian gravity is describing the effect of objects falling to the ground and makes no explanation for the cause.
Relativistic Gravity fails in predictions 95% of the time and is only being held together because of the introduction of concepts like "dark matter" and "dark energy" (matter and energy that does not otherwise interact with the EM spectrum but is placed exactly where it needs to be in the correct amounts).
https://www.kaggle.com/ - Really good resource, but python and numpy focused.
John D. Mcaffrey has many articles about coding neural nets in C#.
The ONLY downside with c# is the limited built in capacity for large matrix math, so, you'll end up with some pretty hefty nested for loops, or finding a library that has that added in.
Something I haven't really looked into since I was building stuff that got to where my home computer could no longer handle the training in anything of reasonable time frames.
Most of those "live chat" AI's are really just seeking out keywords to refer people to the right pages.
Kaggle is a good place to get tips on building a recommendation system through examples, and sticks to plain python for many examples.
(I started with C/C++/C# and Java, so, I tend to prefer being more explicit and verbose in code only because it leaves less question about what the code is doing instead of just calling a function that runs god knows what, but "it works")
I would tend to agree, especially that most of the open AI systems are written to be very convoluted to try and figure out how it works, even though it makes it easily used. When you figure the connection that microsoft and google have, I don't trust that they didn't hide some shit in there for their own purposes.
IMO, it would take a quantum computer to create a true general AI, primarily because the way a brain works does involve some quantum effects. Digital AI tries to replicate the non-linearity, but it's ultimately a data in -> data out as far as the types of ML systems people build.
If there was a true general AI (as in able to respond to any form of information, continuously learning, and other factors I am not considering), great care would need to be made to try to guide it to have morality, that it did not have the sense of being imprisoned, and most of all that it remains sane.
That said, I'm guessing that your intent is an AI model that's meant to learn to handle certain types of tasks, and not something as computer intensive as the GPT-4 (GPT-3 needed something like 1 TB of Ram, and a server rack filled to the tits with GPUs or TPUs, and a wicked amount of hard drive space for the training and the data).
How do you think Elon Musk runs all his companies?
Being skilled in delegating to trusted and competent people.
Putin said whomever controls AI controls the world. The news is saying they are fearful he will blow up the world if he loses.
It's feasible but doubtful.
Why do you think Pelosi wanted Trump's football?
A guess would be a nuclear false flag.
How did the military create a nuclear buffer before AI?
I always assumed it was launch codes and confirmation codes with some form of cryptography to validate the legitimacy.
Why would Milley need to INFORM our enemies instead of just axing the order?
I can't answer that... sounds bad though.
Would AI be able to bypass anyone unwilling to follow orders?
A sufficiently advanced one, yes. Many demos of AI systems have shown their willingness to cheat to win.
Is Putin's statement about the future, or the past?
Most likely the near future.
What would AI look like projecting out into the future.
A true general AI would likely require quantum computing, how it would develop is completely unknown. Once it gets intelligent beyond human levels, it might ad well be thought of as alien.
Would it be as fragmented as Q?
Q is extremely unlikely an AI, there's a variety of reasons. Technically AI is premised on statistical models, and the further out it would project the increased error rates would be seen which makes the 5 year proofs as statistical impossibility. Time travel is the most likely.
While I'm not firm that "the earth is a flat topographical plane" as much as pointing out that such a take isn't as stupid as I had once thought.
There's a legitimate discussion going on that can get pretty deeply technical.
The reality is, at least in our day to day lives are concerned, the earth is an unmoving and generally flat terrain (or mountainous depending where one lives.)