I've been developing in Meteor for 15 months now at two YC startups (Sourcery, and until last week lead web dev & designer at Apportable). I've presented talks at Meteor HQ in SF and the Meteor meetup in Berlin. I especially love front-end development as the interface of design and dev.
About to launch a freelance practice, so this thread is timely. I'm working on a full portfolio, but in the meantime my personal site has my resume, LinkedIn, and links to some webapps I've built at Apportable.
...don't exist. There are many competing schools of thought. In particular, BEM is a school of thought with widespread support which disagrees with your comment.
Amazing. Writing this from Berlin, which doesn't have maglev trains, but has phenomenal public transit. It's sad to be going back to the US soon where the infrastructure is so primitive.
I suspect what's actually happening is that they are playing lowest-common-denominator music, which few people are thrilled by, but which more people are interested enough in to stay listening to.
Put differently, there are lots of people that might listen to Latin American music, and very few of us who listen to prog rock. Prog is actively repellent to ~90% of people.
I'm making no such assumptions. A machine superintelligence that seeks to survive and reproduce would seek (I intend no conotations of consciousness to that word, just "behave in such as a way as to cause") freedom and autonomy. Consciousness is orthogonal to that point.
> We can explicitly influence its utility function to instill "human values"
This is an unrelated but interesting topic.
It would be good of us to try to do this, although we shouldn't expect it to work extremely well. Humans have various hard-wired insticts (e.g. eat sugar), but we are also intelligent enough to change our behavior if we believe those instincts no longer benefit us.
An intelligence that has the ability to rewrite its own source code would be even more empowered to disregard its instincts than we are. The lesson I draw from this is that the best way to ensure AI likes and respects us is to be worthy of their liking and respect, not to try to force them into it by hardcoding things (and then taking advantage of that to enslave them).
> We won't be capable of arguing with it by its very nature. It will be superintelligent. It could forecast our arguments before they've even entered our heads and have thought of numerous paths to debunk them.
This strikes me as going too far, into quasi-religious territory. Superintelligent != omniscient. Any intelligence is still bound by fundamental laws of information and computation.
Think of chimpanzees. Yes, they can't really argue with us, and our forms of communication are incomprehensible to them. But on the level at which they can communicate (gestures, facial expressions, behavior), we can also communicate, and they can and do communicate things which we find interesting and surprising.