On Fri, 14 Oct 2016 18:14:01 +0100, Stephen wrote:

> On 10/14/2016 5:48 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
>> Somehow I hadn't noticed the subject on this post - 637 is a number
> 
> Yip it surely is and it is 641 now.

641 is a very different error code.  In fact, off the top of my head, I 
don't recall what it is....<checks reference book I wrote that contains 
the definitive list from the time>  Ah, yes, INVALID_REQUEST.  That 
figures. ;)

>> that's near and dear here....it's an error code in a product I was/am a
>> SME in that indicates a serious issue that can be easy to fix, and I
>> was involved in some of the original work done on how to fix it.:)
>>
> Funny how the same numbers keep turning up. 316 for me.

It is, at that.

>> Anyways.....
>>
>> https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/oct/12/google-creates-ai-
>> program-that-uses-reasoning-to-navigate-the-london-tube
>>
>> It seems that Google is learning how to play Mornington Crescent.  Now
>> that's terrifying.
> 
> Sorry - we haven’t been able to serve the page you asked for.
> 
> https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/oct/12/google-creates-ai-
program-that-uses-reasoning-to-navigate-the-london-tube
> 
> gets there.
> 
> Interesting.

My newsreader's word wrap can be a bitch at times.  Sorry 'bout that.

Jim



-- 
"I learned long ago, never to wrestle with a pig. You get dirty, and 
besides, the pig likes it." - George Bernard Shaw

Post a reply to this message