User talk:Arch dude

Singularity by 2020

Hey. I stumbled upon your userpage by accident, and I am curious why do you think it will happen so early. I would put my money on somewhere in 20-40 years. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk to me} 04:42, 6 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Piotr. I cannot provide a rational defense of the date, only of the concept. Singulatarians generally accept one or the other of two models: the "swell" or the "spike," as described in Damien Broderick's book The Spike. The "swell" assumes that progress will continue incrementally just as has occurred in the past. I find the "spike" model to be much more likely. In this model, The infrastructure gradually improves until it can support a sudden breakthrough to Superintelligence, the event known as the "singularity.". Then some minor catalytic addition occurs that creates a self-improving autonomous system. This system then evolves abruptly, probably over the course of a few hours or days. In this model, not much is visible to most observers prior to the transition. So, it comes down to a feeling as to what constitutes a sufficient infrastructure and when will that infrastructure be available. A minimally-sufficient infrastructure would require a significant and unlikely catalyst, probably purposely developed. As the infrastructure becomes richer, a broader range of progressively simpler catalysts are possible, and eventually the infrastructure becomes so rich that an unintentional (but improbable) catalyst suffices. Richer still, and and increasingly broad range of increasingly more probable unintentional catalysts suffice. In this model, the singularity is inevitable unless humanity ceases to exist. But the richness of the infrastructure is increasing at an exponential rate. My unsupported guess is that we are well past the minimally-sufficient infrastructure and are at or near the point where an improbable accident is possible, or where a deliberate breakthrough could be initiated by an individual working alone with only normal access to the Internet. Major elements of the infrastructure include massive computing capability (including clouds and supercomputers) increasingly rich knowledge bases (including Wikipedia,) and increasingly sophisticated analytics (including search engines and Watson.) -Arch dude (talk) 23:38, 6 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Spider mite

Sorry, I started my copyright review of Spider mite without checking the talk page first. In the last hundred I've reviewed this is the first where there was some discussion on the talk page, but I will start making it a practice to check the talk page first. That said, I think the facts are clear, the Colorado site was copied from, and should not have been. The ideal solution is probably a rewrite, but given the extreme backlog at wp:cp, I am limiting my actions to removal, and minor rewrite when possible. Sorry to leave it with some further cleanup needed.--SPhilbrick (Talk) 12:23, 30 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your advise and assistance.

Hello Arch,

I appreciate your advise for me. Since I am new and my post on Najaf article was the 1st one, I got a bit surprised when my post was removed immediately. However I followed the instructions and shared my proof of references and answered other concerns of the person removing the post at the Najaf Talk page. I have edited my post today so please review and let me know if there is anything else I need to do https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Najaf#Medieval_or_recent_times. I'm hoping that after providing authentic information I am allowed to share the information.

Have a blessed day! Syed z (talk) 18:34, 6 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Template talk:Cite DNB

Hi Arch duke. Thanks for your comment, which was certainly a more reasonable analysis than either PBS or Billinghurst had to offer. To be honest, I'm not quite sure what steps I should take from here. I tried asking for help at the Help Desk just last month, to which only PBS and Billinghurst replied. I could submit another edit request, although it must be said I am still not sure how to put my proposal into practice, code-wise.--Nevé –selbert 11:05, 13 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

References for article Richard de Clare, 2nd Earl of Pembroke

Hello Arch dude,

In relation to your offer to clean up the references on the aforementioned article, I would greatly appreciate it. The mess was solely my fault and it was largely as a result of my incompetence as a new editor. I plan to hit the books so your free to make whatever changes you feel are necessary.

Sincerely,

Margalant (talk) 18:36, 31 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Re-References for Richard de Clare, 2nd Earl of Pembroke

Hello Arch dude,

Thank you very much for your help and hard work! Also, I really appreciate the compliment. I’ll definitely take your advise — and take into account copyright in the future! You did a great job cleaning up the article and its appeciated.

Sincerely,

Margalant (talk) 14:05, 1 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Content dispute

Hi and thanks for your reply to my recent problem. I asked for a third party editor assistance before making a content dispute, was that the wrong thing to do? From what I understood of the guidelines, this was the course of action to take before going the whole hog? If I'm wrong then I'm sorry for posting in the wrong section.

Thanks again for being civil and helpfulTroy von Tempest (talk) 06:18, 10 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Troy von Tempest: Hi again. WP:DISPUTE provides the entire gamut of tools, starting from the usual discussions on the talk page and going on up from there. It includes Wikipedia:Third opinion, which is not very formal and which will attract editors who are better at this stuff than I am. I'm not sure if other helpdesk denizens are any good at third opinion stuff. All Wikipedia editors are self-selected and select their own tasks with no direction or prior co-ordination. It's never wrong to start at the help desk if you don't know where to go. -Arch dude (talk) 16:19, 10 July 2018 (UTC

Thanks againTroy von Tempest (talk) 02:05, 12 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank You Arch Dude

Thank you Arch Dude, your input and support was very helpful, and I am happy the extraneous content was cleared. I am happy it is all cleared and back to normal.

Best Regards,

Matthew Asinari

Masinari (talk) 22:00, 15 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Outstanding Contributions Recognition

Outstanding Contributions Recognition

Your work and contributions are exemplary.

Dear Arch dude, with intelligent and most helpful inputs at the Help desk, you truly are an outstanding contributor.

Your efforts to guide editors at the Help desk is appreciated.

Keep up the great work! :)

Lourdes