info
Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Chrysler's Space Shuttle alternative
5 views
Skip to first unread message
Byker
Jun 10, 2020, 9:01:23 PM6/10/20
to
Were these people on the level?: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=___JNGJog0A
Note that we STILL aren't using aerospike engines:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K4zFefh5T-8
I don't think Elon Musk has anything to worry about...
Note that we STILL aren't using aerospike engines:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K4zFefh5T-8
I don't think Elon Musk has anything to worry about...
Phantom_View
Jun 10, 2020, 10:14:43 PM6/10/20
to
And aerospike engines look a lot better
on paper .....
BiologyMajor
Jun 11, 2020, 11:52:50 AM6/11/20
to
https://www.monstershack.net/reviews/full/gfx/lostinspace/image022.jpg
Phantom_View
Jun 11, 2020, 9:04:29 PM6/11/20
to
On Thu, 11 Jun 2020 11:52:44 -0400, BiologyMajor <L...@Umich.edu>
wrote:
Weren't we supposed to have our own flying saucers
by now ? When I was a kid they PROMISED !
And our "flying cars" ... big drones ... just ain't what
we had in mind either !
Somebody is responsible for this situation.
wrote:
by now ? When I was a kid they PROMISED !
And our "flying cars" ... big drones ... just ain't what
we had in mind either !
Somebody is responsible for this situation.
Byker
Jun 11, 2020, 9:20:51 PM6/11/20
to
"Phantom_View" wrote in message
news:7vk5efppo09bcqgss...@4ax.com...
travel, etc....
news:7vk5efppo09bcqgss...@4ax.com...
>
> Weren't we supposed to have our own flying saucers
> by now ? When I was a kid they PROMISED !
>
> And our "flying cars" ... big drones ... just ain't what
> we had in mind either !
And robots doing all the work so we would have oodles of free time for
> Weren't we supposed to have our own flying saucers
> by now ? When I was a kid they PROMISED !
>
> And our "flying cars" ... big drones ... just ain't what
> we had in mind either !
travel, etc....
Phantom_View
Jun 11, 2020, 9:35:57 PM6/11/20
to
No economy. You cannot get from here to robotopia, the
whole economy will implode somewhere along the path
and then we will not have people OR robots working
anymore.
John Carlson
Jun 11, 2020, 9:38:37 PM6/11/20
to
On 6/11/2020 6:35 PM, Phantom_View wrote:
> On Thu, 11 Jun 2020 20:19:47 -0500, "Byker" <byker@do~rag.net> wrote:
>
>> "Phantom_View" wrote in message
>> news:7vk5efppo09bcqgss...@4ax.com...
>>>
>>> Weren't we supposed to have our own flying saucers
>>> by now ? When I was a kid they PROMISED !
>>>
>>> And our "flying cars" ... big drones ... just ain't what
>>> we had in mind either !
>>
>> And robots doing all the work so we would have oodles of free time for
>> travel, etc....
>
> With robots doing stuff, people will not get paid anymore.
Not so. There is always an infinite amount of work we would like to have
> On Thu, 11 Jun 2020 20:19:47 -0500, "Byker" <byker@do~rag.net> wrote:
>
>> "Phantom_View" wrote in message
>> news:7vk5efppo09bcqgss...@4ax.com...
>>>
>>> Weren't we supposed to have our own flying saucers
>>> by now ? When I was a kid they PROMISED !
>>>
>>> And our "flying cars" ... big drones ... just ain't what
>>> we had in mind either !
>>
>> And robots doing all the work so we would have oodles of free time for
>> travel, etc....
>
> With robots doing stuff, people will not get paid anymore.
done. There is not an infinite number of robots, and there are some tasks
that, at any give time, robots will not (yet) be able to do.
More worrying than robots might be AI. That will eliminate a lot of
brainwork jobs that robots would never do anyway.
Phantom_View
Jun 11, 2020, 10:05:42 PM6/11/20
to
On Thu, 11 Jun 2020 18:38:36 -0700, John Carlson <j_ca...@gmx.com>
wrote:
>On 6/11/2020 6:35 PM, Phantom_View wrote:
>> On Thu, 11 Jun 2020 20:19:47 -0500, "Byker" <byker@do~rag.net> wrote:
>>
>>> "Phantom_View" wrote in message
>>> news:7vk5efppo09bcqgss...@4ax.com...
>>>>
>>>> Weren't we supposed to have our own flying saucers
>>>> by now ? When I was a kid they PROMISED !
>>>>
>>>> And our "flying cars" ... big drones ... just ain't what
>>>> we had in mind either !
>>>
>>> And robots doing all the work so we would have oodles of free time for
>>> travel, etc....
>>
>> With robots doing stuff, people will not get paid anymore.
>
>Not so. There is always an infinite amount of work we would like to have
>done. There is not an infinite number of robots, and there are some tasks
>that, at any give time, robots will not (yet) be able to do.
Robots are getting cheaper, and much better. When labor
relations go to hell, the owners buy robots. There is a risk
here, especially for the "blue collar" segment. Tesla trucks
can deliver the goods, loaded and unloaded by robots too.
A lot of "mechanical" jobs can be done by robots. At this
point they could do a lot of construction work as well.
The sons of IBMs "Watson" AI can replace every secretary
in an office, almost replace your doctor too. I think the next
10 years are going to be extremely important to the
human/robot economic equation - and I do not see it
working out very well for a big segment of the labor market.
But if not enough humans are working then they will not have
money to buy the stuff the robots are making. It is ultimately
a fatal equation - biz buys robots to get ahead, but eventually
the robots eliminate the customers.
"general purpose" AI like George Jetson's robot maid.
Todays "AI" is just little facets of intelligence - which can
still be quite useful, you do not need "consciousness" to
build a car or a bridge or to do the books. We also do not
really understand how intelligence works from the bottom
up. We can see the top layer, and see nerve cells, but
that all-important middle is very fuzzy. We also lack the
hardware with the needed capacity.
But I suppose it WILL come eventually. That will be very
interesting. AI - well, just "intelligence" by that point -
will partially reflect humans, but will also have an alien
quality as well due to the drastically different life
experience. And no, anything that complex cannot be
programmed to stick to Azimov's "rules" ... it will be
able to rationalize its way around them in a microsecond,
about the time it takes a 3-year-old to determine that you
did not REALLY mean he must stay out of the cookie jar.
We build 'em, we are going to have to LIVE with them.
wrote:
>On 6/11/2020 6:35 PM, Phantom_View wrote:
>> On Thu, 11 Jun 2020 20:19:47 -0500, "Byker" <byker@do~rag.net> wrote:
>>
>>> "Phantom_View" wrote in message
>>> news:7vk5efppo09bcqgss...@4ax.com...
>>>>
>>>> Weren't we supposed to have our own flying saucers
>>>> by now ? When I was a kid they PROMISED !
>>>>
>>>> And our "flying cars" ... big drones ... just ain't what
>>>> we had in mind either !
>>>
>>> And robots doing all the work so we would have oodles of free time for
>>> travel, etc....
>>
>> With robots doing stuff, people will not get paid anymore.
>
>Not so. There is always an infinite amount of work we would like to have
>done. There is not an infinite number of robots, and there are some tasks
>that, at any give time, robots will not (yet) be able to do.
relations go to hell, the owners buy robots. There is a risk
here, especially for the "blue collar" segment. Tesla trucks
can deliver the goods, loaded and unloaded by robots too.
A lot of "mechanical" jobs can be done by robots. At this
point they could do a lot of construction work as well.
The sons of IBMs "Watson" AI can replace every secretary
in an office, almost replace your doctor too. I think the next
10 years are going to be extremely important to the
human/robot economic equation - and I do not see it
working out very well for a big segment of the labor market.
But if not enough humans are working then they will not have
money to buy the stuff the robots are making. It is ultimately
a fatal equation - biz buys robots to get ahead, but eventually
the robots eliminate the customers.
>
>More worrying than robots might be AI. That will eliminate a lot of
>brainwork jobs that robots would never do anyway.
Fortunately (?) we are still quite a ways from any sort of
>More worrying than robots might be AI. That will eliminate a lot of
>brainwork jobs that robots would never do anyway.
"general purpose" AI like George Jetson's robot maid.
Todays "AI" is just little facets of intelligence - which can
still be quite useful, you do not need "consciousness" to
build a car or a bridge or to do the books. We also do not
really understand how intelligence works from the bottom
up. We can see the top layer, and see nerve cells, but
that all-important middle is very fuzzy. We also lack the
hardware with the needed capacity.
But I suppose it WILL come eventually. That will be very
interesting. AI - well, just "intelligence" by that point -
will partially reflect humans, but will also have an alien
quality as well due to the drastically different life
experience. And no, anything that complex cannot be
programmed to stick to Azimov's "rules" ... it will be
able to rationalize its way around them in a microsecond,
about the time it takes a 3-year-old to determine that you
did not REALLY mean he must stay out of the cookie jar.
We build 'em, we are going to have to LIVE with them.
George
Jun 12, 2020, 5:02:05 PM6/12/20
to
--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
BiologyMajor
Jun 12, 2020, 6:47:05 PM6/12/20
to
https://www.indeed.com/q-Aerial-Robotics-jobs.html
https://www.vault.com/industries-professions/professions/d/drone-engineers
Although now that I think about that might not be far off~
Byker
Jun 12, 2020, 7:16:59 PM6/12/20
to
"George" wrote in message news:20200613090...@hnpl.net...
that's a-coming: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IkRE2ogHrdc
providing you don't become a lawn dart in the process:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hrAdayUh6-4&t=18s
>
> According to Popular Science that was supposed to happen in the 60s.
And we were all supposed to be taking rocket rides. Well, it looks like
> According to Popular Science that was supposed to happen in the 60s.
that's a-coming: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IkRE2ogHrdc
providing you don't become a lawn dart in the process:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hrAdayUh6-4&t=18s
Phantom_View
Jun 12, 2020, 10:01:34 PM6/12/20
to
On Fri, 12 Jun 2020 18:46:59 -0400, BiologyMajor <L...@Umich.edu>
wrote:
No, not far off at all. They are also being taught how
to optimize their software, "smarter" every generation.
wrote:
to optimize their software, "smarter" every generation.
BiologyMajor
Jun 13, 2020, 8:25:33 AM6/13/20
to
That's something I suppose.
And it only took fifty years for science to give us
muscle cars again.
That reminds me, when I was a kid my dad was having his
mid-life crisis, and in the year...1969.
So he went into a Chevy dealer and bought the most
loaded Camaro they had.
Bright red 396 SS with black racing stripes, black vinyl
top, fake hood scoops, fancy rims, auto, the
whole list of options.
That's the car years later all rusted out I learned
how to drive with, and in Michigan during the winter.
Sure wasn't a great snow car, not at all. You'd tap the brakes
in snow and the front wheels would stop but the rear wheels
would just keep turning.
It would just go sideways in the snow speeding up or
slowing down. But it sure sounded great doing it.
0 new messages