NBC developing robot-centered futuristic drama

[David]

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/live-feed/nbc-orders-what-drama-cougar-261183

NBC Orders 'What If' Drama From 'Cougar Town' Producer
by Lesley Goldberg

NBC is taking a step into the future with Beautiful People.
The network has given a pilot order to the hourlong "what if" drama
from Cougar Town consulting producer/director Michael McDonald set 10
minutes in the future.

From Universal Television and ABC Studios, Beautiful People is
described as an imaginative and thematically rich ensemble "what if"
drama set 10 minutes in the future where families of mechanical human
beings exist to service the human population -- until some of the
mechanicals begin to "awaken."

The "low tech, high drama" project would mark a return of sorts to the
network for McDonald, who directed and appeared in a handful of
episodes of Scrubs.

In addition to Cougar Town and Scrubs, McDonald's credits include
MadTV and Web Therapy.

[Patty Winter]

In article <dlv2c71nc98hr5enp...@4ax.com>,
David <diml...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/live-feed/nbc-orders-what-drama-cougar-261183

>
>From Universal Television and ABC Studios, Beautiful People is
>described as an imaginative and thematically rich ensemble "what if"
>drama set 10 minutes in the future where families of mechanical human
>beings exist to service the human population -- until some of the
>mechanicals begin to "awaken."

Okay, I waited 10 minutes after reading this and I don't see any
families of mechanical human beings in my neighborhood yet. Did
they perhaps mean "10 decades"? Although people usually call that
"100 years."


Patty

[Barry Margolin]

In article <4ec18201$0$1658$742e...@news.sonic.net>,

But even after you wait 10 minutes, it's still "now", isn't it? You can
never be 10 minutes into the future, the future is always coming.

Wasn't Max Headroom set "20 minutes into the future"? I don't remember
anyone giving them shit about that. But it was such a cool show, we
could forgive just about anything.

--
Barry Margolin
Arlington, MA

[Dimensional Traveler]

I'm already cringing.

[Dano]

"David" wrote in message news:dlv2c71nc98hr5enp...@4ax.com...

======================

Sounds a lot like the movie Surrogates with Bruce Willis from a couple of
years ago.

[David Johnston]

How does that sound at all like a world in which people live through
telepresence?

[Ken from Chicago]

"Patty Winter" <pat...@wintertime.com> wrote in message
news:4ec18201$0$1658$742e...@news.sonic.net...

What they mean by "10 minutes in the future" is an parallel timeline set in
almost-contemporary near-future, ala the latter season of 24, which was
arguably set around 2020 by its 8th and final season.

IOW we can't afford to pay a big budget so we want to use contemporary
settings but wanna feel free to use a few fx now and then, ala GRIMM.

-- Ken from Chicago

[Ken from Chicago]

"David Johnston" <Da...@block.net> wrote in message
news:j9sise$8qc$1...@dont-email.me...

> On 11/14/2011 2:22 PM, Dano wrote:
>> "David" wrote in message
>> news:dlv2c71nc98hr5enp...@4ax.com...

<snip>

>> Sounds a lot like the movie Surrogates with Bruce Willis from a couple
>> of years ago.
>>
>
> How does that sound at all like a world in which people live through
> telepresence?

People and robots were living side by side.

-- Ken from Chicago

[Obveeus]

"Dano" <janea...@yahoo.com> wrote:

>> "David" wrote in message
>> news:dlv2c71nc98hr5enp...@4ax.com...

>> From Universal Television and ABC Studios, Beautiful People is
>> described as an imaginative and thematically rich ensemble "what if"
>> drama set 10 minutes in the future where families of mechanical human
>> beings exist to service the human population -- until some of the
>> mechanicals begin to "awaken."

> ======================
>
> Sounds a lot like the movie Surrogates with Bruce Willis from a couple of
> years ago.

Not at all like 'Surrogates', but it does sound like 'I, Robot'.

[Professor Bubba]

In article <j9tloc$bus$1...@speranza.aioe.org>, Ken from Chicago

Um ... Max Headroom was rather famously set "twenty minutes into the
future." This ten-minute thing is either a tribute or a ripoff; take
your pick.

[Michael Urban]

In article <dlv2c71nc98hr5enp...@4ax.com>,
David <diml...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/live-feed/nbc-orders-what-drama-cougar-261183
>

>From Universal Television and ABC Studios, Beautiful People is
>described as an imaginative and thematically rich ensemble "what if"
>drama set 10 minutes in the future where families of mechanical human
>beings exist to service the human population -- until some of the
>mechanicals begin to "awaken."
>
>The "low tech, high drama" project would mark a return of sorts to the
>network for McDonald, who directed and appeared in a handful of
>episodes of Scrubs.

Creation of the Humanoids (1962). They can call the androids 'clickers'
as an homage. By the way, for a forgotten low-budget effort, it's
actually a pretty good little film.

[Professor Bubba]

In article <j9tv2n$b1r$2...@reader1.panix.com>, Michael Urban

Yes. I particularly liked the intermarriage thing.

[David Johnston]

Well no. People were living in robots. People and robots were living
side by side in I, Robot and A.I.

[Ken from Chicago]

"David Johnston" <Da...@block.net> wrote in message

news:j9u66d$qoa$2...@dont-email.me...

Remote-controlled robots are still robots.

Tho I suspect you're thinking of autonomous robots (aka "androids").

-- Ken from Chicago

[Bill Steele]

On 11/15/11 12:18 PM, Ken from Chicago wrote:
>
>
> "David Johnston" <Da...@block.net> wrote in message
> news:j9u66d$qoa$2...@dont-email.me...
>> On 11/15/2011 6:25 AM, Ken from Chicago wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> "David Johnston" <Da...@block.net> wrote in message
>>> news:j9sise$8qc$1...@dont-email.me...
>>>> On 11/14/2011 2:22 PM, Dano wrote:
>>>>> "David" wrote in message
>>>>> news:dlv2c71nc98hr5enp...@4ax.com...
>>>
>>> <snip>
>>>
>>>>> Sounds a lot like the movie Surrogates with Bruce Willis from a couple
>>>>> of years ago.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> How does that sound at all like a world in which people live through
>>>> telepresence?
>>>
>>> People and robots were living side by side.
>>
>> Well no. People were living in robots. People and robots were living
>> side by side in I, Robot and A.I.
>
> Remote-controlled robots are still robots.
>
> Tho I suspect you're thinking of autonomous robots (aka "androids").
>
> -- Ken from Chicago

Reading between the lines, this would be sort of a prequel to I, Robot.
Think Caprica and Cylons: When AIs become conscious.

They should have titled it "Singularity."

[David Johnston]

On 11/15/2011 10:18 AM, Ken from Chicago wrote:
>
>
> "David Johnston" <Da...@block.net> wrote in message
> news:j9u66d$qoa$2...@dont-email.me...
>> On 11/15/2011 6:25 AM, Ken from Chicago wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> "David Johnston" <Da...@block.net> wrote in message
>>> news:j9sise$8qc$1...@dont-email.me...
>>>> On 11/14/2011 2:22 PM, Dano wrote:
>>>>> "David" wrote in message
>>>>> news:dlv2c71nc98hr5enp...@4ax.com...
>>>
>>> <snip>
>>>
>>>>> Sounds a lot like the movie Surrogates with Bruce Willis from a couple
>>>>> of years ago.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> How does that sound at all like a world in which people live through
>>>> telepresence?
>>>
>>> People and robots were living side by side.
>>
>> Well no. People were living in robots. People and robots were living
>> side by side in I, Robot and A.I.
>
> Remote-controlled robots are still robots.
>
> Tho I suspect you're thinking of autonomous robots (aka "androids").

"android" doesn't mean autonomous. It means "manlike". True robots are
autonomous.

[Ken from Chicago]

"David Johnston" <Da...@block.net> wrote in message

news:j9u9me$m6l$2...@dont-email.me...

Um, no, car factories are filled with robots that aren't autonomous--despite
being in the ... auto biz.

-- Ken from Chicago

[David Johnston]

On 11/15/2011 2:34 PM, Ken from Chicago wrote:

>>> Tho I suspect you're thinking of autonomous robots (aka "androids").
>>
>> "android" doesn't mean autonomous. It means "manlike". True robots are
>> autonomous.
>
> Um, no, car factories are filled with robots that aren't
> autonomous--

No, the car factory robots are autonomous as long as they are activated.

[Bill Steele]

I guess we could quibble over whether autonomous means "Not needing
direction, it will do the job without any help from me," or
"self-directed, able to make decisions on its own." Most industrial
robots are programmed to perform a fixed series of movements, same way
every time. I'd use autonomous for, say, a robot that inspects an engine
block and decides where it needs further machining and does it. DARPA
talks about "autonomous vehicles" where you give it a set of GPS
coordinates and it goes there, but figures out the route for itself and
doesn't hit any pedestrians along the way.

Today's robots -- if you count the ones that are still in labs -- run a
continuum from really stupid on up (with a side category for ones that
have no programming at all but are just remote-=controlled by humans).
What we don't have yet, and what the TV show is apparently about, is
self-awareness.

[~consul]

'tis on Wed, 16 Nov 2011 14:03:11 -0500, wrote Bill Steele thus to essay our thoughts to discern upon

-------- Original Message --------
> On 11/15/11 5:45 PM, David Johnston wrote:
>>> Um, no, car factories are filled with robots that aren't
>>> autonomous--
>> No, the car factory robots are autonomous as long as they are activated.
> I guess we could quibble over whether autonomous means "Not needing direction, it will do the job without any help from me," or "self-directed, able to make decisions on its own." Most industrial robots are programmed to

Isn't the word Sentient for that?
--
"... respect, all good works are not done by only good folk. For here, at the end of all things, we shall do what needs to be done."
--till next time, consul -x- <<poetry.dolphins-cove.com>>

[Ken Wesson]

On Wed, 16 Nov 2011 14:03:11 -0500, Bill Steele wrote:

> DARPA talks about "autonomous vehicles" where you give it a set of GPS
> coordinates and it goes there, but figures out the route for itself and
> doesn't hit any pedestrians along the way.

DARPA doesn't merely talk about them; they've built them. So has Google
(!).

[Bill Steele]

On 11/16/11 7:19 PM, ~consul wrote:
> 'tis on Wed, 16 Nov 2011 14:03:11 -0500, wrote Bill Steele thus to essay
> our thoughts to discern upon
> -------- Original Message --------
>> On 11/15/11 5:45 PM, David Johnston wrote:
>>>> Um, no, car factories are filled with robots that aren't
>>>> autonomous--
>>> No, the car factory robots are autonomous as long as they are activated.
>> I guess we could quibble over whether autonomous means "Not needing
>> direction, it will do the job without any help from me," or
>> "self-directed, able to make decisions on its own." Most industrial
>> robots are programmed to
>
> Isn't the word Sentient for that?

Technically means sensing or feeling, but has acquired the connotation
of consciousness.

[Ken from Chicago]

"Bill Steele" <ws...@cornell.edu> wrote in message
news:ja40b7$fp$1...@ruby.cit.cornell.edu...

Ah yes, "sentient" vs "sapient". About as bad as "robot" vs "android".

-- Ken from Chicago