Of course, they will not be called "combat troops." They are too close for comfort for pretty much any purpose you can mention. We are at the tail end of 2011. What will they be like in 2014? 2018? 2025? Barring tragic accidents or medical issues, most of us sitting here watching the video will live to see the walking, talking, working, patrolling descendants of PetMan. May the gods have mercy on our souls, for I fear the owners of the robots will not.
This is the first intelligent remark in this thread. I wonder if human society in general can work in the large scale presence of robot soldiers and workers. Robotic technology is advancing far more quickly than I had expected. The next 20 or 30 years are not going to be boring. Who owns the robots owns the wealth.
I want everything to be free! Information wants to be free! Music wants to be free! Movies want to be free! Why do these bastards charge us money for Art! Don't they get it? It wants to be free! Since it's digital and can be distributed for nearly zero marginal cost, it should always be free! OK, so you actually rent a physical disk at the supermarket. Big fucking deal! If not free, they should at least never ever raise the price!
Goddamn Luddites! Stuck in the 20th century. Fucking old economy... [mumble mumble, gripe gripe]
Full disclosure: I kept my Netflix account intact in spite of their changes. It's still a convenient bargain with a huge library compared to other sources.
Even here in the US, when I see those fancy electronic whiteboards I wince. It is not only wasteful distraction to learning, but encourages shallow PowerPoint-esque teaching. I agree that chalk, a wooden blackboard, books, and a smart, motivated, and idealistic teacher would be vastly more appropriate.
Wrong, Comrade! You are so wrong! They are pro-actively protecting us from the imminent threats of massive total destruction by terrorists from Eurasia and Eastasia!
Welcome, Comrades!
Welcome to the Glorious Union of Soviet Corporatist Republics!
Yes. Wanting to personally go out in space is a laughably childish desire. Only a fool could possibly hope for it to be realistic at any reasonable cost or to anything beyond a suborbital amusement park ride.
Ah yes, the old bait and switch. No, nobody is against sending satellites into orbit, exploring the solar system and beyond, and so forth. We are against wasting money on manned space exploration because far from being "immensely profitable" to society, it is a huge, useless money sink that is only "immensely profitable" for the highly influential military-industrial-congressional complex. This is not being a Luddite. Those of us who oppose manned space exploration are the most vigorous proponents of robotic space exploration and the general development and application of robotic technologies at the service of humans and human labor, hardly a Luddite cause. If Virgin Atlantic wants to make a space tourism business, fine. Knock yourselves out. Don't expect me to pay for it, though. I refuse to subsidize a bunch of wealthy assholes who want to enjoy an elitist and unbelievably expensive amusement park ride.
You yourself may lack the vision and fortitude to tackle the challenges of space exploration and exploitation, but thankfully there are many individuals out there who are up to it.
The tired old saw that manned space exploration has accomplished anything of importance. It really hasn't, aside from landing on the moon a few times at tremendous expense almost half a century ago. Our solar system has been and continues to be explored by robots, not by people. The universe is being observed with robotic telescopes, spectrometers, and many other devices with no need whatsoever of a human presence. You are acting like a child. You are a sci fi space adventure magical religious zealot who is unable to distinguish reality from fantasy. And a crybaby to boot.
Yeah! Fuck you, man! Like, I want to be able to go to Mars man! Why can't I? Want to go to Mars! Want to go to Mars! Want to go to fucking Mars!
[stamps feet, jumps up and down, then throws self on floor, tearfully pounding it with fists and feet]
I have a fucking right to go to Mars, Dude! It's in the fucking constitution! I pay my taxes, or at least my parents do! Why are you repressing me, Dude?!
It's a bit like handing your wallet to a hooker and watching them walk away.
No, it's more like having unprotected sex with that hooker and having to deal with all the fallout resulting from your initial bad decision.
Actually, it's like having repeated unprotected sex with that skanky chick down the street over a period of years, trying to keep it secret from your wife and kids, and having to deal with all the fallout.
Even your very rough and incomplete ("won't be a serious cost") calculation confirms my assertion that it is not possible in practice. I would prefer much more detailed calculations, though.
I guess it was your turn to repeat that same old "get off this rock" claptrap. It is pure rubbish. You mention at least a 1% survival rate, which would be close to 70,000,000 people. I'll be a nice guy and drop it to 1 million survivors.
As the self-designated sci fi space adventure magical religious cultist volunteering to enlighten us, please calculate the following in enough detail to be reasonable and credible. How much would it cost to transport 1 million people to a space outpost of your choosing (it must already be ready to receive and sustain them), and go from 100% dependence on earth to 0% in 100 years or less?. You may send them up in subgroups and build the outpost in stages if you like, but the whole process from start of outpost construction to achieving a 1 million person outpost with 0% dependence on earth must take no more than one earth century.
You will find that in practical, social, economic, political, and industrial terms, it is not possible. I challenge you to show in credible detail that I am mistaken.
Don't stop dreaming, but please stop repeating that tired and tiresome old analogy with earthbound exploration (which TFA covered quite well). You didn't get the article, apparently.
You didn't understand the article, did you? Resorting to emotional arguments won't change things, although I assume it makes you feel better. To paraphrase an old Chinese epithet, you will live in interesting times.
Beware of jumping to the conclusions that 1) I am proposing to halt technological progress, or 2) that superficial short term efficiency is desirable. Neither are true. The rest is left as an exercise for the reader. A rather lengthy one.
Unfortunately, all that seems to pass for common knowledge here at Slashdot. Techie simpletons think that everything should be done by machines. They won't realize that they have exterminated all the value in human labor until it's too late. No more teachers, no more farmers, no more artisans, no more doctors, and eventually no more engineers. Everything done by machines via iPhone apps or something just as stupid.
The old adage is true: Scientists stand on each other's shoulders, engineers dig each other's graves.
...This is not a seat-of-the-pants, fly-by-night shakedown.
Law school probably offers an entire range of courses teaching their students how to keep a straight face.
They teach much more refined, effective, and perfectly defensible techniques to shake people down, none of that risky and uncouth seat-of-the-pants, fly-by-night shaking down. That's for spammers and Ukrainian gangsters.
Patents from the 30s, 40s and 50s expired decades ago. Everyone is free to use them at no cost, they are now in the public domain. That right there is the whole point of the patent system, an all too often ignored principle.
Slashdot Mirror
Of course, they will not be called "combat troops." They are too close for comfort for pretty much any purpose you can mention. We are at the tail end of 2011. What will they be like in 2014? 2018? 2025? Barring tragic accidents or medical issues, most of us sitting here watching the video will live to see the walking, talking, working, patrolling descendants of PetMan. May the gods have mercy on our souls, for I fear the owners of the robots will not.
A system with a handful of people owning 99% of the world's wealth will not be sustainable.
Alas, my friend, it has been sustainable for the better part of 30,000 years.
This is the first intelligent remark in this thread. I wonder if human society in general can work in the large scale presence of robot soldiers and workers. Robotic technology is advancing far more quickly than I had expected. The next 20 or 30 years are not going to be boring. Who owns the robots owns the wealth.
I want everything to be free! Information wants to be free! Music wants to be free! Movies want to be free! Why do these bastards charge us money for Art! Don't they get it? It wants to be free! Since it's digital and can be distributed for nearly zero marginal cost, it should always be free! OK, so you actually rent a physical disk at the supermarket. Big fucking deal! If not free, they should at least never ever raise the price!
Goddamn Luddites! Stuck in the 20th century. Fucking old economy... [mumble mumble, gripe gripe]
Full disclosure: I kept my Netflix account intact in spite of their changes. It's still a convenient bargain with a huge library compared to other sources.
Even here in the US, when I see those fancy electronic whiteboards I wince. It is not only wasteful distraction to learning, but encourages shallow PowerPoint-esque teaching. I agree that chalk, a wooden blackboard, books, and a smart, motivated, and idealistic teacher would be vastly more appropriate.
and not only include Africa but also other 3rd world regions
Wait a sec! Is that code for "California?"
Wrong, Comrade! You are so wrong! They are pro-actively protecting us from the imminent threats of massive total destruction by terrorists from Eurasia and Eastasia!
Welcome, Comrades!
Welcome to the Glorious Union of Soviet Corporatist Republics!
Yes. Wanting to personally go out in space is a laughably childish desire. Only a fool could possibly hope for it to be realistic at any reasonable cost or to anything beyond a suborbital amusement park ride.
Ah yes, the old bait and switch. No, nobody is against sending satellites into orbit, exploring the solar system and beyond, and so forth. We are against wasting money on manned space exploration because far from being "immensely profitable" to society, it is a huge, useless money sink that is only "immensely profitable" for the highly influential military-industrial-congressional complex. This is not being a Luddite. Those of us who oppose manned space exploration are the most vigorous proponents of robotic space exploration and the general development and application of robotic technologies at the service of humans and human labor, hardly a Luddite cause. If Virgin Atlantic wants to make a space tourism business, fine. Knock yourselves out. Don't expect me to pay for it, though. I refuse to subsidize a bunch of wealthy assholes who want to enjoy an elitist and unbelievably expensive amusement park ride.
You yourself may lack the vision and fortitude to tackle the challenges of space exploration and exploitation, but thankfully there are many individuals out there who are up to it.
The tired old saw that manned space exploration has accomplished anything of importance. It really hasn't, aside from landing on the moon a few times at tremendous expense almost half a century ago. Our solar system has been and continues to be explored by robots, not by people. The universe is being observed with robotic telescopes, spectrometers, and many other devices with no need whatsoever of a human presence. You are acting like a child. You are a sci fi space adventure magical religious zealot who is unable to distinguish reality from fantasy. And a crybaby to boot.
Yeah! Fuck you, man! Like, I want to be able to go to Mars man! Why can't I? Want to go to Mars! Want to go to Mars! Want to go to fucking Mars!
[stamps feet, jumps up and down, then throws self on floor, tearfully pounding it with fists and feet]
I have a fucking right to go to Mars, Dude! It's in the fucking constitution! I pay my taxes, or at least my parents do! Why are you repressing me, Dude?!
[etc., etc.]
It's a bit like handing your wallet to a hooker and watching them walk away.
No, it's more like having unprotected sex with that hooker and having to deal with all the fallout resulting from your initial bad decision.
Actually, it's like having repeated unprotected sex with that skanky chick down the street over a period of years, trying to keep it secret from your wife and kids, and having to deal with all the fallout.
Even your very rough and incomplete ("won't be a serious cost") calculation confirms my assertion that it is not possible in practice. I would prefer much more detailed calculations, though.
I guess it was your turn to repeat that same old "get off this rock" claptrap. It is pure rubbish. You mention at least a 1% survival rate, which would be close to 70,000,000 people. I'll be a nice guy and drop it to 1 million survivors.
As the self-designated sci fi space adventure magical religious cultist volunteering to enlighten us, please calculate the following in enough detail to be reasonable and credible. How much would it cost to transport 1 million people to a space outpost of your choosing (it must already be ready to receive and sustain them), and go from 100% dependence on earth to 0% in 100 years or less?. You may send them up in subgroups and build the outpost in stages if you like, but the whole process from start of outpost construction to achieving a 1 million person outpost with 0% dependence on earth must take no more than one earth century.
You will find that in practical, social, economic, political, and industrial terms, it is not possible. I challenge you to show in credible detail that I am mistaken.
You didn't get it. Try reading the whole article again. Carefully and thoughtfully this time.
Don't stop dreaming, but please stop repeating that tired and tiresome old analogy with earthbound exploration (which TFA covered quite well). You didn't get the article, apparently.
You didn't understand the article, did you? Resorting to emotional arguments won't change things, although I assume it makes you feel better. To paraphrase an old Chinese epithet, you will live in interesting times.
No, we're not. Far from it.
Beware of jumping to the conclusions that 1) I am proposing to halt technological progress, or 2) that superficial short term efficiency is desirable. Neither are true. The rest is left as an exercise for the reader. A rather lengthy one.
Unfortunately, all that seems to pass for common knowledge here at Slashdot. Techie simpletons think that everything should be done by machines. They won't realize that they have exterminated all the value in human labor until it's too late. No more teachers, no more farmers, no more artisans, no more doctors, and eventually no more engineers. Everything done by machines via iPhone apps or something just as stupid.
The old adage is true: Scientists stand on each other's shoulders, engineers dig each other's graves.
Dennis Ritchie had an impact on the technology world FAR beyond what Jobs and Apple could ever dream of
Hear, hear!
Be true to yourself and do what you think is right. Everything else is bullshit. Go against your own personal code and you will regret it.
It is an experimental science. Don Norman and Jakob Nielsen are among its pioneers.
...This is not a seat-of-the-pants, fly-by-night shakedown.
Law school probably offers an entire range of courses teaching their students how to keep a straight face.
They teach much more refined, effective, and perfectly defensible techniques to shake people down, none of that risky and uncouth seat-of-the-pants, fly-by-night shaking down. That's for spammers and Ukrainian gangsters.
Patents from the 30s, 40s and 50s expired decades ago. Everyone is free to use them at no cost, they are now in the public domain. That right there is the whole point of the patent system, an all too often ignored principle.
I say we tar and gzip them.