On Wednesday, November 9, 2016 at 9:30:41 AM UTC-10, Ophelia wrote:
> "dsi1" wrote in message
> ...
>
> On Wednesday, November 9, 2016 at 2:36:45 AM UTC-10, Ophelia wrote:
> > "dsi1" wrote in message
> > ...
> >
> > On Monday, November 7, 2016 at 7:31:11 AM UTC-10, The Greatest! wrote:
> > > So, weve discussed self €“ driving vehicles, now howzabout drone €“
> > > delivered vittles? Just think €“ instead of schlepping around on the
> > > Austin TX bus system, Steve could have his burritos or Bar S weenies
> > > delivered RIGHT to his basement flat doorstep€¦Kuthe could even get his
> > > POT
> > > delivered (talk about a drone delivering to €œdrone€�, hehe€¦)€¦endless
> > > possibilities, folks€¦!!!
> > >
> > >
> > > https://www.technologyreview.com/s/6...ampaign=buffer
> > >
> > >
> > > Burrito-Delivering Drones€”Seriously?
> > >
> > > Automated package drops might improve the efficiency of shipping one
> > > day,
> > > but for now experiments are gimmicks that pander to stereotypes.
> > >
> > > by Jamie Condliffe September 12, 2016
> > >
> > > "In the not-too-distant future, drones may be able to ferry products to
> > > your front door. But until several wrinkles hindering their widespread
> > > adoption are ironed out, the companies developing the underlying
> > > technologies seem intent on using irritating stunts to convince us of
> > > their worth.
> > >
> > > Alphabet has announced that its collaborating with Chipotle to deliver
> > > burritos across the campus of Virginia Tech using its Project Wing
> > > drones.
> > > The university is one of the Federal Aviation Administrations approved
> > > drone test sites, so the location is understandable€”but the choice of
> > > payload is a little harder to stomach. Its easy enough to imagine a
> > > meeting in which the concept was settled upon: €œStudents like burritos!
> > > Lets send them burritos!€�
> > >
> > > Undeniably, it is a marketing gimmick. Its also very obviously flawed:
> > > a
> > > single burrito can fill a single hungry students belly. Unless were
> > > talking about squadrons of drones on nonstop dorm runs, though, what
> > > hope
> > > is there of feeding a crowd of ravenous college kids? (A cannon might be
> > > a
> > > better idea. Or if thats not advanced enough, perhaps a Hyperloop for
> > > food.)
> > >
> > > Sadly, its not the only delivery service being tested that leans on
> > > stereotypes. In London, the robots of Starship Technologies are being
> > > employed by two food delivery startups, Just Eat and Pronto, to ferry
> > > food
> > > to the doors of customers in search of takeout. With a top speed of four
> > > miles per hour, it would literally be faster to walk and collect the
> > > food€”but couch potatoes want food delivered to them, so why not
> > > incentivize a little less exercise?
> > >
> > > Its not just drone testing thats embracing these kinds of gimmicks.
> > > Last
> > > summer, the taxi-hailing app Gett offered Londoners the chance to order
> > > a
> > > bottle of chilled Veuve Clicquot champagne€”two flutes included€”and have
> > > it
> > > delivered straight to their door within 10 minutes for the princely sum
> > > of
> > > £50 (around $70).
> > >
> > > Rarely has a service been more squarely aimed at bankers. Thats
> > > unlikely
> > > to be by accident: the service was only available in Shoreditch,
> > > Clerkenwell, the City, Belgravia, Knightsbridge, Chelsea, and
> > > Kensington€”the last three of which are the most expensive parts of
> > > London
> > > in which to live.
> > >
> > > Better, perhaps, to focus on testing drone delivery services where they
> > > may actually add value. Ziplines first real-world trial of its delivery
> > > drones, for instance, was carried out in Rwanda, where the aircraft were
> > > actually shuttling supplies of blood and drugs to remote health-care
> > > centers. The company plans to expand into the U.S. soon, but when it
> > > does
> > > so it will carry medical supplies out to rural parts of the
> > > U.S.€”including
> > > Smith Island in Maryland and some Native American reservations.
> > >
> > > While companies continue to grapple with the many and varied
> > > difficulties
> > > of getting drones to carry packages to our doors, it might be nice to
> > > see
> > > them following Ziplines lead. Deliver something worthwhile, or dont
> > > deliver at all€¦€�
> >
> > The idea of getting what you want immediately, has much appeal. My guess
> > is
> > that drones will be commonplace in the new/now society. If drones can
> > deliver burritos, they can certainly deliver people too. Flying taxies?
> > You
> > bet!
> >
> > =================
> >
> > Drones are used atm in war. They are armed and are able to home in on a
> > target.
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > http://www.helpforheroes.org.uk
>
> The drones I'm talking about are typically small, have 4 or more rotors, and
> are powered by batteries. The UAV - Unmanned Aerial Vehicle field has pretty
> much exploded. My point was that delivery UAVs are a very short step to
> personal transportation i.e., flying cars. Being in one of these will be a
> lot scarier then a self-driving car - or a lot more thrilling.
>
> =================
>
> When you try it do report back <g>
>
>
> --
> http://www.helpforheroes.org.uk

I'm sure we have nothing to worry about.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m38QcCyo110

dsi1 wrote:
>
> There's nothing wrong with using pop culture references. Using them as grounds for intellectual superiority is something only a real goober would do. If one has claims of having some expertise and insight in AI, citing the Terminator movies does little to enhance one's credibility.

Right back at ya, island boy -
OK jackass. All I said was that your CONSTANT guessing ant worthless
predictions of the future (YAWN) are not worthy of Nostradamus. It's old
school science fiction stories about AI and machines taking over the
world. Terminator movies were exactly all about that. War Games was
about AI and controling humans. Many movies have covered it all long
before you started guessing about the future.

All of your guessing and in the future comments have already been here
and done that. Perhaps you should try living in the 'present'. It's all
you will ever know. Don't lose face.

Let me add this. I really hate writing meanly to someone like you too.
You're a decent fellow, imo. You pick on me though and I'll be right
back at you in your face. It's the RFC way. Not that my opinion counts
for anything here. It's just mine. I'm also a RFC jackass. Many here
will agree too! heheh

I suspect I myself have lost face here.

On Wednesday, November 9, 2016 at 9:31:08 AM UTC-10, Cindy Hamilton wrote:
> On Wednesday, November 9, 2016 at 10:08:23 AM UTC-5, Ophelia wrote:
> > "Cindy Hamilton" wrote in message
> > ...
> >
> > On Tuesday, November 8, 2016 at 2:31:48 PM UTC-5, dsi1 wrote:
> > > On Tuesday, November 8, 2016 at 9:06:36 AM UTC-10, Gary wrote:
> > > > dsi1 wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Ophelia wrote:
> > > > > > Support themselves and their families? If machines become so clever,
> > > > > > why
> > > > > > will they need humans? We might be dispensable.
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > What do you mean by "might?" My guess is that a few milliseconds after
> > > > > an AI machine achieves self-awareness, it's going to realize that
> > > > > humans are mostly dispensable/disposable and it will start planning
> > > > > our demise. That's the breaks. That's the way it always turns out when
> > > > > a group of people meet up with another group with superior technology.
> > > > > In this case, the machines ARE the superior technology.
> > > >
> > > > Have you two geniuses never seen the "Terminator" movies? The scenario
> > > > has already been thought of. dsi1 needn't guess. He's no Nostradamus,
> > > > imo.
> > >
> > > You're right - this idea has been around since the 50's. Thanks for bring
> > > up the Terminator movies. You're one of those folks that get most of their
> > > info about the world from blockbuster movies. Truly, that can be called
> > > intelligence most artificial. It's a mentality that has brought the US to
> > > the choice it has to make this day in the voting booth.
> > >
> > > You're in no position to crow about your intelligence.
> >
> > Why not use a pop culture reference that is likely to be understood
> > by most people? Using something like R.U.R. would just be showing
> > off. Not, mind you, that I'm proud of my erudition or anything.
> >
> > Cindy Hamilton
> > =======================
> >
> > Please tell me what R.U.R means?
>
> It's the title of an early (1920) science fiction play about
> robots. It ends in the extinction of the human race.
>
> You make my point perfectly. Terminator is a much better reference
> (even though its treatment of AI is not original) than this seminal
> work about robots.
>
> Cindy Hamilton

You have a point there. We can learn a lot about computer security from movies like "Hackers" and The Net." We don't need no stinkin' experts or foremost thinkers in the field - they're just too boring!

On Wednesday, November 9, 2016 at 9:44:54 AM UTC-10, Gary wrote:
> dsi1 wrote:
> >
> > There's nothing wrong with using pop culture references. Using them as grounds for intellectual superiority is something only a real goober would do. If one has claims of having some expertise and insight in AI, citing the Terminator movies does little to enhance one's credibility.
>
> Right back at ya, island boy -
> OK jackass. All I said was that your CONSTANT guessing ant worthless
> predictions of the future (YAWN) are not worthy of Nostradamus. It's old
> school science fiction stories about AI and machines taking over the
> world. Terminator movies were exactly all about that. War Games was
> about AI and controling humans. Many movies have covered it all long
> before you started guessing about the future.
>
> All of your guessing and in the future comments have already been here
> and done that. Perhaps you should try living in the 'present'. It's all
> you will ever know. Don't lose face.
>
> Let me add this. I really hate writing meanly to someone like you too.
> You're a decent fellow, imo. You pick on me though and I'll be right
> back at you in your face. It's the RFC way. Not that my opinion counts
> for anything here. It's just mine. I'm also a RFC jackass. Many here
> will agree too! heheh
>
> I suspect I myself have lost face here.

Try to stay away from making rude personal remarks and you'll do fine by me.. Otherwise, it's game on pal!

"dsi1" wrote in message

> The drones I'm talking about are typically small, have 4 or more rotors,
> and
> are powered by batteries. The UAV - Unmanned Aerial Vehicle field has
> pretty
> much exploded. My point was that delivery UAVs are a very short step to
> personal transportation i.e., flying cars. Being in one of these will be a
> lot scarier then a self-driving car - or a lot more thrilling.
>
> =================
>
> When you try it do report back <g>
>
>
> --
> http://www.helpforheroes.org.uk

I'm sure we have nothing to worry about.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m38QcCyo110

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

Gulp. I will stick to our narrow streets thank you!! At least we are all
going the same way!

--
http://www.helpforheroes.org.uk

In article >, Gary says...
>
> dsi1 wrote:
> >
> > There's nothing wrong with using pop culture references. Using them as grounds for intellectual superiority is something only a real goober would do. If one has claims of having some expertise and insight in AI, citing the Terminator movies does little to enhance one's credibility.
>
> Right back at ya, island boy -
> OK jackass. All I said was that your CONSTANT guessing ant worthless
> predictions of the future (YAWN) are not worthy of Nostradamus. It's old
> school science fiction stories about AI and machines taking over the
> world. Terminator movies were exactly all about that. War Games was
> about AI and controling humans. Many movies have covered it all long
> before you started guessing about the future.
>
> All of your guessing and in the future comments have already been here
> and done that. Perhaps you should try living in the 'present'. It's all
> you will ever know. Don't lose face.
>
> Let me add this. I really hate writing meanly to someone like you too.
> You're a decent fellow, imo. You pick on me though and I'll be right
> back at you in your face. It's the RFC way. Not that my opinion counts
> for anything here. It's just mine. I'm also a RFC jackass. Many here
> will agree too! heheh
>
> I suspect I myself have lost face here.

The good thing is that us non-islanders have many faces, so we can
afford to occasionally lose one.

"Gary" wrote in message ...

dsi1 wrote:
>
> There's nothing wrong with using pop culture references. Using them as
> grounds for intellectual superiority is something only a real goober would
> do. If one has claims of having some expertise and insight in AI, citing
> the Terminator movies does little to enhance one's credibility.

Right back at ya, island boy -
OK jackass. All I said was that your CONSTANT guessing ant worthless
predictions of the future (YAWN) are not worthy of Nostradamus. It's old
school science fiction stories about AI and machines taking over the
world. Terminator movies were exactly all about that. War Games was
about AI and controling humans. Many movies have covered it all long
before you started guessing about the future.

All of your guessing and in the future comments have already been here
and done that. Perhaps you should try living in the 'present'. It's all
you will ever know. Don't lose face.

Let me add this. I really hate writing meanly to someone like you too.
You're a decent fellow, imo. You pick on me though and I'll be right
back at you in your face. It's the RFC way. Not that my opinion counts
for anything here. It's just mine. I'm also a RFC jackass. Many here
will agree too! heheh

I suspect I myself have lost face here.

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

Don't be daft lad! Just be nice when you can but try to grow a thick skin
too. You often take umbrage although nobody has really been mean you)

But ... If you are *really* attacked ... go for it)))

Apart from the real nasties here, I don't know anyone who attacks you big
time) You are amiable enough

I do think there are sometimes problems with different uses of word in
different cultures. Often I don't really know what is upsetting you. I
can't do much about that.

--
http://www.helpforheroes.org.uk