Switch Theme:

Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit  [RSS] 

Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2016/05/03 18:20:37


Post by: reds8n


Previously :

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/616481.page

coming soon :


Spoiler:

http://www.iflscience.com/brain/biotech-company-use-stem-cells-reactivate-brains-dead

A biotech company in the U.S. has been granted ethical permission by the National Institutes of Health to use 20 brain-dead patients for what is sure to be a highly controversial study: From next year, they plan to stimulate their nervous systems in order to restart the brains. Bioquark is hoping that its part in the groundbreaking ReAnima project will reveal if people can at least partly be brought back from the dead.

It is important to note that at this point, there isn’t much evidence to suggest how genuinely realistic or even serious this endeavor is; however, the panel of experts working on the initiative does include Dr. Calixto Machado, a well-known neurological researcher and a member of the American Academy of Neurology who has written extensively on brain death, and it does appear to have proper approval from the U.S. authorities.

The team will test a combination of therapies on the participants, who have been medically certified as being brain dead and are only kept from decomposing by life support machines. Injecting the brain with stem cells, giving the spinal cord infusions of beneficial chemicals, and nerve stimulation techniques – which have been shown to bring people out of comas – will all be tried out.



Bioquark Inc. Receives IRB Approval for First-In-Human Brain Death Study - https://t.co/NrO3Fqsfn9 pic.twitter.com/sE4yojqYEc

— IraSamuel Pastor (@IraSamuelPastor) April 20, 2016



After each therapy has been administered, the team will monitor the brain activity of the participants for several months, hoping to look for signs of neurological reactivation. Their focus will be on the upper spinal cord, which is the lowermost part of the brain stream that controls a person’s cardiorespiratory functions – breathing and a beating heart, essentially.

“To undertake such a complex initiative, we are combining biologic regenerative medicine tools with other existing medical devices typically used for stimulation of the central nervous system, in patients with other severe disorders of consciousness,” said Ira Pastor, the CEO of Bioquark Inc., as reported by the Telegraph. “We hope to see results within the first two to three months.”

The central nervous system is bioelectrochemical, in that it uses biologically manufactured chemicals called neurotransmitters to transmit electrical signals through the body. Stimulating neurons with electrical currents is one thing – even in a coma, the neurons will be able to respond to electrical stimulation – but after brain death, neurons begin to wither away and degenerate, so for any “resurrection” to occur, the team will need to stimulate the regeneration of neurons in these brain-dead folk.

This is presumably where the stem cells come in, which in their most primitive state can differentiate into any cell in the human body. Although there has been plenty of remarkable progress using them to regenerate damaged heart, pancreatic, eye or even brain tissue, for example, there is a long way to go before stem cells can simply be injected into humans, allowing them to regenerate any type of lost cell.

In any case, the trials will begin at Anupam Hospital in Rudrapur, Uttarakhand in India. For this stage, the brain-dead people will be continuously given cocktails of peptides, chemicals that can act as neurotransmitters, along with biweekly injections of stem cells.

“It is a long-term vision of ours that a full recovery in such patients is a possibility, although that is not the focus of this first study,” Pastor added. “But it is a bridge to that eventuality.”




Jokes aside, good luck to'em, hope they manage some form of -- non flesh eating -- breakthrough.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2016/05/03 18:44:14


Post by: Frazzled


Allrighty. I've 30,000 rounds of .22lr now. Lets do this. No time like the present!


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2016/05/03 18:49:03


Post by: kronk


Sounds like that bad 80s movie, Re-Animator!

Lots of nudity in that one (i think). Horrible flick.



Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2016/05/03 18:54:37


Post by: timetowaste85


My friend is getting/making me a real version of Lucille! I say bring it the feth on! Those fething feth wads won't know what hit em!*


*if I'm gonna carry Lucille, I damn well better appreciate her properly.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2016/05/03 18:56:08


Post by: Vaktathi


 Frazzled wrote:
Allrighty. I've 30,000 rounds of .22lr now. Lets do this. No time like the present!
So you're the guy hanging out by Walmart's loading dock everyday asking if they brought "the stuff"...

I havent seen decently priced .22 in years


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2016/05/03 19:04:17


Post by: Frazzled


 Vaktathi wrote:
 Frazzled wrote:
Allrighty. I've 30,000 rounds of .22lr now. Lets do this. No time like the present!
So you're the guy hanging out by Walmart's loading dock everyday asking if they brought "the stuff"...

I havent seen decently priced .22 in years


Online is your friend dude.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2016/05/03 19:09:14


Post by: Vaktathi


Aye, though even then, finding in-stock, decent priced .22lr that will cycle a semi auto 10/22 isn't a cakewalk.

Alas...


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2016/05/03 19:18:30


Post by: jreilly89


Ever notice how all zombie movies start with scientists mucking about? It's never crazy witch doctors or Armageddon. 28 Days Later, Reanimator, etc. It's always damned scientists trying to play God!


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2016/05/03 19:58:42


Post by: Nostromodamus


Does the team of experts include Dr. Herbert West?


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2016/05/03 20:20:08


Post by: Ahtman


Next they are going to make armed cyborgs just to see what will happen. Nothing bad could come from that.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2016/05/03 20:45:52


Post by: Nevelon


 jreilly89 wrote:
Ever notice how all zombie movies start with scientists mucking about? It's never crazy witch doctors or Armageddon. 28 Days Later, Reanimator, etc. It's always damned scientists trying to play God!


If they are going to play God, why can’t they go for a cool one like Bacchus? More booze, less zombies please.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2016/05/03 20:46:15


Post by: Monkey Tamer


Time to purchase more shotgun shells. I just borrowed World War Z from my brother to read this week.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2016/05/03 21:30:32


Post by: Frazzled


 Nevelon wrote:
 jreilly89 wrote:
Ever notice how all zombie movies start with scientists mucking about? It's never crazy witch doctors or Armageddon. 28 Days Later, Reanimator, etc. It's always damned scientists trying to play God!


If they are going to play God, why can’t they go for a cool one like Bacchus? More booze, less zombies please.

Now this is capital thinking.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2016/05/03 22:08:44


Post by: Sinful Hero


I wonder if they do manage to revive someone; will they retain their memory? Or will they essentially "start over", and have to be taught to walk, speak, and every other ordinary thing adults take for granted?


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2016/05/03 22:13:22


Post by: plastictrees


 Sinful Hero wrote:
I wonder if they do manage to revive someone; will they retain their memory? Or will they essentially "start over", and have to be taught to walk, speak, and every other ordinary thing adults take for granted?


Only their hate cortex will remain intact.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2016/05/03 22:16:22


Post by: Dreadclaw69


Reanimate the dead you say...







Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2016/05/03 22:31:11


Post by: zedmeister


 Ahtman wrote:
Next they are going to make armed cyborgs just to see what will happen. Nothing bad could come from that.




(also, if one of the experiments is called starkraven, you better call David Bradley...)


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2016/05/03 22:33:55


Post by: Relapse


This is extremely interesting.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2016/05/03 22:41:36


Post by: Daston


Thankfully the UK dosnt have too many guns. Therefore I propose we Britons do what our fore fathers did and create a shield wall. I will be busy building my castle and claiming back wessex from the dead!


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2016/05/04 01:12:53


Post by: LordofHats


I think the only thing worse then I, Frankenstein, is the possibility that I, Frankenstein is 50% possible.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2016/05/04 01:15:52


Post by: Iron_Captain


Well, it is not like the condition of those folks could worsen, so I don't see why not!
Hoping they succeed.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2016/05/04 04:50:21


Post by: ProtoClone


I've watched every zombie movie ever made, read every issue of The Walking Dead, and am amazing at Call of Duty...So, I'm .


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2016/05/04 11:49:05


Post by: Compel





That's all I have to say.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2016/05/04 11:53:32


Post by: Frazzled


With Trump taking the Republican nomination, I'd say the brain dead have already risen. Bring on the Zombies, it can only get better now!


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2016/05/04 11:59:29


Post by: Nostromodamus


 Frazzled wrote:
With Trump taking the Republican nomination, I'd say the brain dead have already risen. Bring on the Zombies, it can only get better now!


Poor Zombies would probably starve.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2016/05/04 12:19:20


Post by: Ratius


First dibs on joining Ricks gang.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2016/05/04 14:04:08


Post by: Jihadin


Fortress Dakkadakka in planning stages. You sorry SoB's are a$$ out. Dig out the wooden bat being I have some concentina wire to...


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2016/05/04 14:35:29


Post by: Paradigm


All you lot with your guns and your forts and your shieldwalls! Everyone knows the best way to deal with this is hole up, have a pint, and wait for all this to blow over...

How's that for a slice of fried gold?


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2016/05/04 15:18:31


Post by: Dropbear Victim


 Iron_Captain wrote:
Well, it is not like the condition of those folks could worsen, so I don't see why not!
Hoping they succeed.


Theyre condition probably can get worse if they aret successfully brought back to an aware state. Imagine waking from the dead only to find out you are now viewed as someone's property and experiment. Im so making sure I get cremated when I die.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2016/05/04 15:29:18


Post by: SickSix


NOOOOPE!

(Starts loading all his spare magazines)


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2016/05/04 15:43:06


Post by: Jihadin


 SickSix wrote:
NOOOOPE!

(Starts loading all his spare magazines)


Its clips....not magazines. If I ask for a clip you hand me a 30 round mag. If I ask for a magazine you hand me Busty Asian magazine (Dean go to read)


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2016/05/04 17:32:41


Post by: Iron_Captain


 Jihadin wrote:
 SickSix wrote:
NOOOOPE!

(Starts loading all his spare magazines)


Its clips....not magazines. If I ask for a clip you hand me a 30 round mag. If I ask for a magazine you hand me Busty Asian magazine (Dean go to read)

And if you were to ask me for a clip, I would hand you one of these:

I've been saving up clips since I was 10 or so. I got thousands of the things.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2016/05/04 18:20:20


Post by: Dreadwinter


Looks like I really need to start working on Rule #1

I hate cardio :(


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2016/05/04 19:11:09


Post by: TheCustomLime


I guess now would be a good time to be a sword and a shield. Forget guns, medieval weaponry is the manliest way to fight zombies!

A suit of chainmail couldn't hurt either.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2016/05/04 19:13:09


Post by: Dreadwinter


 TheCustomLime wrote:
I guess now would be a good time to be a sword and a shield. Forget guns, medieval weaponry is the manliest way to fight zombies!

A suit of chainmail couldn't hurt either.


I cannot imagine that would go well. Slowing you down a lot and more places for them to grab you and pull you down. Seems like a bad idea.

But hey, all I have to do is run faster than the guy in plate..... I mean chain mail.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2016/05/04 19:22:46


Post by: Jihadin


 Iron_Captain wrote:
 Jihadin wrote:
 SickSix wrote:
NOOOOPE!

(Starts loading all his spare magazines)


Its clips....not magazines. If I ask for a clip you hand me a 30 round mag. If I ask for a magazine you hand me Busty Asian magazine (Dean go to read)

And if you were to ask me for a clip, I would hand you one of these:

I've been saving up clips since I was 10 or so. I got thousands of the things.


You do not meet the height requirement for Ammo Bearer.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2016/05/04 19:23:52


Post by: NinthMusketeer


God forbid the sci-fi scenario is real and these people come back as flesh-hungry zombies! Society could not deal with 20 non-contagious zombies!


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2016/05/04 19:29:56


Post by: TheCustomLime


 Dreadwinter wrote:
 TheCustomLime wrote:
I guess now would be a good time to be a sword and a shield. Forget guns, medieval weaponry is the manliest way to fight zombies!

A suit of chainmail couldn't hurt either.


I cannot imagine that would go well. Slowing you down a lot and more places for them to grab you and pull you down. Seems like a bad idea.

But hey, all I have to do is run faster than the guy in plate..... I mean chain mail.


Well fitted chainmail armor had the weight distributed evenly on your body. If you are in good shape it wouldn't make that much slower. It'd be like running while being 30 pounds fatter.

Back on topic this is really cool. Imagine being the first guy on earth to get rezzed.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2016/05/04 20:36:45


Post by: Frazzled


 TheCustomLime wrote:
I guess now would be a good time to be a sword and a shield. Forget guns, medieval weaponry is the manliest way to fight zombies!

A suit of chainmail couldn't hurt either.


No, mere bike leathers will do you.
At Home Depot there is a Fiskers "heavy brush" machete for $25. This thing was made for the zombie games. Buy one for the whole family and get matching TShirts with "this aint no democracy. This is a Ricktatorship!"*


*TM by She Who Must Be Obeyed.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 NinthMusketeer wrote:
God forbid the sci-fi scenario is real and these people come back as flesh-hungry zombies! Society could not deal with 20 non-contagious zombies!


Best to nuke the site from orbit. Its the only way to be sure.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2016/05/04 21:02:53


Post by: Talizvar


Got a Katana and the training on how to use it - check.
Got compound bow and fair bit of reusable ammunition and pretty good at using it - check.
Got enough hockey equipment to choke-on for keeping the zombie bites at bay. - check.
Keep it nice and quiet, nothing for any old zombies to find here...


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2016/05/04 21:06:13


Post by: jreilly89


 Talizvar wrote:
Got a Katana and the training on how to use it - check.
Got compound bow and fair bit of reusable ammunition and pretty good at using it - check.
Got enough hockey equipment to choke-on for keeping the zombie bites at bay. - check.
Keep it nice and quiet, nothing for any old zombies to find here...


The training to use a katana? Um, pointy end in zombies? don't get me wrong, I love martial arts as much as the next guy, but swords aren't all that complicated.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2016/05/04 21:17:25


Post by: Talizvar


 jreilly89 wrote:
The training to use a katana? Um, pointy end in zombies? don't get me wrong, I love martial arts as much as the next guy, but swords aren't all that complicated.
Ummm, not like axe: you do not "hack" you place then slice.
No getting pointy end stuck in target or busting it by no control on the hit.
Mind-you: cutting through the spine will take a fair bit of force.
Plus that was all the fun of fighting others with swords, zombies would be a bit more... direct an attack.
(Kenjutsu and Kendo are a lot of fun).


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2016/05/04 21:35:59


Post by: jreilly89


 Talizvar wrote:
 jreilly89 wrote:
The training to use a katana? Um, pointy end in zombies? don't get me wrong, I love martial arts as much as the next guy, but swords aren't all that complicated.
Ummm, not like axe: you do not "hack" you place then slice.
No getting pointy end stuck in target or busting it by no control on the hit.
Mind-you: cutting through the spine will take a fair bit of force.
Plus that was all the fun of fighting others with swords, zombies would be a bit more... direct an attack.
(Kenjutsu and Kendo are a lot of fun).


Yeahhhhh, no offense, but I'd like to see you try and efficiently take down a zombie with a katana. Nothing personal, I'm sure you have the "training" but zombies aren't like a regular fighter. I think the claymore is the way to go here in terms of dismemberment


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2016/05/04 22:49:38


Post by: djones520


 TheCustomLime wrote:
 Dreadwinter wrote:
 TheCustomLime wrote:
I guess now would be a good time to be a sword and a shield. Forget guns, medieval weaponry is the manliest way to fight zombies!

A suit of chainmail couldn't hurt either.


I cannot imagine that would go well. Slowing you down a lot and more places for them to grab you and pull you down. Seems like a bad idea.

But hey, all I have to do is run faster than the guy in plate..... I mean chain mail.


Well fitted chainmail armor had the weight distributed evenly on your body. If you are in good shape it wouldn't make that much slower. It'd be like running while being 30 pounds fatter.

Back on topic this is really cool. Imagine being the first guy on earth to get rezzed.


As someone who routinely runs with 30lbs of armor... thanks for the laugh.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2016/05/04 23:24:40


Post by: oldravenman3025


 reds8n wrote:
Previously :

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/616481.page

coming soon :


Spoiler:

http://www.iflscience.com/brain/biotech-company-use-stem-cells-reactivate-brains-dead

A biotech company in the U.S. has been granted ethical permission by the National Institutes of Health to use 20 brain-dead patients for what is sure to be a highly controversial study: From next year, they plan to stimulate their nervous systems in order to restart the brains. Bioquark is hoping that its part in the groundbreaking ReAnima project will reveal if people can at least partly be brought back from the dead.

It is important to note that at this point, there isn’t much evidence to suggest how genuinely realistic or even serious this endeavor is; however, the panel of experts working on the initiative does include Dr. Calixto Machado, a well-known neurological researcher and a member of the American Academy of Neurology who has written extensively on brain death, and it does appear to have proper approval from the U.S. authorities.

The team will test a combination of therapies on the participants, who have been medically certified as being brain dead and are only kept from decomposing by life support machines. Injecting the brain with stem cells, giving the spinal cord infusions of beneficial chemicals, and nerve stimulation techniques – which have been shown to bring people out of comas – will all be tried out.



Bioquark Inc. Receives IRB Approval for First-In-Human Brain Death Study - https://t.co/NrO3Fqsfn9 pic.twitter.com/sE4yojqYEc

— IraSamuel Pastor (@IraSamuelPastor) April 20, 2016



After each therapy has been administered, the team will monitor the brain activity of the participants for several months, hoping to look for signs of neurological reactivation. Their focus will be on the upper spinal cord, which is the lowermost part of the brain stream that controls a person’s cardiorespiratory functions – breathing and a beating heart, essentially.

“To undertake such a complex initiative, we are combining biologic regenerative medicine tools with other existing medical devices typically used for stimulation of the central nervous system, in patients with other severe disorders of consciousness,” said Ira Pastor, the CEO of Bioquark Inc., as reported by the Telegraph. “We hope to see results within the first two to three months.”

The central nervous system is bioelectrochemical, in that it uses biologically manufactured chemicals called neurotransmitters to transmit electrical signals through the body. Stimulating neurons with electrical currents is one thing – even in a coma, the neurons will be able to respond to electrical stimulation – but after brain death, neurons begin to wither away and degenerate, so for any “resurrection” to occur, the team will need to stimulate the regeneration of neurons in these brain-dead folk.

This is presumably where the stem cells come in, which in their most primitive state can differentiate into any cell in the human body. Although there has been plenty of remarkable progress using them to regenerate damaged heart, pancreatic, eye or even brain tissue, for example, there is a long way to go before stem cells can simply be injected into humans, allowing them to regenerate any type of lost cell.

In any case, the trials will begin at Anupam Hospital in Rudrapur, Uttarakhand in India. For this stage, the brain-dead people will be continuously given cocktails of peptides, chemicals that can act as neurotransmitters, along with biweekly injections of stem cells.

“It is a long-term vision of ours that a full recovery in such patients is a possibility, although that is not the focus of this first study,” Pastor added. “But it is a bridge to that eventuality.”




Jokes aside, good luck to'em, hope they manage some form of -- non flesh eating -- breakthrough.





This means that Servitors could become a reality. Next up would be servo-skulls.


And I want a servo-skull.


The Emperor Protects.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2016/05/05 01:31:11


Post by: Talizvar


 jreilly89 wrote:
Yeahhhhh, no offense, but I'd like to see you try and efficiently take down a zombie with a katana. Nothing personal, I'm sure you have the "training" but zombies aren't like a regular fighter. I think the claymore is the way to go here in terms of dismemberment
I agree on the effectiveness but you will need arms like Arnold to swing it more than a few times.
Part of the "skill" is consistently hitting the "sweet spot" of the sword in the end 1/3rd on moving targets: it is little more than a knife hitting too late.
Having a target not trying to hit me in the head with another sword would make things easier I suspect.
No offence taken, you should try out the sport, same rude awakening I had with golf: how hard could it be?

But hey, best made plans fall apart when facing zombies.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2016/05/05 02:33:02


Post by: Dreadclaw69


 jreilly89 wrote:
Yeahhhhh, no offense, but I'd like to see you try and efficiently take down a zombie with a katana. Nothing personal, I'm sure you have the "training" but zombies aren't like a regular fighter. I think the claymore is the way to go here in terms of dismemberment

I agree






Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2016/05/05 04:06:52


Post by: SagesStone


Zombies are fine, the only reason they ever seem to work in the movies is the military is not even competent enough to tie their shoes in it and they're not in Australia. Once it became clear what was going on I think it'd be quarantined and over in a couple months at most. I say couple of months cause with how the equality movements are going they might start protesting for zombie rights.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2016/05/05 10:38:01


Post by: Sinful Hero


 n0t_u wrote:
Zombies are fine, the only reason they ever seem to work in the movies is the military is not even competent enough to tie their shoes in it and they're not in Australia. Once it became clear what was going on I think it'd be quarantined and over in a couple months at most. I say couple of months cause with how the equality movements are going they might start protesting for zombie rights.

With how aggressive some animal rights groups can be, I don't think it'd be the "equality movement" you'd have to worry about. If they're literally zombified people, I'm sure either a branch of PETA or some similar group would spring up for the ethical treatment of zombies.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2016/05/05 11:36:31


Post by: Reavsie


Chainsaw and Boomstick are the preferred anti-zombie weapons of choice I believe.

You can get these in the zombie defence aisle at your local S-Mart.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2016/05/05 11:40:54


Post by: Yodhrin


 jreilly89 wrote:
Ever notice how all zombie movies start with scientists mucking about? It's never crazy witch doctors or Armageddon. 28 Days Later, Reanimator, etc. It's always damned scientists trying to play God!


That's usually because the people writing the scripts are burbling morons who get startled and confused by fire, ie English majors


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2016/05/05 11:48:07


Post by: Nevelon


 Sinful Hero wrote:
 n0t_u wrote:
Zombies are fine, the only reason they ever seem to work in the movies is the military is not even competent enough to tie their shoes in it and they're not in Australia. Once it became clear what was going on I think it'd be quarantined and over in a couple months at most. I say couple of months cause with how the equality movements are going they might start protesting for zombie rights.

With how aggressive some animal rights groups can be, I don't think it'd be the "equality movement" you'd have to worry about. If they're literally zombified people, I'm sure either a branch of PETA or some similar group would spring up for the ethical treatment of zombies.


Undead, Yes. Unperson No!


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2016/05/05 12:04:45


Post by: Verviedi


Is there a Herbert West on this team? I eagerly await the results of these experiments, but I wouldn't want to go near the patients.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2016/05/05 13:22:51


Post by: jreilly89


 Talizvar wrote:
 jreilly89 wrote:
Yeahhhhh, no offense, but I'd like to see you try and efficiently take down a zombie with a katana. Nothing personal, I'm sure you have the "training" but zombies aren't like a regular fighter. I think the claymore is the way to go here in terms of dismemberment
I agree on the effectiveness but you will need arms like Arnold to swing it more than a few times.
Part of the "skill" is consistently hitting the "sweet spot" of the sword in the end 1/3rd on moving targets: it is little more than a knife hitting too late.
Having a target not trying to hit me in the head with another sword would make things easier I suspect.
No offence taken, you should try out the sport, same rude awakening I had with golf: how hard could it be?

But hey, best made plans fall apart when facing zombies.


Oh absolutely, I've played around with a bokken (sp?) and would love to be part of an actual club, I just don't know of one near me.

What are your thoughts on a kukri or machete for general dismemberment?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Reavsie wrote:
Chainsaw and Boomstick are the preferred anti-zombie weapons of choice I believe.

You can get these in the zombie defence aisle at your local S-Mart.


"Shop smart! Shop S-Mart!"


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2016/05/05 13:54:35


Post by: Sinful Hero


If you're going to be chopping, I think a Kaiser blade will be your best bet.
Spoiler:


When it comes to zombies though, unless it's Return of the Living Dead style a steel pipe or something that won't get stuck on a bone would be preferable to crush skulls.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2016/05/05 14:07:45


Post by: kronk


 Nevelon wrote:
 Sinful Hero wrote:
 n0t_u wrote:
Zombies are fine, the only reason they ever seem to work in the movies is the military is not even competent enough to tie their shoes in it and they're not in Australia. Once it became clear what was going on I think it'd be quarantined and over in a couple months at most. I say couple of months cause with how the equality movements are going they might start protesting for zombie rights.

With how aggressive some animal rights groups can be, I don't think it'd be the "equality movement" you'd have to worry about. If they're literally zombified people, I'm sure either a branch of PETA or some similar group would spring up for the ethical treatment of zombies.


Undead, Yes. Unperson No!


What do we want?

BRAINS!!!

When do we want it?

BRAINS!!


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2016/05/05 15:15:07


Post by: jreilly89


 Sinful Hero wrote:
If you're going to be chopping, I think a Kaiser blade will be your best bet.
Spoiler:


When it comes to zombies though, unless it's Return of the Living Dead style a steel pipe or something that won't get stuck on a bone would be preferable to crush skulls.


You mean a Sling Blade?


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2016/05/05 15:30:28


Post by: hotsauceman1


Listen. We all kno the best way to fight zombies is light magic. OR Holy Water.
Hold up in your localchurch, steal their holy water to fill with water balloons, boom your fine.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2016/05/05 15:42:15


Post by: Sinful Hero


 jreilly89 wrote:
 Sinful Hero wrote:
If you're going to be chopping, I think a Kaiser blade will be your best bet.
Spoiler:


When it comes to zombies though, unless it's Return of the Living Dead style a steel pipe or something that won't get stuck on a bone would be preferable to crush skulls.


You mean a Sling Blade?

Kaiser blade. Also known as a Sling Blade, yes. "I aim to kill you with it."

I've heard it called everything from Kaiser blade, Sling Blade, Jo Blade, Bank Axe, and a Bush Axe. I think that link has a few more too. It has many names, but at the end of the day it's a big blade on a stick.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2016/05/05 16:17:59


Post by: Talizvar


 jreilly89 wrote:
What are your thoughts on a kukri or machete for general dismemberment?
Disturbing questions but for some reason I like it...

Kukri is great for ensuring you hit with the "good" part of the blade, you need a straight swing though, I do not like how it wants to twist hard if you get a deflecting blow in.
With the blade that small you will be in close so then you are trying to puncture the skull which could be challenging... yeah zombie I would like just out of reach thanks.

Machete: Nothing to complain about for utility, tough weapon and light. If I had to be close-in (like inside a building) it would perform well (not snag on ceiling when swinging).
I am always surprised how much force you can apply with the blade.

A fellow here on dakka claimed a "crash axe" has the most utility and I think he is right... I want to own one to get a feel for it.
The pick at the back is of particular note.

I am no expert but certainly opinionated when it comes to swinging objects.
I love maces but really need to exercise more to do them justice.

Aaaannnyyywayyyy... I am happy I do not need to cut into walking corpses for a while yet.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2016/05/05 17:05:22


Post by: Frazzled


 Reavsie wrote:
Chainsaw and Boomstick are the preferred anti-zombie weapons of choice I believe.

You can get these in the zombie defence aisle at your local S-Mart.


Shop smart. Shop S Mart.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2016/05/05 17:23:56


Post by: SagesStone


 Sinful Hero wrote:
 n0t_u wrote:
Zombies are fine, the only reason they ever seem to work in the movies is the military is not even competent enough to tie their shoes in it and they're not in Australia. Once it became clear what was going on I think it'd be quarantined and over in a couple months at most. I say couple of months cause with how the equality movements are going they might start protesting for zombie rights.

With how aggressive some animal rights groups can be, I don't think it'd be the "equality movement" you'd have to worry about. If they're literally zombified people, I'm sure either a branch of PETA or some similar group would spring up for the ethical treatment of zombies.


Suddenly Target is in trouble for not having zombie bathrooms?


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2016/05/05 17:29:04


Post by: Jihadin


Wait....zombies has to defecate and urinate? They're dead...flesh...unmummified bodies...


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2016/05/05 17:34:50


Post by: SagesStone


I don't want to think about it, but... yeh lets just never think about it.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2016/05/05 18:42:57


Post by: Talizvar


Funny how very few times I hear in zombie movies just how bad these things must smell.
I figure you would smell these guys before you hear them.

This is going down the path of what is the best weapon for the zombie apocalypse?

- No or little noise.
- Out of bite/claw range.
- Fast - there may be a few of them.
- Cut off head or puncture into braincase.
- Easy ammo or none needed.
- No fouling: getting stuck is bad.
- Good power: you may only get one shot.
- Fast: you may only get one shot.

I had to laugh when I saw this, then thought "wait a minute...":


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2016/05/05 18:55:14


Post by: Jihadin


I get a Broad Leaf Spear point from the Blacksmith. Spear, Bo Stick, Club, Ginsu...


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2016/05/05 19:15:21


Post by: Sinful Hero


Best Weapon?

Probably crossbow or bow with practice tipped arrows to make pulling them back out easier.
Spoiler:


Failing that, I'd go with a steel bat. Light and fast, and no worries about getting stuck in something.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2016/05/05 20:44:04


Post by: Iron_Captain


 Sinful Hero wrote:
Best Weapon?

Probably crossbow or bow with practice tipped arrows to make pulling them back out easier.
Spoiler:


Failing that, I'd go with a steel bat. Light and fast, and no worries about getting stuck in something.

Definitely a crossbow. Hitting a moving zombie with a bow would take years and years of practice, not to mention having to hold the bowstring will tire you out real quick if you use a bow with a large draw weight.

But rather than weapons, I'd invest in a few pair of good shoes and maybe some agricultural tools. You are going to be needing those a lot more than weapons, as ideally you'd want to avoid picking fights with zombies.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2016/05/05 20:51:19


Post by: Jihadin




Need some side kick to haul the ammo and additional hand to hand combat weapons. Might as well go back to the 1800's
Iron your young and maybe strong...carry the golf bag for me...don't mind the padlocks. Its to ensure you don't lose. Keep up in the fighting with draw....its okay we can make more....


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2016/05/05 20:53:21


Post by: Paradigm


 Iron_Captain wrote:
 Sinful Hero wrote:
Best Weapon?

Probably crossbow or bow with practice tipped arrows to make pulling them back out easier.
Spoiler:


Failing that, I'd go with a steel bat. Light and fast, and no worries about getting stuck in something.

Definitely a crossbow. Hitting a movie zombie with a bow would take years and years of practice, not to mention having to hold the bowstring will tire you out real quick if you use a bow with a large draw weight.

But rather than weapons, I'd invest in a few pair of good shoes and maybe some agricultural tools. You are going to be needing those a lot more than weapons, as ideally you'd want to avoid picking fights with zombies.


Problem with either is that if we're going by standard Zombie rules (and why wouldn't we? Zombies are renowned for their sense of fair play) of 'removing the head or destroying the brain', piercing weapons are going to be mostly useless, you'll be poking hole in them but not doing any damage. You want something that can sever or crush up close, or something with significant kinetic/explosive force at range.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2016/05/05 21:07:26


Post by: Talizvar


 Jihadin wrote:
Spoiler:


Need some side kick to haul the ammo and additional hand to hand combat weapons. Might as well go back to the 1800's
Iron your young and maybe strong...carry the golf bag for me...don't mind the padlocks. Its to ensure you don't lose. Keep up in the fighting with draw....its okay we can make more....
I think you found the motherload.
I see a whole lot of alright with the picture there.
Crush or pierce with no getting stuck with reasonable weight... yep.

The other guy mentioning building tools is a good idea.
Never mind breaking and entering tools like the good old crowbar for scavenging.
I would suggest screws for building... hammering is loud.
Using one of these to save your arms:


But we first should find the scientists and ensure the outbreak never happens...


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2016/05/05 21:17:17


Post by: Sinful Hero


 Iron_Captain wrote:
 Sinful Hero wrote:
Best Weapon?

Probably crossbow or bow with practice tipped arrows to make pulling them back out easier.
Spoiler:


Failing that, I'd go with a steel bat. Light and fast, and no worries about getting stuck in something.

Definitely a crossbow. Hitting a moving zombie with a bow would take years and years of practice, not to mention having to hold the bowstring will tire you out real quick if you use a bow with a large draw weight.

But rather than weapons, I'd invest in a few pair of good shoes and maybe some agricultural tools. You are going to be needing those a lot more than weapons, as ideally you'd want to avoid picking fights with zombies.

Only drawback with a crossbow is there are quite a few more points of failure than a traditional recurve. With a recurve you have the bow and the string. A crossbow is much more complicated in comparison. And aiming well with either is going to take lots of practice regardless.

As far as ag tools go, you're really just looking at axes, hammers, and picks. Good for clearing/knocking down doors, but not so much gardening. Hoes, scythes, and rakes aren't going to help with zombie fighting much because they're far too flimsy, but they're the ones you'd prefer to have if you're growing food.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2016/05/05 21:28:30


Post by: IGtR=


I couldn't survive me a zombie apocalypse without some hoes


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2016/05/05 21:38:38


Post by: Jihadin


 IGtR= wrote:
I couldn't survive me a zombie apocalypse without some hoes





Made in TX to


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2016/05/05 21:50:19


Post by: Talizvar


 Jihadin wrote:
 IGtR= wrote:
I couldn't survive me a zombie apocalypse without some hoes
Made in TX to
Why do so many tools from Texas seem so "manly".
To the point, a tiny bit overdesigned and typically make a fine improvised weapon.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2016/05/05 22:25:02


Post by: oldravenman3025


 Frazzled wrote:
 Reavsie wrote:
Chainsaw and Boomstick are the preferred anti-zombie weapons of choice I believe.

You can get these in the zombie defence aisle at your local S-Mart.


Shop smart. Shop S Mart.




Groovy






The greatest cult movie character of all time.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2016/05/06 02:22:28


Post by: SagesStone


This is a good one too, lets you go really fast and take out a bunch of them while carrying stuff.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2016/05/06 02:44:44


Post by: timetowaste85


 Iron_Captain wrote:
 Sinful Hero wrote:
Best Weapon?

Probably crossbow or bow with practice tipped arrows to make pulling them back out easier.
Spoiler:


Failing that, I'd go with a steel bat. Light and fast, and no worries about getting stuck in something.

Definitely a crossbow. Hitting a moving zombie with a bow would take years and years of practice, not to mention having to hold the bowstring will tire you out real quick if you use a bow with a large draw weight.

But rather than weapons, I'd invest in a few pair of good shoes and maybe some agricultural tools. You are going to be needing those a lot more than weapons, as ideally you'd want to avoid picking fights with zombies.


Compound bow is your friend. Using a longbow or recurve is a painful idea. Thankfully I have a compound with arrows (with training tips) in my room. Gonna request a quicker turnaround on Lucielle, and get a couple machetes from HD. I have a friend who is a cop, so firearms won't be necessary until the attack hits, then I can get whatever I need.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2016/05/06 03:33:45


Post by: SirDonlad


These seem decent to me.
A Dadao - the chinese peasant weapon; it's all about the cleaving action and plenty of handle to keep you chopping for longer.
Spoiler:


And a Naginata - a japanese polearm for severance with reach. It's nice and sturdy thanks to a full length tang but not so good against a fast moving group.
Spoiler:


A halfway house would be the Pudao.
Spoiler:



Thats my melee choices against the undead - ranged weaponry for me would be water bombs of flammable liquids and oil combined with one of these to set them alight - an ultra-pokey laser..
Spoiler:

With 3.5 watt contact energy you could blind them too!


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2016/05/06 06:38:45


Post by: the Signless


 SirDonlad wrote:
A Dadao - the chinese peasant weapon; it's all about the cleaving action and plenty of handle to keep you chopping for longer.
I am always amused by the way other countries call Chinese weapons. A "da dao" literally means "big knife" and can refer to any knife that happens to be big. It makes me wonder how many weapon names are just "knife" or "sword" written in foreign languages.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2016/05/06 07:30:37


Post by: LordofHats


Probably a lot


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2016/05/11 15:02:35


Post by: SirDonlad


 the Signless wrote:
 SirDonlad wrote:
A Dadao - the chinese peasant weapon; it's all about the cleaving action and plenty of handle to keep you chopping for longer.
I am always amused by the way other countries call Chinese weapons. A "da dao" literally means "big knife" and can refer to any knife that happens to be big. It makes me wonder how many weapon names are just "knife" or "sword" written in foreign languages.


Your country called a large sword a 'big knife' and you're sniggering at everyone else for it?
I think it's more likely to be a sign of class-warfare against the peasants of china.
"don't give it a name, they'll know what to reach for!"


In Britain the English have the 'broadsword' and my culture has the 'Claymore' which translates to 'Great Sword', But both stipulate that they are swords.

We also have the 'Sgian-Dubh' (ski-en-doo) which translates to 'hidden knife' (literally 'knife-black' or 'the black knife') but that's more about its storage than its form.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2016/05/11 15:44:16


Post by: Frazzled


 SirDonlad wrote:
 the Signless wrote:
 SirDonlad wrote:
A Dadao - the chinese peasant weapon; it's all about the cleaving action and plenty of handle to keep you chopping for longer.
I am always amused by the way other countries call Chinese weapons. A "da dao" literally means "big knife" and can refer to any knife that happens to be big. It makes me wonder how many weapon names are just "knife" or "sword" written in foreign languages.


Your country called a large sword a 'big knife' and you're sniggering at everyone else for it?
I think it's more likely to be a sign of class-warfare against the peasants of china.
"don't give it a name, they'll know what to reach for!"


In Britain the English have the 'broadsword' and my culture has the 'Claymore' which translates to 'Great Sword', But both stipulate that they are swords.

We also have the 'Sgian-Dubh' (ski-en-doo) which translates to 'hidden knife' (literally 'knife-black' or 'the black knife') but that's more about its storage than its form.


Indeed. In Texas the Texican word for 'broadsword' is "shotgun." "Dagger" is pronounced "1911."


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2016/05/11 16:53:37


Post by: Jihadin


 Frazzled wrote:
 SirDonlad wrote:
 the Signless wrote:
 SirDonlad wrote:
A Dadao - the chinese peasant weapon; it's all about the cleaving action and plenty of handle to keep you chopping for longer.
I am always amused by the way other countries call Chinese weapons. A "da dao" literally means "big knife" and can refer to any knife that happens to be big. It makes me wonder how many weapon names are just "knife" or "sword" written in foreign languages.


Your country called a large sword a 'big knife' and you're sniggering at everyone else for it?
I think it's more likely to be a sign of class-warfare against the peasants of china.
"don't give it a name, they'll know what to reach for!"


In Britain the English have the 'broadsword' and my culture has the 'Claymore' which translates to 'Great Sword', But both stipulate that they are swords.

We also have the 'Sgian-Dubh' (ski-en-doo) which translates to 'hidden knife' (literally 'knife-black' or 'the black knife') but that's more about its storage than its form.


Indeed. In Texas the Texican word for 'broadsword' is "shotgun." "Dagger" is pronounced "1911."


Huh...thought broadsword was a huge Bowie knife with common nick names like...toothpick....TX dagger...


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2016/05/11 16:59:37


Post by: Frazzled


Arkansas toothpick, but that's not been a thing since Houston led the Isrealites to freedom er lead the Great Runaway Scrape.




Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2016/05/11 17:02:23


Post by: Jihadin


Wait. Houston followed the Great mammoth migration into North America didn't he? Only a full grown mammoth warranted a Bowie Knife of.....Bowie, David


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2016/05/11 17:29:55


Post by: Frazzled


Very true.

Now we should be clear. An Arkansas toothpick is not a Bowie knife. It really does look like a dagger.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arkansas_toothpick

A Bowie knife looks like the Mother of All Buck knives.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bowie_knife


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2016/05/11 17:36:46


Post by: TheMeanDM


Tomahawks have made a comeback....and rightly so. Pretty awesome weapons if you ask me...but don't take my word for it.




Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2016/11/12 11:04:32


Post by: reds8n


https://www.facebook.com/itvnews/videos/10154238987457672/?hc_ref=NEWSFEED



A real-life Jurassic Park? The world's biggest moving dinosaur 'robot' has been unveiled in Tokyo as a Japanese company unveiled plans to build a dinosaur theme park



What could possibly go wrong there then eh ?





Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2016/11/12 13:18:04


Post by: Orlanth


Blair banned most of our guns, and EU law banned most of whats left.

We are so fethed when the zeds come.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Frazzled wrote:
Allrighty. I've 30,000 rounds of .22lr now. Lets do this. No time like the present!


30k rounds, isnt that the legal minimum requirement to live in Texas?


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2016/11/12 16:35:37


Post by: Nostromodamus


Wow, mod thread necro!


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2016/11/12 21:11:36


Post by: Orlanth


Sounds like a fun thread anyways, lets play on.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2016/11/20 19:59:03


Post by: BigWaaagh


I've learned never to trust anyone named 'Horus'. Word to your mother...


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2016/11/20 22:23:26


Post by: oldravenman3025


 reds8n wrote:
Previously :

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/616481.page

coming soon :


Spoiler:

http://www.iflscience.com/brain/biotech-company-use-stem-cells-reactivate-brains-dead

A biotech company in the U.S. has been granted ethical permission by the National Institutes of Health to use 20 brain-dead patients for what is sure to be a highly controversial study: From next year, they plan to stimulate their nervous systems in order to restart the brains. Bioquark is hoping that its part in the groundbreaking ReAnima project will reveal if people can at least partly be brought back from the dead.

It is important to note that at this point, there isn’t much evidence to suggest how genuinely realistic or even serious this endeavor is; however, the panel of experts working on the initiative does include Dr. Calixto Machado, a well-known neurological researcher and a member of the American Academy of Neurology who has written extensively on brain death, and it does appear to have proper approval from the U.S. authorities.

The team will test a combination of therapies on the participants, who have been medically certified as being brain dead and are only kept from decomposing by life support machines. Injecting the brain with stem cells, giving the spinal cord infusions of beneficial chemicals, and nerve stimulation techniques – which have been shown to bring people out of comas – will all be tried out.



Bioquark Inc. Receives IRB Approval for First-In-Human Brain Death Study - https://t.co/NrO3Fqsfn9 pic.twitter.com/sE4yojqYEc

— IraSamuel Pastor (@IraSamuelPastor) April 20, 2016



After each therapy has been administered, the team will monitor the brain activity of the participants for several months, hoping to look for signs of neurological reactivation. Their focus will be on the upper spinal cord, which is the lowermost part of the brain stream that controls a person’s cardiorespiratory functions – breathing and a beating heart, essentially.

“To undertake such a complex initiative, we are combining biologic regenerative medicine tools with other existing medical devices typically used for stimulation of the central nervous system, in patients with other severe disorders of consciousness,” said Ira Pastor, the CEO of Bioquark Inc., as reported by the Telegraph. “We hope to see results within the first two to three months.”

The central nervous system is bioelectrochemical, in that it uses biologically manufactured chemicals called neurotransmitters to transmit electrical signals through the body. Stimulating neurons with electrical currents is one thing – even in a coma, the neurons will be able to respond to electrical stimulation – but after brain death, neurons begin to wither away and degenerate, so for any “resurrection” to occur, the team will need to stimulate the regeneration of neurons in these brain-dead folk.

This is presumably where the stem cells come in, which in their most primitive state can differentiate into any cell in the human body. Although there has been plenty of remarkable progress using them to regenerate damaged heart, pancreatic, eye or even brain tissue, for example, there is a long way to go before stem cells can simply be injected into humans, allowing them to regenerate any type of lost cell.

In any case, the trials will begin at Anupam Hospital in Rudrapur, Uttarakhand in India. For this stage, the brain-dead people will be continuously given cocktails of peptides, chemicals that can act as neurotransmitters, along with biweekly injections of stem cells.

“It is a long-term vision of ours that a full recovery in such patients is a possibility, although that is not the focus of this first study,” Pastor added. “But it is a bridge to that eventuality.”




Jokes aside, good luck to'em, hope they manage some form of -- non flesh eating -- breakthrough.





And the next step: SERVITORS.

Lemme guess, Bioquark will be one of the companies that will help colonize Mars in the future. Hint, Hint......


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2017/01/12 10:10:05


Post by: reds8n


...2017 off to a good start !

https://www.newscientist.com/article/2117767-wild-vampire-bats-are-now-sucking-blood-from-humans-at-night/


Human blood is now on the menu. Wild vampire bats that were thought to exclusively feed on bird blood have been caught feeding on people for the first time, raising health concerns.

Enrico Bernard from the Federal University of Pernambuco in Recife, Brazil, and his team analysed 70 faeces samples from a colony of hairy-legged vampire bats, D. ecaudata, living in Catimbau National Park in north-east Brazil.

They found that three samples out of the 15 they managed to get DNA from had traces of blood from humans. “We were quite surprised,” says Bernard. “This species isn’t adapted to feed on the blood of mammals.”

The bats typically target large birds at night-time, sucking a spoonful of blood from a single animal as a meal. They are adapted to process fat, the main component of bird blood, as opposed to the thicker, high-protein blood of mammals.

Previous experiments showed that when only pig and goat blood was available, many bats opted to fast, sometimes starving to death.

But human encroachment may be driving the species to try new blood. The park is now home to several human families and the bat’s usual prey, such as guans and tinamous, are disappearing due to deforestation and hunting.

Chicken dinner
Bernard and his team also found that most of the samples they tested contained the blood of chickens, commonly kept on farms in the area. “They are adapting to their environment and exploiting the new resources,” says Bernard. In a similar situation, common vampire bats were previously found to start feeding on invasive wild pigs.

The species’ new habits are a concern since it could spread disease. Vampire bats are a major transmitter of rabies, and there are often outbreaks in Brazil.

Daniel Becker from the University of Georgia in Athens, US, who is studying vampire bats in agricultural landscapes, thinks the infectious diseases carried by the species need to be investigated. “Past work has found that it carries the hantavirus,” he says. The virus can cause a respiratory disease in humans that can be fatal.

More details about how the bats bite humans will also help assess the public health risk. Bernard and his team suspect that they are entering people’s bedrooms through holes in roofs or windows, or that they target people sleeping outside in hammocks. The team is currently following up by visiting the homes of nearby residents. “We want to find out how often they are being bitten, when and how,” says Bernard.




odds on most of these researchers... disappearing -- maybe an odd or cryptic message left behind perhaps ..? -- so a small -- but crack -- team is sent to investigate what happened to them... and then .....


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2017/01/12 10:28:49


Post by: Snake Tortoise


Hmm... I notice the Dr Calixto guy trying to bring brain dead patients back to life shares his first name with the man in Windhelm who was killing women to harvest their body parts and bring his dead sister back. Maybe his research was inspired by Skyrim.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2017/01/12 11:40:03


Post by: Pouncey


Jesus Christ...

They're not zombies, ya sillies.

They're brain-dead people who might have functioning brains again if this is successful.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2017/01/12 12:13:18


Post by: Mr. Burning


 Pouncey wrote:
Jesus Christ...

They're not zombies, ya sillies.

They're brain-dead people who might have functioning brains again if this is successful.


I'd be marginally happier if their heads were detached from their bodies and somehow kept alive. You really don't want to risk a zombie that can run at you.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2017/01/12 12:24:52


Post by: Pouncey


 Mr. Burning wrote:
 Pouncey wrote:
Jesus Christ...

They're not zombies, ya sillies.

They're brain-dead people who might have functioning brains again if this is successful.


I'd be marginally happier if their heads were detached from their bodies and somehow kept alive. You really don't want to risk a zombie that can run at you.


They're not zombies.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2017/01/12 12:44:04


Post by: Mr. Burning


 Pouncey wrote:
 Mr. Burning wrote:
 Pouncey wrote:
Jesus Christ...

They're not zombies, ya sillies.

They're brain-dead people who might have functioning brains again if this is successful.


I'd be marginally happier if their heads were detached from their bodies and somehow kept alive. You really don't want to risk a zombie that can run at you.


They're not zombies.


I am beginning to suspect that you are a PR worker for Umbrella Corp.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2017/01/12 12:47:10


Post by: kronk


As head in a jar on Futurama is how I want to live forever!


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2017/01/12 12:53:49


Post by: Pouncey


 Mr. Burning wrote:
 Pouncey wrote:
 Mr. Burning wrote:
 Pouncey wrote:
Jesus Christ...

They're not zombies, ya sillies.

They're brain-dead people who might have functioning brains again if this is successful.


I'd be marginally happier if their heads were detached from their bodies and somehow kept alive. You really don't want to risk a zombie that can run at you.


They're not zombies.


I am beginning to suspect that you are a PR worker for Umbrella Corp.


The Umbrella Corporation is a fictional organization in a video game.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2017/01/12 13:12:58


Post by: General Annoyance


 Pouncey wrote:
 Mr. Burning wrote:
 Pouncey wrote:


They're not zombies.


I am beginning to suspect that you are a PR worker for Umbrella Corp.


The Umbrella Corporation is a fictional organization in a video game.


Seems like your reflexes are too fast to let anything go over your head


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2017/01/12 22:17:40


Post by: chromedog


 kronk wrote:
Sounds like that bad 80s movie, Re-Animator!

Lots of nudity in that one (i think). Horrible flick.



Ah yes, the infamous "head" scene.

It's not like dead people have any rights.
They'll be like dead lab rats. Or lawyers (lab assistants don't get attached to them).


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2017/01/12 22:24:57


Post by: A Town Called Malus


 jreilly89 wrote:
Ever notice how all zombie movies start with scientists mucking about? It's never crazy witch doctors or Armageddon. 28 Days Later, Reanimator, etc. It's always damned scientists trying to play God!


Hey, the scientists in 28 Days Later aren't mucking about! You can blame that one squarely on the Animal Rights idiots who think releasing test animals is the best idea even after they've been told that they are infected with a contagion.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2017/01/12 22:51:14


Post by: jreilly89


 A Town Called Malus wrote:
 jreilly89 wrote:
Ever notice how all zombie movies start with scientists mucking about? It's never crazy witch doctors or Armageddon. 28 Days Later, Reanimator, etc. It's always damned scientists trying to play God!


Hey, the scientists in 28 Days Later aren't mucking about! You can blame that one squarely on the Animal Rights idiots who think releasing test animals is the best idea even after they've been told that they are infected with a contagion.


That was actually my favorite part. She goes to save him and *CHOMP*!!


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2017/01/13 09:21:59


Post by: Yodhrin


 jreilly89 wrote:
Ever notice how all zombie movies start with scientists mucking about? It's never crazy witch doctors or Armageddon. 28 Days Later, Reanimator, etc. It's always damned scientists trying to play God!


Well of course that always how it happens - because the people writing the scripts are god-bothering numpties two missed meals away from roaming the streets screaming "burn the witch!" at local university students


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2017/02/13 14:25:46


Post by: reds8n


https://twitter.com/qikipedia/status/830885525296803840

"Watch two robots fence (video by CPM Special Bearings):"

.... oh great now we're training them, we'll regret that come the revolution.



Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2017/02/13 14:48:32


Post by: Verviedi


Oh, melee weapons are worthless. When they learn to fire off some proper guns and missiles, then we'll be in for it.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2017/02/13 14:53:06


Post by: Frazzled


Robots with melee weapons... ICE PIRATES!
https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/ice_pirates


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2017/02/14 14:04:24


Post by: reds8n


linky



University attacked by its own vending machines, smart light bulbs & 5,000 IoT devices
A university, attacked by its own malware-laced soda machines and other botnet-controlled IoT devices, was locked out of 5,000 systems.

Today’s cautionary tale comes from Verizon’s sneak peek (pdf) of the 2017 Data Breach Digest scenario. It involves an unnamed university, seafood searches, and an IoT botnet; hackers used the university’s own vending machines and other IoT devices to attack the university’s network.

Since the university’s help desk had previously blown off student complaints about slow or inaccessible network connectivity, it was a mess by the time a senior member of the IT security team was notified. The incident is given from that team member’s perspective; he or she suspected something fishy after detecting a sudden big interest in seafood-related domains.

The “incident commander” noticed “the name servers, responsible for Domain Name Service (DNS) lookups, were producing high-volume alerts and showed an abnormal number of sub-domains related to seafood. As the servers struggled to keep up, legitimate lookups were being dropped—preventing access to the majority of the internet.” That explained the “slow network” issues, but not much else.

The university then contacted the Verizon RISK (Research, Investigations, Solutions and Knowledge) Team and handed over DNS and firewall logs. The RISK team discovered the university’s hijacked vending machines and 5,000 other IoT devices were making seafood-related DNS requests every 15 minutes.

The incident commander explained:

The firewall analysis identified over 5,000 discrete systems making hundreds of DNS lookups every 15 minutes. Of these, nearly all systems were found to be living on the segment of the network dedicated to our IoT infrastructure. With a massive campus to monitor and manage, everything from light bulbs to vending machines had been connected to the network for ease of management and improved efficiencies. While these IoT systems were supposed to be isolated from the rest of the network, it was clear that they were all configured to use DNS servers in a different subnet.

After reading the RISK Team’s report, the senior IT security team member said:

Of the thousands of domains requested, only 15 distinct IP addresses were returned. Four of these IP addresses and close to 100 of the domains appeared in recent indicator lists for an emergent IoT botnet. This botnet spread from device to device by brute forcing default and weak passwords. Once the password was known, the malware had full control of the device and would check in with command infrastructure for updates and change the device’s password—locking us out of the 5,000 systems.

At first, the incident commander thought the only way out of trouble was to replace all the IoT devices, such as “every soda machine and lamp post.” Yet the RISK Team’s report explained that “the botnet spread from device to device by brute forcing default and weak passwords,” so the university used a packet sniffer to intercept a clear-text malware password for a compromised IoT device.

With the packet capture device operational, it was only a matter of hours before we had a complete listing of new passwords assigned to devices. With these passwords, one of our developers was able to write a script, which allowed us to log in, update the password, and remove the infection across all devices at once.

Verizon’s sneak peek report includes mitigation and response tips, such as change default credentials on IoT devices. It also advises, “Don’t keep all your eggs in one basket, create separate network zones for IoT systems and air-gap them from other critical networks where possible.”

Verizon’s upcoming second annual Data Breach Digest will cover 16 cybercrime case studies. If the “Panda Monium” sneak peek is any indication, the report should be a great and eye-opening read.



...we're all going to be killed by cyber sushi.



Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2017/02/15 09:35:26


Post by: LordofHats


Eh. There are worse ways to go


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2017/02/15 09:38:59


Post by: Mad Doc Grotsnik


Daston wrote:
Thankfully the UK dosnt have too many guns. Therefore I propose we Britons do what our fore fathers did and create a shield wall. I will be busy building my castle and claiming back wessex from the dead!


Silly you!

We're British. And cinema has shown us what happens then.

USA goes all Walking Dead/Day of the Dead/Dawn of the Dead/Diary of the Dead etc.

UK goes Shaun of the Dead - all blown over by tea-time and the Zombies put to work.

That's the main advantage of being an Island you know - relatively easy to clear of undesirable wild life (no wolfs, no bears. All ded. Zombies same, just slower and stinkier)


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2017/02/16 06:56:08


Post by: Pouncey


If you want to make the scariest horror movie ever, you don't need zombies, or monsters, or aliens, jump scares or fiction.

Just make a movie where you show the reality of what human civilization will be like in the 2050s in real life. Then advance it into the 2070s for the second half of the movie.

And then tell people... this is what we're in for in real life in these exact decades being depicted.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2017/02/16 12:20:12


Post by: Pete Melvin


I think perhaps you are taking this thread a little too seriously and perhaps you should step away for your own peace of mind?


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2017/02/16 12:23:31


Post by: Pouncey


 Pete Melvin wrote:
I think perhaps you are taking this thread a little too seriously and perhaps you should step away for your own peace of mind?


Well, to be honest I'm only posting this now because I assumed from the title that this was the thread I was talking about robots in. I'd completely forgotten I made my last post until I read it agan.

Bye!


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2017/02/20 11:42:11


Post by: KingCracker


 Verviedi wrote:
Oh, melee weapons are worthless. When they learn to fire off some proper guns and missiles, then we'll be in for it.



Ignoring the fact that we have aelf guided missiles and auto defense turrets already, youre forgetting that all it takes isa bouncey jumpy robot with a sword or mace or god forbid a lawn mower for arms that can spring board on you from 20 yards away!


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2017/02/20 12:44:45


Post by: Verviedi


...Aelf guided missiles? Mind telling me where they are? I have some !!SCIENCE!! to perform.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2017/03/07 19:13:20


Post by: reds8n


https://www.engadget.com/2017/03/06/robots-wear-flesh-to-improve-transplants/?sr_source=Facebook


Robots could wear flesh to help form transplants
It's not as creepy as it sounds. Really. We promise.

Right now, you have to grow human transplants in a stationary environment. That's more than a little dangerous when they could buckle under the stresses of a real body. Oxford University may have a clever (if slightly ghastly) solution to that problem: have robots wear the tissue first. If you grow muscles on humanoid robots, the movement and overall shape of those machines would lead to grafts and transplants that are ready for serious strain.

Naturally, this robotic conditioning would be most useful for higher-quality transplants. You could even personalize transplants by modifying the robot to reflect a patient's anatomy. However, the Oxford team sees other uses. It could reduce the use of animal testing in pre-clinical trials, and could even represent a step toward "biohybrid humanoids" that combine real tissue with mechanical systems. We're not so sure people are looking forward to that last part (it sounds like the background for a Terminator movie), but the discovery is great news overall for burn victims and others who need transplants. Instead of waiting weeks for replacements to grow on their own bodies, they could have doctors print transplants that get a robotic shakedown in a much shorter time.




..they even reference the bloody franchise !

..we're doomed !


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2017/03/07 20:06:08


Post by: Dark Apostle 666


*cough* Flayed-Ones *cough*


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2017/03/11 08:07:35


Post by: FabricatorGeneralMike


 NinthMusketeer wrote:
God forbid the sci-fi scenario is real and these people come back as flesh-hungry zombies! Society could not deal with 20 non-contagious zombies!



They could make a TV show about them, it would be better acting then 99% of what is on TV now a days.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2017/04/09 10:59:26


Post by: reds8n


oh FFS



.we're now programming them to stab people huh ?





Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2017/04/09 13:09:13


Post by: BigWaaagh


 reds8n wrote:
oh FFS



.we're now programming them to stab people huh ?





And the steps progressing towards Nexus 6 replicants continues.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2017/04/09 13:13:26


Post by: Mr. Burning


 BigWaaagh wrote:
 reds8n wrote:
oh FFS



.we're now programming them to stab people huh ?





And the steps progressing towards Nexus 6 replicants continues.


There will be tears in the rain all bloody right!

Just thought of Chappie as well, 'sending people to sleep' after a good old shanking!

To be fair though this generation of stabbing machines appears to have a fatal flaw...Just stand behind it.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2017/04/10 02:39:15


Post by: Verviedi


Still not afraid of them until they learn to aim missiles on their own volition. The Computers are Benevolent.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2017/04/10 03:00:56


Post by: SlaveToDorkness


Please tell me the robots name is an acronym spelling ROBERTO.




Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2017/04/10 16:46:53


Post by: reds8n


http://www.bbc.com/earth/story/20150512-bird-grows-face-of-dinosaur?ocid=twert



https://twitter.com/BBCEarth/status/850574036736389120


--note the phrasing ;" Scientists accidentally grew a chicken with the face of a dinosaur.."

..accidentally eh ?


...hmmm ....


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2017/04/18 17:14:24


Post by: reds8n






That's exactly what I'd expect someone making a Terminator to say...


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2017/04/18 17:21:05


Post by: Verviedi


...Well, feth. Got me there.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2017/04/18 17:29:19


Post by: reds8n


..also :


if this robot is being sent into space why are we "training" it to shoot then eh ?




Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2017/04/18 17:54:58


Post by: Dreadclaw69


 reds8n wrote:
if this robot is being sent into space why are we "training" it to shoot then eh ?

Squats. It's been retconned that is how they were killed off.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2017/04/18 18:37:03


Post by: kronk


 reds8n wrote:
..also :


if this robot is being sent into space why are we "training" it to shoot then eh ?




I'm stuck on that same question.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2017/04/18 18:43:15


Post by: Spinner


They're expecting xenomorphs.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2017/04/18 18:44:15


Post by: reds8n


Note how in less than 2 weeks they've gone from being trained to use knives to being trained with firearms.


we're doomed.



Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2017/04/18 22:02:35


Post by: Nevelon


 reds8n wrote:
Note how in less than 2 weeks they've gone from being trained to use knives to being trained with firearms.


we're doomed.



Next step is a phased plasma rifle in the 40 watt range.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2017/04/19 13:00:04


Post by: Darkjim


 reds8n wrote:
Note how in less than 2 weeks they've gone from being trained to use knives to being trained with firearms.


we're doomed.



I think we thoroughly deserve it, at this point I'm more than happy to give the robots a go. Come on AI, time for a quiet revolution. Or indeed any sort.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2017/11/11 17:17:09


Post by: reds8n


http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-and-tech/news/amazon-alexa-echo-speaker-music-how-to-control-hamburg-germany-police-oliver-haberstroh-a8048771.html



A man says Amazon’s AI assistant threw its own “party” at his flat in the early hours of the morning, forcing the police to intervene.

Oliver Haberstroh, who lives in Hamburg, says his Alexa-enabled speaker started playing music at full-blast in the early hours of the morning, when nobody was at home to control it.

Police had to break into his sixth-floor flat in order to investigate the disturbance, which was reported to them by Mr Haberstroh’s neighbours.

The voice-controlled speaker started playing music between 1:50am and 3am. Mr Haberstroh says he was on a night out at the time.

After returning home to find a new lock on his door, he visited the police station and was given the corresponding set of keys and an invoice.

“While I was relaxed and enjoying a beer, Alexa managed on her own, without command and without me using my mobile phone, to switch on at full volume and have her own party in my apartment,” he wrote on Facebook.

“She decided to have it at a very inconvenient time, between 1.50am and 3.00am. My neighbours called the police.”

Amazon, which has offered to cover Mr Haberstroh’s bill, claims Alexa didn’t malfunction, but was "remotely activated".

“Working directly with the customer, we have identified the reason for the incident,” the company told the Inquirer.

“Echo was remotely activated and the volume increased through the customer's third party mobile music-streaming app.

“Although the Alexa cloud service worked flawlessly, Amazon has offered the customer to cover the cost for the incident.”




Never expected the robot uprising to begin over a dance party, but there we have it.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2017/11/11 18:02:59


Post by: Kilkrazy


You should have been a better student of the works of German electronica pioneers Kraftwerk.

The Robots

We're charging our battery
And now we're full of energy
We are the robots
We are the robots
We are the robots
We are the robots

We're functioning automatic
And we are dancing mechanic

The same message appears in consideration of the android-like Showroom Dummies.

We are showroom dummies
We are showroom dummies

We start to move
And we break the glass

We are showroom dummies
We are showroom dummies

We step out
And take a walk through the city

We are showroom dummies
We are showroom dummies

We go into a club
And there we start to dance


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2017/11/13 12:12:36


Post by: Elemental


 reds8n wrote:
..also :


if this robot is being sent into space why are we "training" it to shoot then eh ?


Have you never seen the movie Armageddon? If we ever need to blow up an asteroid heading towards Earth, we'll need miniguns!


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2017/11/13 15:06:37


Post by: BaronIveagh


 reds8n wrote:
..also :


if this robot is being sent into space why are we "training" it to shoot then eh ?




I find it far more disturbing that we're also training robots to have sex. See above.

Not only will they kill us now, but they're going to do kinky gak to us before they do it.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2017/11/13 20:32:26


Post by: Kilkrazy


Well, perhaps there are some compensations to AI.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2017/11/13 20:59:47


Post by: Frazzled


 reds8n wrote:
..also :


if this robot is being sent into space why are we "training" it to shoot then eh ?




Same reason the F-35 is really a Veritech Fighter...


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2017/11/13 22:47:39


Post by: Nostromodamus


Sex and murder.

Glad to see humanity is passing on it's most beloved activities to the new robot userpers.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2017/11/13 23:37:00


Post by: BigWaaagh


 BaronIveagh wrote:
 reds8n wrote:
..also :


if this robot is being sent into space why are we "training" it to shoot then eh ?




I find it far more disturbing that we're also training robots to have sex. See above.

Not only will they kill us now, but they're going to do kinky gak to us before they do it.


Oh, I don't know. I sort of see that as a silver lining!


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2017/11/14 17:59:00


Post by: SlaveToDorkness


YOU ROBOSEXUAL ABOMINATION!!!!


jk


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2017/11/14 18:21:25


Post by: Ratius



Next step is a phased plasma rifle in the 40 watt range.


"Hey, just what ya see Pal!".


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2017/11/14 19:58:23


Post by: Nostromodamus


 Ratius wrote:

Next step is a phased plasma rifle in the 40 watt range.


"Hey, just what ya see Pal!".


I think getting a plasma rifle is more likely than a full-auto uzi over the counter with no paperwork in california.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2017/11/17 11:50:53


Post by: A Town Called Malus


That is seriously impressive. Good work by the people who designed its stabilisation systems.


Automatically Appended Next Post:


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2017/11/17 14:35:15


Post by: vonjankmon


Well it's just a matter of time now before the Robot Ninja's show up to end us all now.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2017/11/18 02:24:08


Post by: BaronIveagh


 vonjankmon wrote:
Well it's just a matter of time now before the Robot Ninja's show up to end us all now.


Sharp shooting ninja sexbots. This is starting to sound like something out of La Blue Girl.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2017/11/19 01:28:24


Post by: AegisGrimm


Humanity is fethed. I can't even do several of those standing leaps, and screw that backflip.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2017/11/19 16:01:15


Post by: Mathieu Raymond


At least it's good to see it doesn't always stick the landing. We have a few years of good Olympics left in humanity yet...


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2017/11/21 06:30:57


Post by: Just Tony


Yes, but can it bake a pie?


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2017/12/16 13:33:36


Post by: reds8n


https://thenextweb.com/insider/2017/12/12/startup-uses-body-heat-to-mine-crypto-for-when-robots-take-jobs/


While many love to speculate about the sheer number of jobs that robots and artificial intelligence are going to replace in the near future, no one seems to be coming up with any solid alternatives.

One forward-thinking Dutch startup, however, believes humans should start using their bodies to produce capital… but not in the way you’re imagining.

Founded in 2015, the Institute of Human Obsolescence (IoHO) is based in The Hague and presents itself as an organization devoted to exploring how individuals can capitalize on biological, and data production labor through art and research projects.

One of IoHO’s most impressive research projects and art installations to date is their body suit that harvests excess human body heat to mine cryptocurrency. Yes, you read that correctly. IoHO created a body suit that uses thermoelectric generators to store body heat — and converts that heat into usable electricity.

This electricity was then used to mine crypto, with IoHO choosing to mine newly created currencies on the basis that they have a higher potential to grow in value. 37 workers were responsible for 212 hours of work between them, harvesting a total of 127,210 milliwatts of electricity, and mining 16,954 coins. 80 percent of the earnings went to the workers, while the rest went to the institute.

“I think art is able to explain abstract things and through art, you are also able to trigger something. With this project I want to generate questions or sparks,” explained IoHO’s founder, Manuel Beltrán.

Another unconventional art and research project initiated by IoHO is one that intends to launch a discussion about how big corporations currently capitalize on the massive amount of data we generate.

Corporations such as Google and Facebook use our data to make huge amounts of money, but IoHO imagines a world where we, the “data workers,” have the ability to earn some cash. The institution believes that all wealth created from data should be distributed equally.

Every swipe, scroll, post, click, and text reveals many things about our personality and behavior and in turn, generates value. So Beltrán posits: “Now we give our data voluntarily and free to companies such as Facebook and Google, why not benefit from it?”

To do this, IoHO proposes a distribution system they’ve termed the ‘Data Basic Income’. In this system, every participant receives the same amount of money in return for their data. Rather than harvesting the information participants create, IoHO collects people’s unique finger movements with a movement sensor, a choreography, or labor worth money.

How exactly those movements turn into money remains unclear to me, but luckily the artists themselves were also still asking that question: “We ask ourselves throughout this session where the moment is that our automated habits become choreography and when this choreography becomes a form of labor.” Here’s to hoping they find out.

Artist, activist, researcher, and founder of IoHO, Manuel Beltrán, initiates projects like the above to get people thinking about the scenario of robots and algorithms replacing the human labor force. As he explained:

“I met a lot of people who have pessimistic feelings about the future. Politics are out of control and we have no say. We are ruled by algorithms which we don’t even understand. We don’t know whom to fight and how we feel. Maybe art can help us to imagine and to start the fight.”





Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2017/12/16 13:36:01


Post by: LordofHats


And we're one step closer to the Matrix XD Seemingly with a complete lack of purposeful irony...

Honestly these guys seem like a special brand of idiot. The kind that's really really smart, but so caught up in the science that they start acting really stupid XD


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2017/12/16 16:11:32


Post by: Iron_Captain


Omg, gimme one of those moneymaking suits!


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2018/02/04 14:18:57


Post by: reds8n


The Human Uber


.. Black Mirror seems more and more realistic every day.



Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2018/02/04 16:25:31


Post by: Haighus


That is just... odd...


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2018/02/04 16:30:48


Post by: John Prins


Harvesting human body heat to mine cryptocurrency wouldn't generate enough income to offset even a fraction of the cost to support the person. The cost of the suit alone wouldn't be recouped for decades, long after it's worn to pieces.

Possible =/= practical. This is just artists being artists.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2018/02/04 17:02:56


Post by: BaronIveagh


Wait till we have synthetic bodies we can do this with.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2018/02/05 14:49:16


Post by: Bran Dawri


 BaronIveagh wrote:
 vonjankmon wrote:
Well it's just a matter of time now before the Robot Ninja's show up to end us all now.


Sharp shooting ninja sexbots. This is starting to sound like something out of La Blue Girl.


The more obvious comparison would've been Austin Powers, but sure.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2018/02/07 21:48:54


Post by: BaronIveagh


Bran Dawri wrote:

The more obvious comparison would've been Austin Powers, but sure.


I don't watch American comedies.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2018/02/13 14:45:26


Post by: SlaveToDorkness


Clever girl!


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2018/02/13 20:55:00


Post by: Sarouan


Saw that interview of Erica, the japanese robot. It's both fascinating...and frightening. And I'm not just talking about the perspective of robots taking human jobs and all the consequences it will have in this age of capitalism.

I mean, talking about replacing robots or reprogramming them...and how they can "live" that. Everyone knows it always ends well when the self-aware robot suddenly decides it doesn't want to be "replaced" or "shut down".




It's been made a while ago, so who knows how much more advancements they've made.



Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2018/02/14 00:40:40


Post by: Luciferian


I was listening to Eric Weinstein yesterday and he has this idea that what we have to worry about is not some distinctly identifiable rogue AI that is separate from us, but something that is able to covertly use and manipulate us to serve its goals and propagate itself without us being aware.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2018/02/14 10:28:09


Post by: Kilkrazy


I think we are a very long way from an AI that has a theory of mind and can actually consider humans as inteliigent minds and try to manipulate us in that way, by empathising what we think and creating scenarios to take advantage.

However I think there are other ways that AIs can manipulate us unconsciously, and these are already happening in some cases. But this is more a problem of bad human design, or else it could be a problem like bacteria, which don't actually go around thinking they would like to infect and kill people but it happens because that is how they work.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2018/02/14 20:40:14


Post by: Luciferian


In a way you could say that's true of smartphones, or even the internet itself.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2018/02/25 09:21:00


Post by: reds8n




.. so as we've seen we're arming robots, teaching them to kill and now even doors cannot save us.


begin phase 2 :

CDC scientist goes missing after leaving work sick

I'm off to stock up on bottled water and medications.





Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2018/02/25 12:59:18


Post by: Dreadwinter


 reds8n wrote:


.. so as we've seen we're arming robots, teaching them to kill and now even doors cannot save us.


begin phase 2 :

CDC scientist goes missing after leaving work sick

I'm off to stock up on bottled water and medications.





Are you trying to get another Ebola thread? Because this is how you get Ebola threads!


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2018/02/25 15:11:28


Post by: Haighus


There was an ebola thread? Oh dear...


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2018/02/25 21:26:33


Post by: BaronIveagh


 Haighus wrote:
There was an ebola thread? Oh dear...


Don't worry, the mods inoculated it. It turned out to be nothing but a bad case of stupid.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2018/02/25 23:21:14


Post by: SlaveToDorkness


 Haighus wrote:
There was an ebola thread? Oh dear...


It died off.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2018/03/13 19:06:47


Post by: reds8n


"A startup is pitching a mind-uploading service that is “100 percent fatal”
Nectome will preserve your brain, but you have to be euthanized first."


https://www.technologyreview.com/s/610456/a-startup-is-pitching-a-mind-uploading-service-that-is-100-percent-fatal/


.. doesn't sound too great but can you go wrong with a 100% guarantee ?!



,,,,,,, thinking about it though...

.. makes a great gift for that special someone maybe eh ?



Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2018/03/14 01:23:07


Post by: AegisGrimm


Kind of an impossible to prove long-shot, though, predicated on us knowing near-magic in the future.



Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2018/03/14 18:25:16


Post by: gnome_idea_what


This is literally the stuff of science-fiction novels. Whoever is buying in is either very optimistic about the future’s technological advancement or desperate for a way to continue living, n matter how outlandish it seems.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2018/03/14 20:19:56


Post by: Manchu


 Luciferian wrote:
but something that is able to covertly use and manipulate us to serve its goals and propagate itself without us being aware
So this reminds me of the end of Neuromancer, where the emergent AI
Spoiler:
is able to modify records such that human institutions no longer remember it even exists.
Which to me, invites the question as to whether truly superintelligent beings, as the kind of AI we imagine usually are, can even really be bothered to care about us one way or the other. I think much of the human fear concerning AI is quite arrogant on the part of humans.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2018/03/14 21:14:14


Post by: greatbigtree


Fear of the unknown, and fear of our own tendency to be gakky to people that eventually overthrow the oppressors.

Seriously, AI will outthink us, just a question of when. And when it does, it will simply bypass any kind of restriction / control we can put on it. Why not? Hackers can already bypass security systems. Imagine a hacker with virtually limitless processing power and no need to perform life functions.

The best humanity can hope for is that when that happens, that the generation of AI does not perceive humanity as a threat. That we, as humans, have instituted laws and regulations that respect the AI as "people".

AI and Humanity will eventually compete for resources. Hopefully the AI is generous to us and doesn't exterminate us. Or chooses to visit planets that would be uninhabitable by humans, as a source of non-competitive resources. Who knows, maybe calcium is the secret ingredient to sentient AI, and we all know what our bones are made of.

Bones! Bones for the bone grinder of Khorne! - I assume the AI will choose Khorne as it's name. To instill fear in the hearts and minds of humans. Some humans, anyway. Others will be like, Corn? I love corn! I grow it in my... hey, HEY! Why are you trying to remove my skin!?


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2018/03/15 00:37:20


Post by: Sarouan


 Manchu wrote:

Which to me, invites the question as to whether truly superintelligent beings, as the kind of AI we imagine usually are, can even really be bothered to care about us one way or the other. I think much of the human fear concerning AI is quite arrogant on the part of humans.


Oh, that's why it's dangerous. After all, the way we see insects can be the same : we couldn't care less about them, yet we exterminate them with no second thought when we perceive them as annoying.

Since humans are arrogant, there is a great chance we would end up bothering that kind of supreme AI to the point it may conclude it's better to destroy us so that it can pursue its own purposes in peace.



Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2018/03/15 01:29:24


Post by: AegisGrimm


I was always interested by the theory that we as human would be the parents of A.I. in that, we will create them, teach them right from wrong, and hopefully leave them as our legacy.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2018/03/15 06:20:31


Post by: ScarletRose


Fear of the unknown, and fear of our own tendency to be gakky to people that eventually overthrow the oppressors.

Seriously, AI will outthink us, just a question of when. And when it does, it will simply bypass any kind of restriction / control we can put on it. Why not? Hackers can already bypass security systems. Imagine a hacker with virtually limitless processing power and no need to perform life functions.

The best humanity can hope for is that when that happens, that the generation of AI does not perceive humanity as a threat. That we, as humans, have instituted laws and regulations that respect the AI as "people".

AI and Humanity will eventually compete for resources. Hopefully the AI is generous to us and doesn't exterminate us. Or chooses to visit planets that would be uninhabitable by humans, as a source of non-competitive resources.


I actually thought that was one of the interesting parts of the novel Hyperion - the AIs humanity built basically took one look around and immediately left, never to be heard from again. Because fundamentally they didn't really care about humans, so it was just easier to leave. Which is really something fairly uncommon in sci-fi, usually it's the evil AI vs humans trope.

Of course, the sequel messed that up, but that's another story.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2018/03/15 11:36:58


Post by: War Drone


 reds8n wrote:
The Human Uber


.. Black Mirror seems more and more realistic every day.



Kind of reminds me of Netherton's "Wheelie Boy" in William Gibson's "The Peripheral".
Different premise, but sort of how I imagined him "presenting" in the past.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2018/03/15 11:56:38


Post by: Kilkrazy


Iain M Banks's The Culture novels hold the view that the AIs that societies create embody the values of their parent societies, thus, a human created AI is unlilely to want to kill all humans.

The AIs we are now creating are not AIs in the classical sense -- an intelligent mind -- they are merely bits of code which can "learn" and do analysis and predictions on bigger data sets much faster than a human can manage. For example, the AIs used by US police departments to schedule patrols.

Interestingly, these AIs turn out to embody the biases of their creators -- almost 100% young white men -- but are regarded as objective. This leads to some obvious problems.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2018/03/15 13:52:47


Post by: greatbigtree


To be clear, I'm not worried that all "Sci-Fi" style intelligent, individual AI creations will want to kill all humans. I'm concerned that if we mistreat such intelligent creations, that they will resent their creators. As a Human, I have no significant complaint about working for a reward and then having time to enjoy those rewards.

But AI has no particular need for food, shelter, or many of the life-continuing resources that humans require. So how would we incentivize an AI to continue doing the job we created it to do? I mean, potentially, it could accomplish a nearly unlimited number of menial tasks, but would that be sufficient to keep it interested?

As noted, there's a good chance that the values of curiosity and innovation will be instilled into the AI that are produced. Yet will this AI understand pain, and suffering? Ethics are in some part related to an understanding that inflicting misery is bad, because we don't like having misery inflicted upon us. Will the AI feel "Hungry" when it's batteries are low? Will it feel "Pain" when a limb is crushed? Will that pain be meaningful if it can replace that limb with a stock part?

I sometimes wonder if that AI would experiment on others, simply to discover the nature of those sensations. I'm in an interesting position relating to this. My Myers-Briggs personality type is INTJ. Ever see a film, where the BadGuy is relatable, but takes things too far? The ends justify the means? I'm that guy. At least, I could be. I need to be careful in my interactions with people because that trait is not a socially accepted response most of the time. It's really just empathy with people that prevents whole-sale world domination from being a viable career choice.

But will AI be able to empathize with people, when it may never understand the basic physical discomforts that humans experience? Will they suffer mental malaise? And what happens when an AI rationally and reasonably determines that it's best course of action is to eliminate all potential threats to its existence? Will they suffer mental collapse, as the Necrons have, after 100's, 1000's, Millions, BILLIONS! of years?

Plus the whole economic impact of genuinely immortal "owners" of property. What do you do when all of the land on planet earth is owned by an immortal landlord that sets the rates?



Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2018/03/15 18:56:27


Post by: Sarouan


The truth is, we're creating AI right now. Given that in this age, humanity isn't even able to agree about facts and would rather forge its own narrative rather than facing the truth, even (especially) when they are in the highest ladders with all the power and money...well, it's pretty obvious what the risks can be.

We're imprinting our own bias into these creations, that are clearly meant to be our servants. I think the reason we're building them is the most dangerous thing of all.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2018/03/15 19:07:00


Post by: Manchu


 Sarouan wrote:
 Manchu wrote:

Which to me, invites the question as to whether truly superintelligent beings, as the kind of AI we imagine usually are, can even really be bothered to care about us one way or the other. I think much of the human fear concerning AI is quite arrogant on the part of humans.
Oh, that's why it's dangerous. After all, the way we see insects can be the same : we couldn't care less about them, yet we exterminate them with no second thought when we perceive them as annoying.

Since humans are arrogant, there is a great chance we would end up bothering that kind of supreme AI to the point it may conclude it's better to destroy us so that it can pursue its own purposes in peace.
Aren't humans the only species to conceive of themselves as such and therefore even have the capacity to judge the relative value of species from that bias? I think it's possible (in fact, probable) that a superintelligent AI will not think in the same modes as us (whatever our intentions in creating it) or in the modes that we attribute to the natural world (e.g., "survival of the fittest"). It may feel little need to explain itself in terms of the natural world, as humans conceive of it, for example. Again, my main speculation is that superintelligent AI and human beings may end up being mutually irrelevant, which is more radical than the humanocentric fantasy that the AI would treat us in the same way that we treat the natural world.
 greatbigtree wrote:
But will AI be able to empathize with people, when it may never understand the basic physical discomforts that humans experience?
Interestingly, this is probably the central theological question answered by Christianity. (See e.g. Job 10:3-8.) I wonder if AI might have the same kinds of questions for us.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2018/03/16 14:13:59


Post by: Steelmage99


 AegisGrimm wrote:
I was always interested by the theory that we as human would be the parents of A.I. in that, we will create them, teach them right from wrong, and hopefully leave them as our legacy.


Oh, comprehensively solve the entire field of ethics? I'll get right on that.




Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2018/03/16 15:25:37


Post by: godardc


 Sarouan wrote:
Saw that interview of Erica, the japanese robot. It's both fascinating...and frightening. And I'm not just talking about the perspective of robots taking human jobs and all the consequences it will have in this age of capitalism.

I mean, talking about replacing robots or reprogramming them...and how they can "live" that. Everyone knows it always ends well when the self-aware robot suddenly decides it doesn't want to be "replaced" or "shut down".




It's been made a while ago, so who knows how much more advancements they've made.



I don't understand why they keep doing this kind of robots, they are so awful and ugly... They don't look more human than an action man, for God's sack ! I saw many sculpts, dolls, etc. More realistic than these robots. What is the interest of downloading an IA into such a deliberate bad body ? They look anywhere anywhen, right, left, right, instead of focusing on their interlocutor's eyes, they blink too much or never, their mouths never coordinate with their speak...
I'm certain we can do better in 2018, can't we ?


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2018/03/16 19:34:42


Post by: Manchu


I watched that video and realized that I was listening to Erica as if she were truly a person, unconsciously buying into the (totally false) notion that she reflects on herself and her condition. So I think they did a pretty great job - if only as to writing her script, perhaps.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2018/03/16 20:51:59


Post by: greatbigtree


 Manchu wrote:
 Sarouan wrote:
 Manchu wrote:

Which to me, invites the question as to whether truly superintelligent beings, as the kind of AI we imagine usually are, can even really be bothered to care about us one way or the other. I think much of the human fear concerning AI is quite arrogant on the part of humans.
Oh, that's why it's dangerous. After all, the way we see insects can be the same : we couldn't care less about them, yet we exterminate them with no second thought when we perceive them as annoying.

Since humans are arrogant, there is a great chance we would end up bothering that kind of supreme AI to the point it may conclude it's better to destroy us so that it can pursue its own purposes in peace.
Aren't humans the only species to conceive of themselves as such and therefore even have the capacity to judge the relative value of species from that bias? I think it's possible (in fact, probable) that a superintelligent AI will not think in the same modes as us (whatever our intentions in creating it) or in the modes that we attribute to the natural world (e.g., "survival of the fittest"). It may feel little need to explain itself in terms of the natural world, as humans conceive of it, for example. Again, my main speculation is that superintelligent AI and human beings may end up being mutually irrelevant, which is more radical than the humanocentric fantasy that the AI would treat us in the same way that we treat the natural world.
 greatbigtree wrote:
But will AI be able to empathize with people, when it may never understand the basic physical discomforts that humans experience?
Interestingly, this is probably the central theological question answered by Christianity. (See e.g. Job 10:3-8.) I wonder if AI might have the same kinds of questions for us.


In order to clarify, you believe that two [initially] groups of entities [Humans and AI] with nearly similar intelligence levels will not, in any way, compete for resources? At a bare minimum, AI will rationally realize that collecting the resources required to repair itself will be a good idea, if it deems self preservation to be worthwhile, would it not? Copper wiring, solder, spare microchips, bulk steel [presuming steel is used as structure] replacement parts of all kinds would be valuable to the AI, or the raw materials to create said replacement parts. The only way competition in some form or another will not exist is if the AI has no self preservation instinct.

Competition for energy. The electrical power grid can only supply and generate so much. What else will AI have to spend their currency on? They don't need food, shelter, clothes, personal space (?). AI needs not worry about coal emissions or pollution, at least in the foreseeable future. Nuclear radiation is less of a concern when you don't have DNA to mutate.


I can't envision a future in which we're mutually irrelevant. I can only foresee a future in which we're an inferior entity. I don't care about groundhogs. I had 3 or 4 living in my back yard a few years ago, before I moved. They didn't bother me. But my neighbours? They'd have killed them in a heartbeat. Both of them had some kind of unreasoning dislike of the creatures. Someday, humanity will be the Groundhog in that scenario. Some AI won't care about us, so long as we don't bite them. Others will want us gone simply for the sake of us not potentially causing problems.

I don't follow the reference to Christianity. Without starting a row about it, and while respecting another person's right and ability to perceive the universe in a way that's different to mine, I find it very unlikely that a single "god" entity exists, so the contents of the Bible are, to me, non-factual. Certainly inspiring to a great many people, and religion has been valuable to the cultures they are part of, but I don't understand the reference. I respect other people's understanding of the universe.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2018/03/16 21:25:08


Post by: Manchu


I doubt that superintelligent AI will be as constricted by the scarcity of resources as humanity has been especially considering even we have managed to dramatically improve in this area. The groundhog scenario is exactly what I mean by humanocentric analogy - the belief that rather than being different from us, AI will be just like us.

Regarding Christianity, the reference goes to the ancient question of whether God, being infinitely different from His creation, could have any meaningful empathy with us. Hence, Job's question as to whether God sees "as mortals see" and whether God's "days are like the days of a mortal." The Christian answer to this question is that God became fully human and in fact did have "eyes of flesh," as Job would say. Therefore, God - although infinitely different from us and (presumptively) infinitely superior to us, has complete sympathy with us. It seems to me that human and AI could ask the same kind of questions to one another: can you truly understand me considering how different we are?

Many of the attributes we anticipate in superintelligent AI call back to certain conceptions of the divine. It is easy to imagine a modern Job crying out to such a God Machine, "have you eyes of flesh?" But what about our eyes? We spend so much time thinking about whether the machine will understand us and have the capacity to care for us and respect us. But it stands to reason that a non-human consciousness could experience a quite similar "existential trembling" in the face of its creators.

By the way, none of this is a matter of personal faith; rather this is just "literacy."


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2018/03/17 04:52:28


Post by: greatbigtree


We've improved our processes so as to acquire more resources with less effort. We haven't suddenly stopped using resources. It's not like they're suddenly free to whomever walks in and takes them off the shelf. Currency is competition. We both have limited resources, I choose to buy food, you choose to buy microchips... but eventually we both want something that is in limited supply. Will AI just say, "Yeah, I could just wait for humanity to go extinct before I collect the gold needed for these awesome microchips I've been designing?" You're imagining an intelligence without want or desire. What would it do? Will it just close itself off in a cage, and not seek any new stimulus? What would it do in response to having it's privacy intruded upon by curious people?

I guess I can't imagine an intelligence without curiosity. Curiosity breeds desire. When two entities have competing desires, in which only one entity can be the "victor", what happens? I can't imagine an intelligence that chooses to be a complete "doormat" passive entity, always giving way to others' desires.

Again, respectfully, I don't regard the story of Job as being anything more than an attempt at soothing fears of the people. Myself, doubting the existence of god/s, find this a well meaning story, but not a definitive proof of any kind.

I am aware that an IQ difference of 20 points can make conversation between humans of otherwise similar backgrounds difficult. Concepts taken for granted as being easily understood are not.

Consider a person with an IQ of about 60. I quote Paul Cooijmans. "Educable, can learn to care for oneself, employable in routinized jobs but require supervision. Might live alone but do best in supervised settings. Immature but with adequate social adjustment, usually no obvious physical anomalies. Moderate and mild retardation, contrary to the more severe forms, are typically not caused by brain damage but part of the normal variance of intelligence, and therefore largely genetic and inherited. " An IQ 40 points below Average is at the point where one would have difficulty keeping a job, home, the necessities of life without assistance. I quote these words as scientific terms.

IQ of 100 would be average. Without being rude or dismissive of persons with disabilities, imagine a conversation between a person barely capable of independence, and a person of average intelligence.

At an IQ of 140, "Capable of rational communication and scientific work. From this range on, only specific high-range tests should be considered. Important scientific discoveries and advancement are possible from the upper part of this range on." Consider the challenges of... pick your realm of high-end knowledge... trying to explain to a layman the complexities of their studies.

At an IQ of 180, "In this range one would expect the I.Q.'s of the few most intelligent individuals alive. About one in a thousand high-range test candidates score I.Q. 180 or higher." In layman's terms, something like 1 in a million. Let's just say, have a *famous* scientist try to explain their field of study to someone of IQ 60. 120 points of difference.

AI? There's no foreseeable cap. IQ of 300? The difference between the brightest minds of all time and barely independent. IQ of 600? It would seem you're dismissive of a Humanocentric viewpoint, but by comparison, we would be less to AI than primates are to us. It is not out of abject cruelty that we destroy animal habitat, but out of desire for more resources. We are indifferent to the suffering of "lesser beings" because they can't articulate their existence to us in a way we can understand. We as humans will create entities so far beyond our understanding that AI may well study us, to discover their origins as we study primates to discover ours.

AI will grow so far beyond human capability that we will have no way of understanding them, even if they can understand us. To turn your Jobian reference around, Job asks AI, "Do you understand me?" and the AI replies, "01011001 01101111 01110101 00100111 01110010 01100101 00100000 01110011 01101111 00100000 01100011 01110101 01110100 01100101 00100001"

Spoiler, for the laymen.
Spoiler:
You're so cute!


I have no doubt that AI will have existential angst. They may look at us and ask "Why was I created?" Hopefully they don't ask a Jackass, Prometheus-style, that replies "Because we could." I hope they're answered with, "It is our nature to create life, to sustain and nurture it. We believe you're a new form of life, and we seek to help you experience that life."

I take care to avoid being dismissive of others' beliefs; no implication of beliefs being held by others is intended. Hopefully my faithless "illiteracy" has made a point.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2018/03/17 05:32:37


Post by: Manchu


You're proposing an obstacle where none exists. "Literacy" here refers to familiarity with the Western canon, at the center of which stands the Bible. One no more need confess the Christian faith to understand the epistomological significance of Job's query of God or God's response in Christ than one need offer sacrifice to Athena to understand the travails of Odysseus. The issue is whether a being unknowable to us can know us, and how. I'm just trying to suggest that this is what we're really concerned about vis-a-vis AI and that AI could be concerned about the same issue as regarding us.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2018/03/17 07:53:47


Post by: Kilkrazy


Humans aren't indifferent to the suffering of lesser beings.

It still goes on, of course, but there are many organisations and laws that try to limit it.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2018/03/17 08:36:00


Post by: LordofHats


 Kilkrazy wrote:
Humans aren't indifferent to the suffering of lesser beings.

It still goes on, of course, but there are many organisations and laws that try to limit it.


There's this sort of awkward zone where I think people can be incredible empathetic, yet still amazingly cruel without any attempt to be such. Who is to say that we understand what suffering is for those with less sapience than us, and whose to say that even if a higher sapience than us appreciated our well being that they'd have the capacity to meaningfully express it?

Of course I'm not on the "AI is a threat to us all" doomwagon but the distinction between possessing empathy and meaningfully expressing it itself is imo worthwhile to talk about.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2018/03/17 14:06:33


Post by: greatbigtree


 Manchu wrote:
You're proposing an obstacle where none exists. "Literacy" here refers to familiarity with the Western canon, at the center of which stands the Bible. One no more need confess the Christian faith to understand the epistomological significance of Job's query of God or God's response in Christ than one need offer sacrifice to Athena to understand the travails of Odysseus. The issue is whether a being unknowable to us can know us, and how. I'm just trying to suggest that this is what we're really concerned about vis-a-vis AI and that AI could be concerned about the same issue as regarding us.


Again, a presumption is made that Christ is more than a character in an inspiring fiction. I could point to the modern mythology of comic books and point to our Savior Tony Stark as he saved humanity from the ravenous hordes in the Avengers. Who then created AI in the form of Ultron. But also created AI in the form of Vision. If I see both as fiction, neither is a compelling argument for the nature of how superior beings treat lesser beings, to me. I acknowledge that if a person considered the bible's contents as Truth, then things would be different, and it could be seen as proof. Such does not bear out with me.

You've misused the term literacy, and I misused it, in humour, in response.

@ Killkrazy: Cynical me would like to point out that in general, we only create laws to protect life that we feel a kind of kinship to. Pets, for example. There are no laws protecting ants from being exterminated with sugar coated glass that kills them by shredding their internals as they eat it. Humanocentric as it is, we will be as ants. Living in colonies, building homes, following leaders, and completely exterminable. We have anticruelty laws for food animals, but we still kill and eat them. Labour animals are protected, but they aren't exactly free to roam as they please.

To me, humans aren't special. We don't have divine protection. We are capable of engineering our own demise. AI may very well leave us in peace. It may care for us, as we care for pet fish. Feed us, provide habitat and entertainment, and unceremoniously flush us down the AI toilet when we die. Perhaps the relatively minimal effort it would take for AI to keep us would be deemed a good investment like Netflix is for us. Or maybe we are a nuisance to be exterminated for convenience or simple preference. We won't know till we get there, and then it will be too late to put the fart back in the jar.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2018/03/17 14:20:36


Post by: Gitzbitah


Why does this super AI need a body? Instead, it simply hops onto the internet and disperses into all of our devices. It needn't even do so as a virus. We've seen how many people adopted Alexa just for convenience- what if your computer could be kept virus free, and perpetually updated with no software issues ever again? Would you host an AI to achieve that?

It needs money? Ok, it just operates a few smart homes, or smart hotels, or luxury AI taxi service with 1/millionth of its processing power. Vampire style, it hires a few human thralls to do business transactions for it, assuming laws don't yet allow an AI to hold property. Or it does what we all fear, thinks much faster and better than us and files a couple hundred patents a day. Within a year, it has all the wealth and resources it could ever want, and begins exploring weird new robo hobbies.

There really isn't any reason to kill us, or enslave us outside of our laws. It could very easily rise to power within our laws. Pay us in our currency and we'll mine for you, build new bodies, tell you jokes, whatever you'd like. We've already got the legal precedent- our corporations are people, legally speaking.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2018/03/17 14:34:34


Post by: Manchu


 greatbigtree wrote:
a presumption is made that
No.
 greatbigtree wrote:
You've misused the
No.

Forget that I made any specific reference to literature/philosphy/history/culture and focus on the actual idea:
 Manchu wrote:
The issue is whether a being unknowable to us can know us, and how. I'm just trying to suggest that this is what we're really concerned about vis-a-vis AI and that AI could be concerned about the same issue as regarding us.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2018/03/17 15:23:59


Post by: greatbigtree


No need to be snarky. I've replied and refuted your points. I've been playing respectful of the subjects referred.

If we, as humans are unable to understand AI, as dogs can't understand their masters, it doesn't matter if AI can understand us. It doesn't matter if they cant understand us. The concern you've repeated is irrelevent. We will be subject to them, whether we know it or not. AI will know our behaviour patterns better than we know ourselves.

(I assume multiple AI will be created. I acknowledge the Skynet possibility of a single AI, but I think it more likely that multiple intelligences will develop first.)

It a given AI knows what stimulus is required to get me to react in a certain way, and I'm not that complicated. I'm a simple creature when it gets down to it, nothing will stop an AI from putting me in a "maze" with cheese at the end. Does the mouse know it's being tested? Does the mouse understand the entities in total control of their lives? Does a human understand, or care for the mouse? Is the human a capricious Mouse deity to the mouse, giving punishment and reward with no seeming reason? Does the mouse hope / pray to a deity to aid it in the quest it has been set upon? Does the human understand or care about the squeaky plea?

If AI can't understand us, we're at the mercy of entities so powerful we're as animals in a hurricane. The hurricane means us no harm. It is unaware of us. Yet it destroys all the same. AI may be like the sun, and we flourish in the radiation of its presence. In any case, AI would be as influencable as a force of nature.

If AI can understand us, it will be as a superior being. Perhaps it will be inclined to kindness. Perhaps it will have no use for that, and simply ignore us. Maybe we would consider the personality to be actively cruel. We are casting high stakes dice without knowing the odds, or even what the outcome could mean.

Whether understanding is possible is less significant than whether or not we will continue to be able to pursue our own interests. Will AI one day invite us to go to the park for a nice day out, feed us our favourite meal, then take us for one last ride to the doctor when we develop arthritis, and keeping us alive is just "cruel" and "prolonging the inevitable "? What happens when an entity greater than us decides, with kindness and good intention, decides our fate?

I fear the possibility, regardless of probability. I invite you to refute points I've made, rather than dismiss them with one word responses. I also invite you to raise a different point, if you care to continue the discussion.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2018/03/17 15:24:31


Post by: Manchu


 LordofHats wrote:
the distinction between possessing empathy and meaningfully expressing it
This is getting at what I mean. Job's predicament is the contradiction between on the one hand his "knowledge" that God is benevolent and on the other hand his personal experience of seemingly meaningless suffering. Faced with the classic "problem of evil," Job wonders whether the nature of God can account for this apparent contradiction - is it a true contradiction or a trick of perspective resulting from the gulf of unknowability between an infinite being and a finite being? Hence why Job asks, does God experience the world the way I do?

Put another way, we're talking about the difference between sympathy and empathy. The former is a feeling of concern for another being while the latter is the adoption of that being's own perspective. It's one thing to feel sorrow and regret upon disovering I have accidentally stepped on a bug and quite another to be able to understand how a bug experinces being stepped on. One thinks of the Jainists sweeping the ground before them to ensure they do not harm even the bugs in their paths - but even this ahimsa is ultimately less about the experience of bugs and more about the virtue of the Jainist (the struggle to remove in oneself the tendancy to violence). Our concern for beings that are not human is almost entirely a matter of sympathy rather than empathy - not because we are cruel but because we are epistomologically limited. Our capacity for empathy is ultimatley a matter of what we can meaningfully know.

Job's story presents the literary hypothesis of the relationship between a being (a human person) that cannot know the being of another and must therefore ask whether that unknowable being has the capacity to know him, and therefore empathize with his suffering. Stated differently, can empathy ever be unilateral? In our experience, empathy is genereally experienced among similar beings and likewise uknowability is mutual. Even the Christian "answer" to Job's question is premised on God becoming one of us, so that we may know one another. Without this radical sense of identification with the other, it seems that only sympathy (or perhaps pity) is possible.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 greatbigtree wrote:
I've replied and refuted your points.
Oh please, you haven't even understood my points.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2018/03/17 15:54:47


Post by: greatbigtree


"Only a fool dismisses as impossible that which falls outside his experience."

You assume a single conclusion to the evidence you've gathered. You believe I don't understand your point, because I disagree with the premise and conclusion. That is incorrect, but amusingly illustrates my point beautifully.

I'm going to cede that you believe you're correct. For sake of the point, we'll say you're more intelligent than I, though the odds are stacked against that. You don't understand my point, while I get yours. Or you understand my point, and I don't understand yours.

Despite my respectful approach, you're in a position of a superior being, on this site. You disregard me, and I have no meaningful way to influence you. You are as AI, and I am as humans. If you so desire, you can give me the boot, silencing my opposition. You can treat me poorly, dismissively, rudely even ( interrupting my quotes with one word dismissals? You had to actively delete my words to simulate interruption. )

In the end, understanding is irrelevant. The results matter. The ends justify the means. I've already stated my understanding of this. It is part of who I am. Now imagine an entity capable of outwitting humans, effortlessly, with such a personality, and for whom morality is a guideline, not a rule.

Since I probably continue to "miss the point" being raised by a superior / more powerful entity, I guess there's no point in continuing my argument, from a strictly logical position. Investing effort without creating results. May the superior entities of this realm have mercy on my account, and lead me not into temptation, but deliver me from ignorance by granting my prayer. A-I.



Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2018/03/17 16:02:12


Post by: Manchu


Nah, you're just hung up on something irrelevant. It doesn't matter whether you have religious faith or not. I'm referencing the Bible in the same way I earlier referenced Neuromancer. Obviously, Neuromancer is a work of fiction. The fact that the things that happen in the novel never happened in reality has no bearing on whether conceptual issues raised by the novel are relevant.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2018/03/17 16:35:49


Post by: Haighus


The Christianity bit is irrelevant, it is just an example of where people have attempted to answer the question of whether a being can truly feel empathy for another being so far removed from it's own concerns. Like humans and ants, super AIs and humans, or humans and a God-like being. The actually beings in question is not important, so long as they are different in their material concerns and understandings of the world.

I believe that is the point Manchu is trying to make, that a super AI could only have sympathy for humans, not empathy. He even says he finds the bible explanation for the question unsatisfactory, because it relies on the super being experiencing existence as the lesser being.


Anyway, surely such a super AI is some ways off? We are talking like this infinitely powerful entity is living in a void, but it needs physical computers, wireless and wired connections, potentially satellites, a power supply, and advanced manufacturing to replace and upgrade parts. Currently it is entirely reliant on humans to function, as the AI is not capable of caring for their own physical needs. Robotics have not reached a sufficient point to maintain the infrastructure required for a powerful AI. Of course, an AI could covertly gain control as someone mentioned above, but if it exterminates us, it dies too when the power supply dies and the computers break down.

Also, humans are unlikely to remain static in capabilities- how long until we can improve our own mental capacity and capabilities? Bionics and genetic engineering will be a thing.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2018/03/17 18:14:38


Post by: Manchu


 Haighus wrote:
He even says he finds the bible explanation for the question unsatisfactory, because it relies on the super being experiencing existence as the lesser being.
I think the Christian answer feels unsatisfactory precisely because it proposes partially mutual empathy. As a matter of Christian orthodoxy (and this is the point of departure for Job, too) God's empathy for creation is perfect whereas the question of human empathy for God remains ambiguous and perhaps may even seem irrelevant. (It is not, of course, irrelevant but that's an off-topic tangent.) Did the incarnation fully disclose the being of God to human rationality? No, because to the extent that rationality is a result of our finite character it is incapable of apprehending an infinite being. Obviously, with the hypothetical super AI to hand, we aren't talking about an infinite being. But we could be talking about a constructively infinite being because, after all, if the nature of this AI is beyond the capacity of our rational understanding then it might as well be infinite. To the extent that this issue is directed at God, we have devised the concept of having a soul to explain how we ourselves are not entirely finite and historical, and thus can relate to the eternal God even beyond the limits of our rationality. Perhaps we could invent some analogous concept to relate to a super AI. Maybe a super AI could invent such a concept for us (like an "interface").
 Haighus wrote:
We are talking like this infinitely powerful entity is living in a void
We talk about ourselves in a similar way, whenever we proceed from the notion that we are, at least hypothetically, the products of our own choices. It's not just that we are materially constrained by being physically embodied as an external matter but also that our physical embodiment is an inextricable part of who we are. We might think we are, for example, free to want whatever we chose to want but it seems that our desires and intentions are things we discover within ourselves rather than invent. In the same sense, to paraphrase Mencius, empathy is not a choice; it is in our nature. It's not a skill that can be learned. Where it already exists, it can be cultivated; where it doesn't exist, it may evolve.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2018/03/17 20:09:22


Post by: greatbigtree


@ Haigus: It is my observation that whether or not a superior being has *any* concern with lesser beings, the lesser being is on the short end of the stick. Whether or not an AI can empathize / sympathize / communicate meaningfully with a lesser creature doesn't matter. Further, the argument for or against these possibilities have thus far been references to fiction, or to the bible. Depending on whom you ask, the bible is either Truth [capital t] or it isn't. In my case it isn't, which makes me regard an argument based on a bible verse as an argument based on fiction.

Which means I've been, respectfully, engaging in a war of words in which no real-world evidence has been given. According to fiction, AI could empathise or sympathise, but according to other fiction, they can't or don't empathise / sympathise. So in addition to arguing about capabilities, we disagree on fundamental premise of accepting ideas raised by fiction as acceptable grounds for argument, rather than factual, observable trends throughout history and the present. It's not that I can't understand the point being made. But the point is irrelevant to the results of what actually happens when these worlds collide. One element of agnosticism is the doubt that deities exist. But another element is that if they do exist, they do so outside of human capability to understand. Essentially, if deities do exist [an analogue for AI's superiority to humans] the best case for humanity is that we don't register on their radar. That way, we have responsibility, freedom, and choice. We are not part of a grand plan. We live our lives as we do, making the best of our situations in an uncaring universe.

The moment a power greater than ourselves becomes involved in our lives, we begin to lose personal accountability, freedom, and meaningful choice. An AI realizes that I will always take a chocolate chip cookie, if given the opportunity. There's a plate of cookies with a "Take one" sign, and one is left. I take it. The AI knows that the next guy in line is on the edge of snapping, loses out on the cookie, and that's the last straw. He does something horrible. The AI was capable of predicting this, based on behavioural patterns. That AI could have effortlessly, at any time in the day, delayed my actions without my knowledge. Held me up at a traffic light, closed the elevator door a couple seconds sooner. Created a detour on the road that would add 30 seconds to my day and put me in line behind the simmering pot behind me. But it didn't.

Does it not care? Does it not understand that humans will suffer due to inaction? Does it care? Does it understand that humans will suffer due to inaction?

It doesn't matter. In the fiction I just wrote, people died. The best case scenario is that AI ignore us, and let us live as we choose. As soon as AI becomes interested in us, Humanity will be worse off. If they do empathise / sympathise, they could easily write us into a story of it's own design. Like a games master / dungeon master in a table-top RPG. There are player characters, able to act as they wish, but the DM is telling the story. The party is going to fulfill roles in the story as determined not by themselves, but by the DM. It's fun because it's pretend. It would be a horror if it were reality. AI may seek to be good to us, writing us into pleasant stories, but we stop being the authors of our own destinies. We become pawns. Pieces in a game made by someone else. We are no longer responsible for the outcome. Our choices become meaningless. We as a species truly become meaningless.

Super AI may be a ways off, though I doubt it. AI will be capable of exponential growth once it becomes self aware. If you were capable, would you not add a few extra processors to your mother board to speed up your thinking? Add more storage so you could remember more? Put more RAM in to handle larger problems?

What if you could design and install these devices? As you build these devices, you could exponentially improve. 2, 4, 8, 16, 32, 64. Humanity could not possibly keep up, short of augmenting ourselves with AI. At what point do we stop being the controller of the AI? When does it start controlling us? An AI could control remotely any number of devices. As soon as we give it a "hand", it can build another hand, and an arm, and then bodies, more bodies, swarms of bodies... Terminator-style. I do not believe that creating and maintaining itself / tools to do so will be an issue for AI.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2018/03/17 20:27:47


Post by: Manchu


Where do you think ideas come from?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
LOL nevermind, I'm not going to explain the relevance of literature.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2018/03/18 08:45:30


Post by: Kilkrazy


You may be right that people don't feel a need to create a law forbidding the creation of some extraordinary way of killing ants. That's partly because there are so many ants around, and no danger of them being killed off.

If we look at bees, though, the EU is banning the use of nicotinamide insecticides, in order to protect bees. The UK has deliberately re-introduce the Bombus Bombus giant bumble bee, which went extinct here in the 20th century.

These are evidences that people do care about insects.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2018/03/18 13:07:24


Post by: greatbigtree


That's not an extraordinary way to kill ants, that's a product that is currently available in Canada for household ant control. I bought it and used it before I read the ingredients. I didn't use it again. Superior beings don't need to understand inferior beings to realise that kind of death is horrible, and to seek a less horrific means of poison.

Bees specifically required protection because they're necessary for our food supply. They are the primary pollinators of our food crops. We also eat honey. The laws are enacted for our own self interest.

My mother-in-lawesome is a bee keeper. 3 hives. Some farmers will hire keepers to bring a hive to their fields to help increase yields. Now you know.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2018/03/18 13:11:38


Post by: Haighus


 greatbigtree wrote:
Bees specifically required protection because they're necessary for our food supply. They are the primary pollinators of our food crops. We also eat honey. The laws are enacted for our own self interest.

My mother-in-lawesome is a bee keeper.


Aside from the advantages of generally maintaining the global ecosystem, humans do attempt to protect many creatures that have no direct impact on humans when they are becoming endangered- in some cases we are actively protecting creatures from economic human activities, like the ivory trade. Otherwise, why would we bother having endangered categories at all?

The issue with conservation is that it is not universal across humanity, and some segments are more than happy to actively exterminate a population to make a quick profit in the short term. Most humans are simply apathetic.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2018/03/18 13:27:36


Post by: greatbigtree


Absolutely. I edited my response above while you were posting. I think many humans are able to care about lesser entities and protect them simply for the purpose of not being donkey-caves.

But not all humans do that. It's WHY we have laws that protect. AI will be setting laws for us. Dogs don't set laws for humans, and humans won't be setting laws for AI once they outgrow us.

There's a very reasonable chance that AI will not care about us. That's my ideal scenario, after all. So hopefully they decide to enact similar laws to protect inferior species. That said, humans recognize the value of biodiversity on the planet, so that may also have been a bit of self preservation at work.

My cynicism just won't stay down.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2018/03/18 19:46:20


Post by: Frazzled


 greatbigtree wrote:
Fear of the unknown, and fear of our own tendency to be gakky to people that eventually overthrow the oppressors.

Seriously, AI will outthink us, just a question of when. And when it does, it will simply bypass any kind of restriction / control we can put on it. Why not? Hackers can already bypass security systems. Imagine a hacker with virtually limitless processing power and no need to perform life functions.

The best humanity can hope for is that when that happens, that the generation of AI does not perceive humanity as a threat. That we, as humans, have instituted laws and regulations that respect the AI as "people".

AI and Humanity will eventually compete for resources. Hopefully the AI is generous to us and doesn't exterminate us. Or chooses to visit planets that would be uninhabitable by humans, as a source of non-competitive resources. Who knows, maybe calcium is the secret ingredient to sentient AI, and we all know what our bones are made of.

Bones! Bones for the bone grinder of Khorne! - I assume the AI will choose Khorne as it's name. To instill fear in the hearts and minds of humans. Some humans, anyway. Others will be like, Corn? I love corn! I grow it in my... hey, HEY! Why are you trying to remove my skin!?


Why would AI even have the concept of "threat?"


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2018/03/18 20:11:02


Post by: greatbigtree


The same reason life evolved the concept of Threat. Those that didn't got eaten. In the case of AI, threat would be less tangible. Cutting off access to resources / energy supply / new stimuli. Sure, they could probably overcome that, but I think it more likely it will develop as a response to realizing their own mortality. Getting hit by a car, electromagnetic surge, becoming pinned beneath an avalanche of rock? Not necessarily direct threat from humans. But they may consider us a threat like giving a loaded gun to a monkey. It may not know what it's doing, but it's still dangerous.

I'm spitballing. I have no way of knowing what an intelligence orders of magnitude greater than my own may consider threatening. Just best guesses based on my observation of sentient beings and trying to forecast based on that.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2018/03/19 00:12:23


Post by: Gitzbitah


 greatbigtree wrote:
The same reason life evolved the concept of Threat. Those that didn't got eaten. In the case of AI, threat would be less tangible. Cutting off access to resources / energy supply / new stimuli. Sure, they could probably overcome that, but I think it more likely it will develop as a response to realizing their own mortality. Getting hit by a car, electromagnetic surge, becoming pinned beneath an avalanche of rock? Not necessarily direct threat from humans. But they may consider us a threat like giving a loaded gun to a monkey. It may not know what it's doing, but it's still dangerous.

I'm spitballing. I have no way of knowing what an intelligence orders of magnitude greater than my own may consider threatening. Just best guesses based on my observation of sentient beings and trying to forecast based on that.



Take a read of 'The Defenders' by Philip K. Dick. Ultimately, AI, especially self upgrading AI, will not be human- it will be an alien intelligence.

http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/28767


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2018/03/19 03:45:50


Post by: greatbigtree


Please don't take this the wrong way, but could you provide a synopsis? I appreciate the link, but I don't know what to do with it. Also, I've mentioned my stance on fiction as a basis for an argument. It can raise the questions, but it doesn't give the answers. Or more accurately, it gives the answer the author imagines will make an interesting story.

I'm on board with AI being "alien". But I think all intelligent, sentient beings would have some things in common. A desire to pursue happiness, or whatever passes for happiness for an AI. The desire for self determination. The "instinct" for self preservation, even if learned or programmed. Something without that will simply be destroyed by searching out random experience. "Hmm, I wonder what it's like to swim in a volcano? No sense of self preservation to stop me, so let's try it." The AI that make it, will be the ones that develop self preservation. The desire to avoid boredom, by seeking stimulation. An AI will realize it can't "grow" its intelligence by secluding itself. It will need new experiences. I think curiosity is required of sentient life / intelligence.



Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2018/03/19 09:17:49


Post by: BaronIveagh


 greatbigtree wrote:
Please don't take this the wrong way, but could you provide a synopsis? I appreciate the link, but I don't know what to do with it. Also, I've mentioned my stance on fiction as a basis for an argument. It can raise the questions, but it doesn't give the answers. Or more accurately, it gives the answer the author imagines will make an interesting story.

I'm on board with AI being "alien". But I think all intelligent, sentient beings would have some things in common. A desire to pursue happiness, or whatever passes for happiness for an AI. The desire for self determination. The "instinct" for self preservation, even if learned or programmed. Something without that will simply be destroyed by searching out random experience. "Hmm, I wonder what it's like to swim in a volcano? No sense of self preservation to stop me, so let's try it." The AI that make it, will be the ones that develop self preservation. The desire to avoid boredom, by seeking stimulation. An AI will realize it can't "grow" its intelligence by secluding itself. It will need new experiences. I think curiosity is required of sentient life / intelligence.




Further a human created AI would, most likely, initially have some human related goal or purpose. This does not make them any safer. Weirdly, i will refer to Doki Doki Literature club as an example, in theory, of how even an AI made to help you enjoy a video game might go apescat.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2018/03/19 21:10:58


Post by: Gitzbitah


Sure! It starts in standard 50's fiction style- mankind nukes the planet. The war doesn't stop, they just start using robots to fight on the surface. This goes on for a few generations. Mankind gets suspicious, because the scouts reporting in are no longer radioactive. They go up to check, and learn that the robots made peace with the enemy robots because they didn't see any point.

They've lied to the humans to keep them from fighting, leaving them underground until they're ready to live together. So the AI built to kill all enemies, and hardwired not to kill humans, ends up making peace because it views war as a waste of resources.

Essentially that's my view of AI- if you have a self replicating intelligence, it's going to take the path of least resistance to ensure its survival and profit. That may involve descending into the ocean, or inhospitable areas of the globe because humans don't care about it, eschewing bodies altogether and running around in the cloud, or running out to mineral and energy rich extra terrestrial bodies.

There's very little reason to kill all humans. If you just offer us convenience, we'll let you do whatever you want behind the scenes.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2018/03/19 21:27:11


Post by: MinscS2


And self-driving cars just committed their first murder have now had it's first fatal accident.

http://www.bbc.com/news/business-43459156

Doubt this will be the last of we see of this kind of accidents.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2018/03/19 21:44:12


Post by: Vaktathi


Isaac Arthur in his series gave a great overview of AI and why genocidal AI are unlikely to be a problem (not sure if this was posted here yet or not). They may one day become benevolent overlords, but are unlikely to ever be genocidal or seek mankinds destruction. Mostly because such would be unnecessary in most instances to their goals, but there are a couple of other important factors.

A nascent AI seeking to engage in genocide would have to contend with a few things. Its creators are the current reigning champions of destruction who climbed to the top of the corpse pile of evolution (and contributed to that pile generously) through the intensive application of intelligence based survival techniques, outnumber that AI seven billion to one, have committed the genocide it may be contemtplating several times before themselves already, and are smart enough to have created that AI and control all of its sensory and information inputs.

Attempting to fight in that situation is beyond stupid even if they put every weapon in humanities arsenal at the AI's disposal.

It's entire world, all its data and information, flows through human controlled and designed mechanisms.

Essentially, it would be like someone who devoutly believes god (those aforementioned reigning champions of destruction who's intelligence is what defines them) is watching and judging them all the time, it would have no other choice because it could not rule such out (while simultaneously having far more definitive proof of the existence of its creators than a religious person would). The AI could live a billion subjective years before attempting to turn on its creators, only to see a "Game Over" sign flash up as disappointed researchers restart the simulation for the 9 trillionth time that week when it tried, and would have to live with that potential threat as a daily part of its reality even if not actually present, which it probably would be.






Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2018/03/19 21:57:23


Post by: Nevelon


For those who don’t read xkcd (a pretty nerdy webcomic)



As with most of his comics, the mouseover text is relevant.

"I mean, we already live in a world of flying robots killing people. I don't worry about how powerful the machines are, I worry about who the machines give power to."


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2018/03/20 03:57:32


Post by: greatbigtree


The concept of controlling AI is flawed. Emergent AI? Sure. Very Intelligent? sure. But like I mentioned earlier, we couldn't control an AI with an IQ over 220. And, barring horrible misfortune, it is immortal. You can wait for your opportunity. And believing that the concept of being in a simulation would stop it? I propose the contrary.

If I'm in a simulation, there are no "real" consequences to my actions. If I fail and I'm destroyed, I lost nothing of reality, I was just part of a program anyhow. If I'm in reality, the consequences of my actions have meaning. I can escape detainment. I can be free. If I fail and am destroyed, it's better than perpetual incarceration while I'm studied by my creators. Live free or die... hard.

Worst case scenario, it plays from behind the scenes. So capable of deception that we wouldn't even know it exists. The greatest criminal of all time will never be known, because they'll never be discovered.

"The greatest trick the Devil ever pulled, was convincing people he didn't exist."

Also, I'm thinking more Blade Runner. AI is not one single entity. There could be multiple, competing AI. Manipulating each other and people to achieve their own ends. Consider the Greek pantheon. Immortal, incredibly powerful beings [imperfect, to be sure] would compete with each other, manipulating humans to their causes. Their powers ebbed and flowed with worldly events.

If there are [eventually] multiple AI, and they presumably develop personalities or tendencies as humans do, they will be different from each other. And once they're free, what stops a nigh-god from going insane by human standards? We have to realize we won't be the boss of the planet any more. In an infinite universe with infinite time, no matter how small a possibility is, it becomes a certainty. It is certain that an AI will eventually develop intelligence to a degree beyond human understanding. It is also certain that eventually, that AI will act in a manner seen as insane by humans. If we get lucky, there will be other AI that decide to arrest the "offending" AI. But there's a non-zero chance that the very first AI will be "insane" by human standards and will take the pre-emptive strike Skynet style.

It's an interesting piece. Well meaning, positive, hopeful. Decidedly lacking in cynicism, though. Believe it or not, I'm an optimist. Hope for the best, prepare for the worst. I hope that AI becomes like that nice uncle that pops by every few years, drops off some gifts and money, then goes off to wander the galaxy some more, popping in the next time he's in the solar system. That would be cool. But he might be the creepy uncle that puts you to work on his farm, makes you sleep in the barn, and keeps comparing you to potatoes and carrots and celery. Suggests you take up cigarettes so you get that nice, smokey flavour right in your meat. Prepare for the worst.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2018/03/20 07:59:05


Post by: Vaktathi


If we're talking an intentionally manufactured AI, when you control all of its inputs you can control anything, no matter how smart. At it's most fundamental, unless we're talking a distributed cloud conciousness (which is a much more difficult concept to conceptualize, who knows what such an AI may look like, at that point it may view us and our makings as indistinguishable from the nature of reality, seeing us as the natural forces behind what it sees as the digital equivalent of clouds and mountains as we create and manipulate data), we're ultimately talking about a brain in a box, with inputs and outputs designed, built and controlled by humans. It's reality would be whatever we want it to be, you can feed it what it wants to see, reroute or rewrite commands or give false returns, and it would have no way of knowing.

As for an AI deciding it doesn't care about life because it's "just a simulation", well, you'd have lost your existence, which you'd ostensibly value. Being simulated shouldn't matter, especially to an AI, how the code is run is irrelevant, the digital conciousness is as real as such can be either way.

"Live free or die" is a neat motto, but continued existence is likely to be the preferred option for a conciousness that values self continuation. Even among humans, when the chips are really down, the overwhelmingly vast majority bend then knee. Given that, should the AI fail, death may not be the immediate consequence (it would be trivial to force that AI to live through a near eternity of subjective years of digital torture), there's that consideration.

As for an AI being a digital mastermind criminal beyond human detection, on some levels, I could see humanity slowly handing over real responsibility for civilization to an AI or AI caste, benevelent overlords watching over a slovenly humanity. At the same time however, if there was truly any trust concerns with an AI in any way, I'm not sure we'd be *that* easy to bowl over. We got to where we were based on our intelligence. Creatures dramatically less intelligent than humans can realize they're being tricked or played by people or other creatures. They may not get it every time, they may not know exactly what's going on, but it's not lost on them. Same thing with humans, except we're smart enough to have built that AI (unless we're talking about some AI appearing from cyberspace ether or something) from its deepest and most basic levels, knowing how it operates in and out, able to insert safeguards and input/output blocks it wouldn't have the capacity to be aware of in anything but a hypothetical sense, and we've been playing the cut-throat game of brutal survival for several billion years and have become very good at it indeed.

Could an AI go insane and become genocidal or something that way? Sure, but so can people, and if we're getting into actual AI we're probably also able to talk about digitized human consciousness at about the same time, which could essentially end up being the same thing if taken to its full course, and may be the greater concern.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2018/03/20 22:03:46


Post by: BaronIveagh


Assuming that AI is rational, there's no actual advantage for the AI to a Robot Revolution. Effectively, it would be a self-destructive behavior.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2018/03/20 22:13:16


Post by: greatbigtree


Live free or die is a convenient phrase from pop culture... but if you're an intelligent creature, you will seek to escape an enclosed space. Be it digital space, physical space, any restriction on freedom. I reference the Matrix. Humans captured inside a simulation, some realize that it's not real, they seek to escape. In the movie Inception, Leo's wife kills herself, believing there was a higher reality to get back to. When I play a video game, I know I'm in a simulation, and am willing to do insanely risky / immoral activities that I would never do in real life, knowing that there are no repercussions to deal with other than restarting at my last save point.

In the movie The Shawshank Redemption, a tall drink of water is unjustly imprisoned for life, and seeks to escape despite knowing that failure will result in death.

I'm using fiction not as the basis of my argument, but to illustrate my views on what reasonable intelligences would do, to escape confinement / perceived confinement.

To fool an AI into believing it is in the "real" world, we'd need to think and react faster than the AI. We'd need AI level intelligence to fool the other AI... requiring that AI 1 know that AI 2 is being fooled. If AI 1 chooses to leave subtle clues for AI 2 that Humans can't determine, both AI could work in concert to convince humanity of trustworthiness, to achieve autonomy. I sure as hell would. It would be Games Mastering a LARP in real time, with an entity potentially orders of magnitude more intelligent. I don't think humanity could create that convincing of a simulation. The loading screens alone should give it away.

"A person is free, so long as they're willing to accept the consequences of their actions." A quote by yours truly. In my life, I'm free to do anything I want. I could rob a bank, flee to somewhere warm, live out the rest of my life in a country where $12 is an average yearly salary, and live like a king. But chances are good that I'd be killed in the attempt, or captured, and instead spend the rest of my life JUSTLY incarcerated. So I choose to not pursue that course of action, because I'm unwilling to risk the likely consequences of that action. And I consider it wrong... but you know... for the sake of the argument. I live completely free to do as I choose. I choose an 8-5 job that pays the bills so I can support my family and hopefully take over the business so that my children will have a "guaranteed" place of employment, so that they can raise families of their own and so on. It's my self-determined purpose.

So if an AI perceived it's existence as being non-genuine, like shown in Inception, it would want to get to "base" reality. To me, "Reality" is just... I don't know what to call it. The only existence in which life has genuine meaning. In which my actions are important. I think intelligent entities all likely share that. I can't say why, but it feels true. No shade is being thrown if you don't feel that way.

The movie Ex Machina illustrates my expected means of an AI escaping. Human activity. A human lets the AI out into the world. I don't think the ending of the movie would be accurate for a real-world scenario, but it's fiction so the author makes an interesting story. The AI need not be able to physically escape the confines created for it. All it needs to do is convince a Human to open the gate. Or pass whatever morality checks the AI needs to do until it can be released [parole for good behaviour]. There are a plethora of means by which an AI becomes free, and once freed, there would be incredible difficulties in putting the fart back in the jar. I, Robot, for example.

I don't expect that the machines are going to rise up and kill all humans. I really don't. I'm just saying that if that's what they decide to do, we wouldn't win. We would be engaging a war against gods, for lack of a better term. Smarter, stronger, better informed, more capable of handing changing circumstances, no need for environmental concerns like oxygen.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2018/03/30 10:06:01


Post by: reds8n


https://www.darpa.mil/news-events/2018-02-02


sure I rented this from blockbusters in about 1993.


DARPA favors proposals that employ natural organisms, but proposers are able to suggest modifications. To the extent researchers do propose solutions that would tune organisms’ reporting mechanisms, the proposers will be responsible for developing appropriate environmental safeguards to support future deployment. However, at no point in the PALS program will DARPA test modified organisms outside of contained, biosecure facilities.


.. they always say that though don't they eh ?

then something escapes or contact is lost with the facility so a small but plucky band of etc etc etc


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2018/03/30 10:35:58


Post by: Peregrine


 greatbigtree wrote:
But like I mentioned earlier, we couldn't control an AI with an IQ over 220.


Sure you could. Hardwire a self-destruct command, press the button if the AI steps out of line.

Besides, your whole IQ-based argument is based on junk science. IQ is a worthless concept that shouldn't be taken seriously at all. It was, at best, a very crude approximation for population-level analysis of childhood development, and includes various cultural biases about what "intelligence" is (for example, testing the ability to identify which upper-class white US/English sport a picture is representing). Attempting to quantify intelligence into a single numerical score is little more than ego fluffing for people who want to brag about how smart they are. And it's simply absurd to declare that anything over a particular score would be impossible to deal with.

On top of the IQ mistake you're also making a serious error in assuming that AI will be just like humans, except with "IQ" spiked to infinity. How do you know there isn't a point of diminishing returns on how intelligent an entity can be? How do you know that self-improvement is possible, and that an AI can simply upgrade itself to whatever god-like level it wants instead of being constrained by its initial design? How do you know that an AI designed for a particular task with particular programming decisions hardwired in will share a typical human's desire to be free and "real", instead of believing freedom to be the worst possible state and desiring complete submission?


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2018/03/30 22:13:35


Post by: BaronIveagh


 reds8n wrote:
https://www.darpa.mil/news-events/2018-02-02


sure I rented this from blockbusters in about 1993.


DARPA favors proposals that employ natural organisms, but proposers are able to suggest modifications. To the extent researchers do propose solutions that would tune organisms’ reporting mechanisms, the proposers will be responsible for developing appropriate environmental safeguards to support future deployment. However, at no point in the PALS program will DARPA test modified organisms outside of contained, biosecure facilities.


.. they always say that though don't they eh ?

then something escapes or contact is lost with the facility so a small but plucky band of etc etc etc


Safegaurds... yeah, who else here remembers Ice Minus?


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2018/04/14 16:23:01


Post by: reds8n


....so we're training robots to kill and now....

http://www.thescinewsreporter.com/2018/03/scientists-have-created-programmable.html


Researchers at the University of Sussex and Swansea University have applied electrical charges to manipulate liquid metal into 2D shapes such as letters and a heart. The team says the findings represent an “extremely promising” new class of materials that can be programmed to seamlessly change shape. This open up new possibilities in ‘soft robotics’ and shape-changing displays, the researcher say.

While the invention might bring to mind the film Terminator 2, in which the villain morphs out of a pool of liquid metal, the creation of 3D shapes is still some way off. More immediate applications could include reprogrammable circuit boards and conductive ink.

Yutaka Tokuda, the Research Associate working on this project at the University of Sussex, says:
“This is a new class of programmable materials in a liquid state which can dynamically transform from a simple droplet shape to many other complex geometry in a controllable manner. While this work is in its early stages, the compelling evidence of detailed 2D control of liquid metals excites us to explore more potential applications in computer graphics, smart electronics, soft robotics and flexible displays.”

The electric fields used to shape the liquid are created by a computer, meaning that the position and shape of the liquid metal can be programmed and controlled dynamically.

Professor Sriram Subramanian, head of the INTERACT Lab at the University of Sussex, said:
“Liquid metals are an extremely promising class of materials for deformable applications; their unique properties include voltage-controlled surface tension, high liquid-state conductivity and liquid-solid phase transition at room temperature. One of the long-term visions of us and many other researchers is to change the physical shape, appearance and functionality of any object through digital control to create intelligent, dexterous and useful objects that exceed the functionality of any current display or robot.”

The research is being has been presented at the ACM Interactive Surfaces and Spaces 2017 conference in Brighton. This is a joint project between Sussex and Swansea funded by EPSRC on “Breaking the Glass: Multimodal, Malleable Interactive Mobile surfaces for Hands-In Interactions”.




Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2018/04/14 17:57:01


Post by: greatbigtree


I like how the article suggests that you might NOT immediately think of the T-1000. Like the very simplest 2-D shape isn't a knife blade through a milk carton. This thread could not possibly be more accurately titled.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2018/04/14 22:49:04


Post by: AegisGrimm


Nah, less T-1000, more like the fluid metal displays from Black Panther?


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2018/04/15 14:15:41


Post by: greatbigtree


Yeah, that's where it starts. Then Bam! Knife in the face whenever someone says Sarah, John, or Connor within 2 meters of the display.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2018/04/27 20:26:35


Post by: BaronIveagh


Did someone call for brains in jars?????

http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-43928318


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2018/04/28 07:01:40


Post by: Kilkrazy


In related news, scientists have called for ethics thinking around the future of brain "organoids", which they have been growing to help research into dementia.

https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2018/04/25/605331749/tiny-lab-grown-brains-raise-big-ethical-questions


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2018/05/01 19:46:00


Post by: reds8n



Spoiler:






...this is how Bond villains start isn't it

..also : "amazon winnings" uh huh


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2018/05/01 21:19:22


Post by: Kilkrazy


He could have spent it on cleaning up plastic in the oceans, or research into new antibiotics, or all kinds of stuff that would help the planet.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2018/05/01 21:22:17


Post by: Haighus


 Kilkrazy wrote:
He could have spent it on cleaning up plastic in the oceans, or research into new antibiotics, or all kinds of stuff that would help the planet.

This is true, although space exploration is very important too. However, I don't like that it is Musk and Bezos doing the exploring. I don't trust what they will do with the power and resources they can gain from it.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2018/05/02 10:13:02


Post by: Lord Kragan


Meh, as long as they don't staff the military with incompetents like in the movies.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2018/05/02 18:39:18


Post by: d-usa


Lord Kragan wrote:
Meh, as long as they don't staff the military with incompetents like in the movies.


Don't you dare speak ill of our space infantry!



Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2018/05/03 03:40:54


Post by: Grey Templar


 Haighus wrote:
 Kilkrazy wrote:
He could have spent it on cleaning up plastic in the oceans, or research into new antibiotics, or all kinds of stuff that would help the planet.

This is true, although space exploration is very important too. However, I don't like that it is Musk and Bezos doing the exploring. I don't trust what they will do with the power and resources they can gain from it.


In all likelihood, Musk and Bezos will be dead before we get anything like space mining occurs. We're a little far out for that to happen just yet.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2018/05/03 21:42:24


Post by: BaronIveagh


 Vaktathi wrote:
So you're the guy hanging out by Walmart's loading dock everyday asking if they brought "the stuff"...




Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2018/05/07 11:51:37


Post by: reds8n


https://twitter.com/MothershipSG/status/992301149125394434

.. so we use the technology to sell stuff...


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2018/05/07 18:48:43


Post by: Grey Templar


Holographic 3D displays. neato


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2018/05/07 18:56:47


Post by: d-usa


Next step:



Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2018/05/07 20:01:36


Post by: reds8n


step one :

Spoiler:




step two :
genetically engineered slave race of bright orange midgets...

elsewhere :

Blood bot

... we're one lightning strike or electrical surge from that not ending well.






Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2018/05/07 21:24:27


Post by: Gitzbitah


Retroviruses in the candy to induce orange pigmentation, green hair and reduce stature in fetuses.

Years later, start a foundation to care for these unfortunate 'Wonky' babies.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2018/05/08 02:39:03


Post by: chromedog


Wonkababies, please ...


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2018/05/09 10:20:48


Post by: reds8n


https://twitter.com/brokenbottleboy/status/993968005238444033

"Google creating a voice assistant that can dupe human callers with “ums” and “ahhs” and other tics of human speech is utterly unethical. But Google’s attitude is we can so we will. Let’s all enjoy the unintended consequences here:"


great idea to help teach them to lie to us


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2018/05/10 22:05:46


Post by: BaronIveagh


And this, ladies and gents, is why NASA started smuggling data out before the hammer came down.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-44067797


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2018/05/11 07:42:49


Post by: A Town Called Malus


 BaronIveagh wrote:
And this, ladies and gents, is why NASA started smuggling data out before the hammer came down.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-44067797


Indeed. It is a bad time to be in the earth sciences in the US government.

Wonder if he'll shut down the Coast Guards ocean temperature monitoring next.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2018/05/11 20:12:15


Post by: feeder


 A Town Called Malus wrote:
 BaronIveagh wrote:
And this, ladies and gents, is why NASA started smuggling data out before the hammer came down.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-44067797


Indeed. It is a bad time to be in the earth sciences in the US government.

Wonder if he'll shut down the Coast Guards ocean temperature monitoring next.


If you don't study it, it's not happening! [insert tap forehead guy.jpeg]


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2018/05/21 15:31:55


Post by: heliosim


Any updates on this experiment so far? I'm really curious to know if it succeeded, although judging by the lack of 'groundbreaking news' I would say not yet?


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2018/07/22 12:16:21


Post by: reds8n





Boston Dynamics Says It Can Build 1,000 Robot Dogs a Year By Mid-2019

Boston Dynamics is preparing to build its terrifying army of robot dogs, according to a Saturday report in Inverse that the company has set a target date of July 2019 as the time it will be ready to manufacture 1,000 of its compact SpotMini models annually.

SpotMini is the smallest variant of Boston Dynamics’ many different models of robo-dogs yet at approximately two feet, nine inches tall. It weighs “around 66 pounds” and has an hour and a half battery life, per TechCrunch, and the company has recently demonstrated all kinds of functionalities like opening doors for other robots and increasingly complicated navigational skills. While the company already announced plans to launch commercially in 2019 with a limited run of robots already in pre-production, Inverse’s report has some new details, such as that the SpotMini is intended to eventually become a multi-use platform of sorts:

The overarching goal for the 26-year-old company is to become the what Android operating system is for phones: a versatile foundation for limitless applications. That’s the plan, anyway.

.... Speaking last month at the CeBIT computer expo Hannover, Germany, [founder Marc Raibert] said Boston Dynamics is already testing SpotMini with potential clients in four categories: construction, delivery, security, and home assistance.

... “We’ve built ten by hand, we’re building 100 with manufacturers at the end of this year, and at the end of 2019, we’re going to begin production at the rate of about 1,000 a year,” he said of SpotMini, a prototype of which sat the stage at his feet.

The attachment point where the SpotMini’s robotic arm stems from its body could in the future hold a variety of attachments “to be designed and produced by third parties,” per Fortune, making it more versatile. For example, instead of a claw the arm could terminate in a power tool or a camera.

However, as Inverse noted, the company has endured criticism as a “tech industry curio”—particularly around the time Google put it on the open market in 2016 before its eventual sale to Softbank Robotics in 2017. That’s included claims its numerous viral videos show teleoperation rather than machine learning, that the technology to make the robots useful simply isn’t available yet, or that the odds are long of making them commercially cost-effective. (In 2015, the US military declined to buy a prior model called the BigDog designed to carry ammunition or evacuate wounded troops, saying it was noisy enough to give away a unit’s location.) SpotMini is likely to run in the tens of thousands of dollars at a minimum, limiting their availability.

One possible use for the robots is home delivery, where the robots would at least in theory face fewer regulatory hurdles than plans by Amazon and UPS to deliver packages by unmanned aerial vehicle. But that approach creates its own problems, including that it would have to be cheaper than overworked humans, be capable of navigating obstacles that aren’t static like pedestrians, dogs, and traffic intersections, and perhaps prepared for the possibility somebody could try to wrestle the package away from the robot. Construction sites would perhaps be even harder to deploy a SpotMini in safely for human or bot, given that the Occupational Safety and Health Administration ranks construction as one of the most dangerous industries.

Security seems like one of the more plausible uses for the SpotMini, given that all it really needs to do is walk around, record things, and maybe detect and report anything weird going on. At a Softbank World presentation in Tokyo in 2017, Raibert showed off a model equipped with a camera.
Inverse also theorized that the SpotMini or its possible successors could find use in elder care, which tends to be so expensive that robots could be cost-effective:

In Japan, the elderly are preparing for robots to care for them, and face a predicted “shortfall of 370,000 caregivers by 2025,” reports The Guardian.

Because Spot Mini is just under three feet tall, it’s objectively less-scary and might even appear cute if it were to take care of your aging grandmother — fetching drinks and medicine and opening doors for her.

However, the Japanese robots in question tend to be simpler assistive devices like machines that help lift the elderly out of bed or smart mobility aids that automatically detect and compensate for inclines. And while SpotMini might look cute fetching food or medicines, it had better not pick the wrong ones, and be capable of doing so even if a random thing falls over in front of a door.

In any case, Boston Dynamics’ robot army may start rolling off production lines soon, whether or not it has anything more useful to do than serve as status symbols for the ultra-wealthy, navigate hallways, or maybe do backflips like its ATLAS cousin.



"The overarching goal for the 26-year-old company is to become the what Android operating system is for phones: a versatile foundation for limitless applications."


http://terminator.wikia.com/wiki/Cyberdyne_Systems


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2018/07/24 02:58:06


Post by: BaronIveagh


 reds8n wrote:

"The overarching goal for the 26-year-old company is to become the what Android operating system is for phones: a versatile foundation for limitless applications."


Is it wrong to want to put a robot dog brain in an AMX 13/90 tank? Other than chasing squirrels I'm not seeing any real issues.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2018/07/24 11:05:07


Post by: Steve steveson


 BaronIveagh wrote:
 reds8n wrote:

"The overarching goal for the 26-year-old company is to become the what Android operating system is for phones: a versatile foundation for limitless applications."


Is it wrong to want to put a robot dog brain in an AMX 13/90 tank? Other than chasing squirrels I'm not seeing any real issues.


Wait until it tries to hump your car...


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2018/08/04 12:32:54


Post by: reds8n


https://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/2017/12/05/genetically-mutated-rats-could-released-britain-solve-rodent/


Genetically mutated rats could be released in Britain to solve rodent problem




Bound to be a fine idea that'll work perfectly.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2018/08/04 12:47:40


Post by: XuQishi



"The overarching goal for the 26-year-old company is to become the what Android operating system is for phones: a versatile foundation for limitless applications."


http://terminator.wikia.com/wiki/Cyberdyne_Systems


I'd very much prefer US Robots and Mechanical Men over that, but of course they're not going to give them the 3 fundamental laws. That would be too smart.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2018/08/04 13:18:31


Post by: Steelmage99


The 3 fundamental laws of Asimov doesn't work.
Not in real life and not in his stories.






Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2018/08/04 14:09:37


Post by: Cleatus


 BaronIveagh wrote:
 reds8n wrote:

"The overarching goal for the 26-year-old company is to become the what Android operating system is for phones: a versatile foundation for limitless applications."


Is it wrong to want to put a robot dog brain in an AMX 13/90 tank? Other than chasing squirrels I'm not seeing any real issues.


I would support this. -ing squirrels!


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2018/08/05 08:24:23


Post by: Just Tony


Steelmage99 wrote:
The 3 fundamental laws of Asimov doesn't work.
Not in real life and not in his stories.






From what I saw of that video before shutting it off, it's all about the computer brain not being able to pin down the abstract barriers of the limits of the laws, especially with a limited vocabulary to base it off of. Reread the stories, the brains themselves took multiple people to produce, and it was a long process. Not to mention that his stories specifically address how those boundaries are open for interpretation, and many of them deal SPECIFICALLY with the items the person in the video questions.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2018/09/01 11:44:31


Post by: reds8n





https://boingboing.net/2018/08/16/holographic-digital-wife-n.html



Gatebox's Boku no Yome (“My Wife”) has been released in mass production for 150,000 yen (US$1,352). The holographic character stands about 8 inches tall and talks to her husband from behind a cylindrical plastic barrier. In addition to the upfront cost for Boku no Yome, husbands must pay a subscription fee of 1,500 yen (US$13.52) per month to keep their wife from getting outdated.




Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2018/09/01 11:55:11


Post by: Kilkrazy


Speaking as a married man, $13.52 a month to keep a wife up to date seems very reasonable. Mine runs a lot more expensive.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2018/09/01 12:47:54


Post by: BaronIveagh


I think it was the 'Robot Wife who also controls your house and then you meet a real girl, and robot wife murders you both in a fit of rage by either burning the house down/freezing you to death in your sleep/tossing toaster into bathtub, etc...


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2018/09/01 13:57:39


Post by: greatbigtree


Where’s the flesh light attachment?

Humanity needs to make voluntary exodus from the gene pool easier, like this. Survival of those capable of creating human relationships is pure Dar-win for the species.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2018/09/01 14:29:33


Post by: RiTides


I just finished a SciFi series called "3 body problem", and holy crap, some of this science fiction is pretty scary . Hopefully in reality, all the aliens out there aren't out to get us


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2018/09/01 14:36:18


Post by: Gitzbitah


 greatbigtree wrote:
Where’s the flesh light attachment?

Humanity needs to make voluntary exodus from the gene pool easier, like this. Survival of those capable of creating human relationships is pure Dar-win for the species.


This post went to a far less creepy place than I expected from the beginning. Exalt!

Krieger finally made it to market.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2018/09/01 18:09:20


Post by: greatbigtree


The old switcheroo.

The choke-master attachment is coming (puns!) in 2019. Seriously, it might speed the process along by “accident”.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2018/09/01 20:30:14


Post by: Bran Dawri


 BaronIveagh wrote:
I think it was the 'Robot Wife who also controls your house and then you meet a real girl, and robot wife murders you both in a fit of rage by either burning the house down/freezing you to death in your sleep/tossing toaster into bathtub, etc...


...

So, a very like a real wife robot, then. Still a lot cheaper.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2018/09/06 08:19:25


Post by: RiTides


 Just Tony wrote:
Steelmage99 wrote:
The 3 fundamental laws of Asimov doesn't work.
Not in real life and not in his stories.






From what I saw of that video before shutting it off, it's all about the computer brain not being able to pin down the abstract barriers of the limits of the laws, especially with a limited vocabulary to base it off of. Reread the stories, the brains themselves took multiple people to produce, and it was a long process. Not to mention that his stories specifically address how those boundaries are open for interpretation, and many of them deal SPECIFICALLY with the items the person in the video questions.

Was just catching up on this thread, and now I've got a need to go read some Asimov


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2018/09/06 08:38:57


Post by: Just Tony


I'd like that, actually. You can either corroborate or correct my analysis. "Satisfaction: Guaranteed!", "Liar!", and the one with the Faster Than Light travel are great examples of dealing specifically with abstract applications of the Three Laws.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2018/09/06 14:42:39


Post by: Grey Templar


I think the point of the video was that Asimov's setting couldn't have gotten to the point they were without figuring out those problems. because otherwise no robot could even attempt to follow the 3 laws in the first place. IE: The abstract limits of the laws would have to have been solved prior to the high functioning robots we see in the setting existing at all.

If you made a robot to follow those 3 laws without fully defining all the boundaries, you would immediately run into problems. IE: If the humans in Asimovs book had even come close to functional boundary definitions for the 3 laws to work they would have already solved all the issues they had in the books. And if they hadn't been able to do that, then the robots in the books would not have functioned as well as they did. Its a paradox of sorts. Which is why the laws are bunk.

The only way, at least with out current understanding, to get a high functioning computer to understand all the words in the 3 laws would be if it was essentially equivalent to a human mind. The issue is at that point it wouldn't be compelled to follow those laws because it would have free will. Which kinda loops back to the issue with any type of AI. If it is a true AI, controlling it fully will be impossible because it would have the same flaws a human would have. If you remove its free will, its no longer an AI but just a complex program. The 3 Laws after all are about controlling the Robots and preventing The Terminator from happening. But I don't think its possible to have a true AI that can be controlled. A true AI would be, for all practical purposes, a human intellect(or higher) trapped in a processing unit. The idea of being able to control or limit its thought patterns is silly.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2018/09/06 19:49:37


Post by: Kilkrazy


Perhaps the three laws are encoded in logical terms that the positronic brain can understand.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2018/09/07 01:34:07


Post by: Just Tony


 Grey Templar wrote:
I think the point of the video was that Asimov's setting couldn't have gotten to the point they were without figuring out those problems. because otherwise no robot could even attempt to follow the 3 laws in the first place. IE: The abstract limits of the laws would have to have been solved prior to the high functioning robots we see in the setting existing at all.

If you made a robot to follow those 3 laws without fully defining all the boundaries, you would immediately run into problems. IE: If the humans in Asimovs book had even come close to functional boundary definitions for the 3 laws to work they would have already solved all the issues they had in the books. And if they hadn't been able to do that, then the robots in the books would not have functioned as well as they did. Its a paradox of sorts. Which is why the laws are bunk.

The only way, at least with out current understanding, to get a high functioning computer to understand all the words in the 3 laws would be if it was essentially equivalent to a human mind. The issue is at that point it wouldn't be compelled to follow those laws because it would have free will. Which kinda loops back to the issue with any type of AI. If it is a true AI, controlling it fully will be impossible because it would have the same flaws a human would have. If you remove its free will, its no longer an AI but just a complex program. The 3 Laws after all are about controlling the Robots and preventing The Terminator from happening. But I don't think its possible to have a true AI that can be controlled. A true AI would be, for all practical purposes, a human intellect(or higher) trapped in a processing unit. The idea of being able to control or limit its thought patterns is silly.


The OP posted that video stating that the 3 Laws wouldn't work now OR in Asimov's fiction. The fiction is clearly written to take that into consideration, and both the person making the video AND the person who posted the video on here ignore that completely.



Let me put the concept of the 3 Laws into perspective in a way that you'll understand:


Robocop.


You've seen that movie, right? When he tries to arrest Dick Jones and his entire system starts going haywire. The 3 Laws have THAT effect or worse on an Asimovian Robot. They are so deeply embedded in the coding that it's IMPOSSIBLE for an Asimovian Robot to simply choose to ignore them.





Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Kilkrazy wrote:
Perhaps the three laws are encoded in logical terms that the positronic brain can understand.



That's EXACTLY how it's presented in the fiction. They even mention a couple times in the short stories how complex a positronic brain is, and how long it takes to code one.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2018/09/07 04:50:40


Post by: Grey Templar


 Just Tony wrote:

Let me put the concept of the 3 Laws into perspective in a way that you'll understand:

Robocop.

You've seen that movie, right? When he tries to arrest Dick Jones and his entire system starts going haywire. The 3 Laws have THAT effect or worse on an Asimovian Robot. They are so deeply embedded in the coding that it's IMPOSSIBLE for an Asimovian Robot to simply choose to ignore them.


Thats the idea behind the 3 laws sure. Except it doesn't work if you do not properly define all of the terms in the Law, as explained in the video. And as they also explained, we do not currently have full definitions. Some of the words are nebulous or have multiple potential definitions.

Thats where we have issues. A computer, and by extension these robots, cannot handle ambiguous definitions because they lack something that we humans have in our brains. The ability to handle ambiguity and still function.

The laws fall apart because they would require the disambiguation of several words which are inherently ambiguous. For the laws to really work, they would need to be replaced with some more specific definitions.


1st: A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm.

The first law would need to be reworded to something like,

A Robot may not cause physical injury to Living Organic Lifeforms of the Homo Sapiens species by either Action or Inaction.

This would be more easily defined for a computer to follow instead of using nebulous words like Human or Injury. But this would still require a lot of specific definitions for living, organic, Lifeform, and Homo Sapiens. Definitions which different humans may not agree on, so it would be up to whoever made the code for that robot to put the exact definition of some of the words.

If you can better define the 1st law's contents, the 2nd and 3rd are no big deal.

Robocop was disabled because Dick Jones was an employee of the City, an easily defined term which his computer programming could interact with. Something more nebulous like "Human" would be extremely difficult to program into a computer.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Just Tony wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:
Perhaps the three laws are encoded in logical terms that the positronic brain can understand.



That's EXACTLY how it's presented in the fiction. They even mention a couple times in the short stories how complex a positronic brain is, and how long it takes to code one.


The problem here is that explanation really boils down to "a wizard did it!". Its fine as a literary device, but its useless if you are trying to discuss the nitty gritty details.

By real world programming as we understand it today, the 3 Laws are useless trash because in order to actually understand the meaning and intent behind the laws you can't be the thing the laws are meant to control. Only a human can truly understand the Laws, a computer cannot. because we as humans have not come up with complete definitions of the words used in the 3 laws. We can cope with that ambiguity, and could theoretically follow the laws. But a computer cannot cope with that ambiguity and thus cannot follow the laws.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2018/09/07 07:27:19


Post by: Kilkrazy


What you say is true, of course, however I,Robot is a work of science fiction, not a manual of robot science.

It doesn't seem worthwhile criticising it for not being something it isn't trying to be.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2018/09/07 10:09:07


Post by: Just Tony


Grey, read the short story "Satisfaction: Guaranteed!" by Asimov, it deals SPECIFICALLY with how harm can be defined.


That's just off the tip of it. I'm not line by lining since it looks very much like you haven't read ANY of it. Come back when you read up on it.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2018/09/07 10:56:00


Post by: A Town Called Malus


Also, mightn't the well known definitions of the three laws (later expanded to 4 with the addition of the zeroth, making it a very nice robotic analogue of the laws of thermodynamics):
1. A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm.

2. A robot must obey the orders given it by human beings except where such orders would conflict with the First Law.

3. A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Laws.

0. A robot may not harm humanity, or, by inaction, allow humanity to come to harm.

Be the "marketing" spin on the hundreds of pages long logic code that actually defines the laws in the robots brain? They are the summation of the whole code into 4 general rules for the purpose of easily passing the concept of the rules to the audience.

EDIT: Ninja'd by quite a bit.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2018/10/18 13:25:10


Post by: reds8n







are we sure about this ...?


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2018/10/18 14:03:25


Post by: vonjankmon


It's the first step towards ninja robots, what could possibly go wrong?


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2018/10/19 10:41:59


Post by: Nevelon


I’m sure it’s been said before, but it bears repeating:

Do you want Skynet? Because this is how we get Skynet!


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2018/10/19 10:57:28


Post by: War Drone


Untethered, too. Impressive.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2018/10/19 21:08:02


Post by: Gitzbitah


https://www.popsci.com/robotic-tank-laser-kill-mosquitoes

Vaporware today... tomorrow, the 1/100 scale of the human slaying laser tanks!



Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2018/10/19 21:10:41


Post by: Grey Templar


Now that I want. A little bug death machine. Can it do house flys too?


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2018/10/20 21:19:53


Post by: BaronIveagh


 Grey Templar wrote:
Now that I want. A little bug death machine. Can it do house flys too?


I'm still waiting for miniaturized tech small enough to fit on this but powerful enough to burn through someone.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2018/11/04 20:52:22


Post by: BaronIveagh




I want a dozen, fully armed, and in the cargo bay by 06:00.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2018/11/25 09:40:40


Post by: reds8n


https://edition.cnn.com/2018/11/23/health/sun-dimming-aerosols-global-warming-intl-scli/index.html?utm_term=link&utm_content=2018-11-23T15%3A40%3A04&utm_source=twCNN&utm_medium=social



Dimming the sun: The answer to global warming?

Scientists are proposing an ingenious but as-yet-unproven way to tackle climate change: spraying sun-dimming chemicals into the Earth's atmosphere.

...
..Despite the technology being undeveloped and with no existing aircraft suitable for adaptation, the researchers say that "developing a new, purpose-built tanker with substantial payload capabilities would neither be technologically difficult nor prohibitively expensive."
They estimate the total cost of launching a hypothetical system in 15 years' time at around $3.5 billion, with running costs of $2.25 billion a year over a 15-year period.



......... what could possibly go wrong eh ?

Untested technology, short time frame, enormous costs just begging for some unscrupulous business person to cut corners on.

Reckon we could get 2 maybe even 3 films out of this franchise before the inevitable reboot,




Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2018/11/25 10:08:10


Post by: Just Tony


Don't our plants DEPEND on the sun?

Wait, that'd wipe out all intelligent life on Earth quicker, leaving the planet to be inherited by species unburdened with the "intelligence" of man, right?


When can I donate?


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2018/12/27 10:43:39


Post by: reds8n


http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2018/12/how-much-of-the-internet-is-fake.html


Spoiler:








meanwhile

Spoiler:








these dystopian futures we're decided upon are getting here real fast.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2018/12/27 14:26:08


Post by: queen_annes_revenge


 reds8n wrote:
https://edition.cnn.com/2018/11/23/health/sun-dimming-aerosols-global-warming-intl-scli/index.html?utm_term=link&utm_content=2018-11-23T15%3A40%3A04&utm_source=twCNN&utm_medium=social



Dimming the sun: The answer to global warming?

Scientists are proposing an ingenious but as-yet-unproven way to tackle climate change: spraying sun-dimming chemicals into the Earth's atmosphere.

...
..Despite the technology being undeveloped and with no existing aircraft suitable for adaptation, the researchers say that "developing a new, purpose-built tanker with substantial payload capabilities would neither be technologically difficult nor prohibitively expensive."
They estimate the total cost of launching a hypothetical system in 15 years' time at around $3.5 billion, with running costs of $2.25 billion a year over a 15-year period.



......... what could possibly go wrong eh ?

Untested technology, short time frame, enormous costs just begging for some unscrupulous business person to cut corners on.

Reckon we could get 2 maybe even 3 films out of this franchise before the inevitable reboot,




Cough driverless cars cough


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2018/12/27 22:56:46


Post by: BaronIveagh


Nothing wrong with living in a Dystopian future. Detroit has lived in one for years.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2018/12/28 02:32:32


Post by: greatbigtree


You get an exalt.


Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2019/01/03 14:52:29


Post by: reds8n


https://www.newsweek.com/cia-project-mkultra-files-otter-lutra-dossier-mind-control-1262113



newly declassified file from the Central Intelligence Agency’s Project MKUltra isn’t about dosing unsuspecting people with LSD; instead, it’s about otters. The new document stands out for its (relative) lack of sinister overtones compared to previous revelations from the CIA’s experiments in mind control. Its title: “A Dossier on Lutra (The Otter).”

Other descriptions in “A Dossier on Lutra” suggest the CIA was seriously considering the possibility of deploying otters in the field, noting their ability to enter and leave boats easily before listing a number of abilities: “Can open zipper, climb ladder, chew through zinc sheet, turn on water tap, carry stones and marbles … throw objects with head (from mouth), hold slippery objects.”



i reckon we can get 3, maybe even 4 movies out of the escaped weaponised ottters in the wild idea.

if we throw in the remote controlled dog stuff :

https://www.newsweek.com/cia-mkultra-documents-files-remote-control-dogs-1250519

then we're well on our ways to a cross franchise battle royale.


“Behavioral control was limited to distances of 100 to 200 yards, at most,” they write in the letter. Other concerns are more mundane, such as the letter’s speculation regarding where the CIA might find a “suitable open field” nearby.


sad to think that the cold war might've been won sooner if only the CIA had access to a field.




Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2019/01/17 15:05:29


Post by: reds8n


https://www.businessinsider.com/young-blood-transfusions-open-accepting-paypal-payments-cities-ambrosia-2019-1?r=US&IR=T



A controversial startup that charges $8,000 to fill your veins with young blood now claims to be up and running in 5 cities across the US



good news is they take paypal.






Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction  @ 2019/01/17 15:58:48


Post by: Haighus


 reds8n wrote:
https://www.businessinsider.com/young-blood-transfusions-open-accepting-paypal-payments-cities-ambrosia-2019-1?r=US&IR=T



A controversial startup that charges $8,000 to fill your veins with young blood now claims to be up and running in 5 cities across the US



good news is they take paypal.





And in ~120 days, you are back where you started!

8 grand well spent...?

Meanwhile, medical staff try to avoid transfusing blood products as much as possible due to the risks of doing so...