I was thinking of the Wheelers from "Return to Oz": https://youtu.be/2MLVfQOknYM
Introducing Handle – Boston Dynamics [video]
91–100 of 123 posts
Re: Introducing Handle – Boston Dynamics [video]
#92I think this is the most frightening company there is.
If I was writing megacorp scifi I'd have them grow via military contracts and eventually merge with Palantir (and maybe some innocent litte AI startup that gets gobbled up, where the hero works) to be one of the megacorps that essentially becomes a government entity (DynamicPalantir). Some sort of Bio/Chem merger (maybe Johnson & Johnson+Bayer/Monsato as a base) would be the counterpart battling it out with DynamicPalantir because they're betting on clones not robots.
Toss in Saudi Aramco++ for some good measure.
Re: Introducing Handle – Boston Dynamics [video]
#93Mankind's days are dated. Couple this with AI and we'll have a whole new species on Earth. Start building your own bots and restock your underground shelters.
Re: Introducing Handle – Boston Dynamics [video]
#94Earlier quoted context omitted.
Handle looks like it can kick back.
Actually it looks to me as though the legs cannot move sideways at all, only forward/back/up/down. If that's true it would be nearly impossible for Handle to stand on one leg or even raise one leg for long enough to perform a decent kick without falling over.
Or lasers...
Re: Introducing Handle – Boston Dynamics [video]
#95Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think at some point we're going to have to have another uncomfortable conversation about whether cybernetically enhanced (say ex amputees) humans should be allowed to compete in sports where their new physiology is giving them a distinct advantage. The same way right now we're stuck between biology and political correctness when talking about ex-male MMA or wrestling competitors dominating in the women's side of th…
We passed that milestone years ago: https://uksportsci.wordpress.com/2012/11/26/prosthetics-in-s...
My favorite aspect of this topic is that amputees long jumpers jump on their prosthetic leg.
I don't think we are past the threshold though. People, including coaches of able-bodied athletes are still viewing prosthetics as balancing the odds.
To me the real threshold will be when a double-amputee will break the 200m or 400m World record. I thought it would happen last year but I guess a few more years will be needed. It will happen.
Re: Introducing Handle – Boston Dynamics [video]
#96I think this is the most frightening company there is.
If I was writing megacorp scifi I'd have them grow via military contracts and eventually merge with Palantir (and maybe some innocent litte AI startup that gets gobbled up, where the hero works) to be one of the megacorps that essentially becomes a government entity (DynamicPalantir). Some sort of Bio/Chem merger (maybe Johnson & Johnson+Bayer/Monsato as a base) would be the counterpart battling it out with DynamicPa…
So what you end up with is an Autonomous, Intelligent, Bipedal robot fighting a clone, eating only GMO-corn, with silky smooth skin? ... Talking arabic... XD
Re: Introducing Handle – Boston Dynamics [video]
#97Earlier quoted context omitted.
What is even the point of having a war once you are fighting with robot armies? Why not just throw a coin and hand the country over to the side that picked the correct outcome? Use an unfair coin to correct for military strength. Or each side sends its best players for a game of Risk or Rock, Paper, Scissors or Command and Conquer. You get a winer and a loser, it does not take years and costs a fortune and you avoid…
It won't work because actually enforcing a meaningful loss requires a real war. Otherwise, no matter if you believe if you have got a 50% or 10% chance of victory (or even no chance, but a certainty of painful losses for the opponent) then it makes all kinds of practical sense for the loser to say "screw the coin/game" and simply ignore the result and escalate it further. If a reasonable settlement acceptable to both…
If the simulation is reasonably predictive and the spoils of war not too severe then the loser won't start the war because they would npt expect to gain enough.
This is what democracy is, a coarse estimate of who has the most soldiers. A 90% majority can do what they want, a 51% majority needs to compromise a little.
Re: Introducing Handle – Boston Dynamics [video]
#98I wonder what it's like on a halfpipe :D
Re: Introducing Handle – Boston Dynamics [video]
#99I can't wait for weapons to be attached to this thing so it can be used against us in the future. Imagine the part where it was spinning, but instead with a firing automatic weapon. What prevents democracy from collapsing when a certain technical elite control the most powerful autonomous weapons and keep tabs on everyone's daily lives?
People itself are the cheapest and most versatile "killbots".
Re: Introducing Handle – Boston Dynamics [video]
#100Earlier quoted context omitted.
It won't work because actually enforcing a meaningful loss requires a real war. Otherwise, no matter if you believe if you have got a 50% or 10% chance of victory (or even no chance, but a certainty of painful losses for the opponent) then it makes all kinds of practical sense for the loser to say "screw the coin/game" and simply ignore the result and escalate it further. If a reasonable settlement acceptable to both…
If the simulation is reasonably predictive and the spoils of war not too severe then the loser won't start the war because they would npt expect to gain enough. This is what democracy is, a coarse estimate of who has the most soldiers. A 90% majority can do what they want, a 51% majority needs to compromise a little.
Just as the purpose of a war isn't to determine who's stronger but an extension of diplomacy with violence as a tool, a simulation isn't needed to determine who's weaker, countries already have a good idea on that. If the results are reasonably predictable and the request is not too severe, then you don't need a simulation, game or coin toss, ordinary diplomacy does that well; this is how events like Sudatenland takeover in last century or Crimea takeover in this century happened without a fight.
However, in an actual war many things matter more than the numbers or fighting power. For example, it is clear that ISIS is much weaker than the full USA military, however, because defeating ISIS in an actual land war would cause significant casualties to USA, they can go on - a clear simulation result showing that they would lose won't ever be enough for them to concede defeat since they can (and will) simply call it as a bluff and claim that USA is not willing to pay the blood price. So you can't settle a conflict like this with a simulation; the loser always has the backup plan of telling "make me, if you dare" instead of accepting the loss.
Agreeing to a result of simulations that both sides believe isn't settling undecided disputes nonviolently, it's just old fashioned diplomacy or ultimatum/surrender.