71–80 of 86 posts
Where are the best sexbots? Do they even come close to what humans can do?
If you keep your blinders on an focus on what you predict automation will look like, you will miss the world reshaping itself around you.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qoyIVGB8OOk
There is definatley something here in terms of using human intelligence to control physical actions, perhaps as a prelude to full automation for a given task.
It also opens up interesting questions as to the future of the labour markets around the world where somebody in one country can control the unit of production in another, I mean we are comfortable with software outsourcing so perhaps this is not such a reach.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I’m super curious, what are HAL and Holmes? > algorithm costs $100k to run I almost choked on my coffee. They used this line on multiple companies??
> I’m super curious, what are HAL and Holmes? HAL is just IBM encypted using Caesar cipher / ROT25 :) Holmes must be Watson (but "Holmes" is also the marketing name given by another tech vendor in this space to their own AI product inspired by Watson - very creative)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I’m super curious, what are HAL and Holmes? > algorithm costs $100k to run I almost choked on my coffee. They used this line on multiple companies??
Oblique references to IBM and their product Watson. I assume they're afraid IBM would otherwise find their comment and sue them for libel (implausible). For those that need further explanation, HAL is the killer computer in the movie 2001, the name was picked for the movie because the letters are shifted by one from "IBM." IBM's product Watson is named after Sherlock Holmes's sidekick, Dr. Watson. Edit: the product w…
Actually, the IBM/HAL thing is just a coincidence, according to both Kubrick and Clarke: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HAL_9000#Origin_of_name
Automation is capital intensive to set up, so it may take years for it to pay for itself. This delays adoption considerably for smaller businesses. Hair cutting is one of those jobs that resists automation. Same for burger flipping. It's not as if salons and restaurants can afford expensive robots to automate those tasks. Customer support automation may mean lost business due to angry customers.
Burger assembling may resist, but I know of at least two burger chains that use conveyor charbroilers where you put the patties in on one end and they come out nicely cooked on the other. I don't think those have a large capital cost either.
McDonald's is always inovating on labor reduction. They've got robots pouring drinks now, but they also used to have the size buttons to dispense a specific amount of soda which reduced labor. When you add up enough savings, you can run the restaurant with one less person; which is handy.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If getting jiggy with an industrial machine that could tear you in half is what floats your boat...
> If getting jiggy with an industrial machine that could tear you in half is what floats your boat... People already get jiggy with other people who could easily bite off important bits. The issue is trust, and I think that even with the simplest of failsafes[1], the machine juggling your important bits can be made more trustworthy than the human currently doing it. [1] For example, failing in an off position, or usi…
But wasn't that the problem OP was trying to solve ;)
Automation is capital intensive to set up, so it may take years for it to pay for itself. This delays adoption considerably for smaller businesses. Hair cutting is one of those jobs that resists automation. Same for burger flipping. It's not as if salons and restaurants can afford expensive robots to automate those tasks. Customer support automation may mean lost business due to angry customers.
It occurs to me that buying a robot arm to literally flip burgers is highly anthropomorphizing the solution space. You want a machine that gives you a burger at the end. This is a pretty easy thing to automate if you had a huge, constant demand for burgers at one single location using standard factory automation strategies. Might not be feasible at all for the typical franchises with spikey demand and relatively low…
Besides, the fry robot has a better ROI given the profit margin on that item.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Oblique references to IBM and their product Watson. I assume they're afraid IBM would otherwise find their comment and sue them for libel (implausible). For those that need further explanation, HAL is the killer computer in the movie 2001, the name was picked for the movie because the letters are shifted by one from "IBM." IBM's product Watson is named after Sherlock Holmes's sidekick, Dr. Watson. Edit: the product w…
> the name was picked for the movie because the letters are shifted by one from "IBM." Actually, the IBM/HAL thing is just a coincidence, according to both Kubrick and Clarke: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HAL_9000#Origin_of_name
Then, of course, they get promoted, the tech becomes a "product" and they try to push it on other departments, but the original grassroots efforts by software engineers doing things other than software engineering (e.g., operating spacecraft) is solid gold.