Labor is rapidly becoming less and less necessary.

But when the car came along you were still in control of your horse so to speak.

Laurence Holmes is a fucking weirdo, a nerd in denial, and a wannabe. Not a very good radio host either.

I like driving and being a drone.

The self-driving vehicles are only a small segment of what is coming though. There are already computers writing news stories for ESPN, and Google has an entire team working on general A.I..

there's a chef-bot out there:

http://www.theverge.com/2015/7/31/90762 ... rab-bisque

so far, we seem to be building 1 to 1 robots who replicate and replace individual humans doing individual human activity with one "robot".

recall a film from about 20 years ago, Fast, Cheap and Out of Control, which highlighted "nano-bots"--insanely small robots who when deployed in groups could do things like explore Mars, keep your tv clean, replace soldiers in the military.

maybe something like arduino vs raspberry pi, but on a much smaller scale in terms of size of the individuals bots.

eg., a collection of "nano bots" who were deployed to maintain landscaping/shrubbery--you could program how often and in what design they maintained specific shrubs etc.

or nano-bots that "lived" in your sink and any time you dropped a dirty dish in the sink, came out and cleaned it cleaner than any human or dishwasher.

https://youtu.be/wFukiQOvDYs

probably the most likely and best use of nano-bots would/will be in health care--say, inject nano-bots into the blood stream to clean out arteries?

probably the most likely and best use of nano-bots would/will be in health care--say, inject nano-bots into the blood stream to clean out arteries?

CBS does this for its weekly updates on my fantasy league. The reports seemed cool the first week but soon became painfully formulaic.

For instance they were never taught that Columbus was a slave owner.

there's a chef-bot out there:

Now, Otto is looking for 1,000 truckers to volunteer to have self-driving kits installed on their cabs, at no cost, to help fine-tune the technology. The volunteer truckers would still be expected to seize the wheel and take control of the truck if the technology fails or the driving conditions make it unsafe to remain in autonomous mode, mirroring the laws governing tests of self-driving cars on public streets and highways.

Otto hasn't set a timetable for completing its tests, but hopes to eventually retrofit all the U.S. trucks on the road. That would encompass more than 4.7 million trucks, according to the American Trucking Associations.

The startup touts its technology as way to make up for a worsening shortage of truck drivers as more of them retire without enough younger drivers to replace them. Last year, the shortage stood at 47,500 and, unless recent trends change, will rise to nearly 175,000 by 2024, according to the American Trucking Associations.

The trade group hasn't taken a stand on self-driving technology, but may draw up a policy later this year, said Dave Osiecki, executive vice president and chief of national advocacy.

"We are paying close attention because this could be huge for trucking in terms of labor costs and safety," Osiecki says.

Levandowski insists self-driving trucks aren't as scary as they might sound. Robot truckers are less likely to speed or continue to drive in unsafe conditions than a human, and will never get tired. Between 10 and 20 percent of the roughly 4,000 fatal accidents in the U.S. each year involving trucks and buses are linked to driver fatigue, based on estimates gathered by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine.

"It's really silly to have a person steering a truck for eight hours just to keep it between two lines on the highway," Levandowski says.

Can we get rid of public transportation yet?

For instance they were never taught that Columbus was a slave owner.

It's not just the truckers that the machines are coming for.

http://www.npr.org/sections/health-shot ... cal-errors

http://www.medicaldaily.com/robot-surge ... ous-386079

You'd need true artificial intelligence(not massive memorization like the robots that win at chess and jeopardy). We are still many decades from that if we can ever do it.

For instance they were never taught that Columbus was a slave owner.

Google is working on A.I. But many basic surgeries may not need A.I. They are basically a construction project.

Until something goes wrong or there is a non-standard set of circumstances.

For instance they were never taught that Columbus was a slave owner.

If you read the medical error article, something "goes wrong" all the time in our current medical system. The machine is a tool, and it will probably go wrong fewer times than a human in the right cases.

Um no. Those are completely different things.

We'd need true artificial intelligence to do any complex surgery. You can download the steps required to do a heart transplant. The reason you wouldn't be good at it is because a lot of decisions need to be made and computer are still relatively poor at true decision making.

For instance they were never taught that Columbus was a slave owner.

You are debating different topics. It is going to start out with simple tasks, and move on to more difficult surgeries later. There are already machines assisting in difficult surgeries. But for more simple outpatient surgeries there might be a physician to check then you go to the machine.

As for A.I. read up on Alpha Go. Google is figuring out A.I. and only the extreme skeptics think it will never occur. Maybe it will be 10 years, maybe 50, but once the first A.I. is created it is going to be replicated rapidly.