Space Robots Aren't Even Close To Being As Capable As Humans en-us Wed, 31 Dec 1969 19:00:00 -0500 Thu, 25 Dec 2014 11:04:12 -0500 Jennifer Welsh LovesFLSun Thu, 28 Feb 2013 08:18:37 -0500 Uh, true. No matter what any movie or anything else says, we'll always be able to turn them off! newworldorder Mon, 25 Feb 2013 17:42:40 -0500 Thank you for the excellent analogy. For the rest we will have to stay tuned in to discover if what we call "reality" now is discrete (quantized). If so whatever "this" is will be a computation as a minimum. If you like the sense of deep alarm this is the point. It is not synthetic brains so much as this point. If it is not quantized then the machines might hit a wall and we do not need to be concerned about "spiritual machines" as there will be no known or knowable path. newworldorder Mon, 25 Feb 2013 17:33:13 -0500 Very ably summarized. It was wealth initially that was taxed by most governments everywhere as there was no infrastructure to assess "income" whatever that was. Tax Farmers would simply seize whatever was available- this was a partial looting. Early bureaucrats pointed out that if you took 100% of all assets the peasantry would starve to death and you would have no one to rob in coming years. We have centuries of experience with this. The alternative is to conquer new areas and loot them. ( expensive) There is no possible way of taxing people adequately to meet the entitlement obligations based on money of stable value ( non-diluted) so we redistribute through dilution. As you have pointed out in the past this is also a stimulative mechanism or was in past years. Mr. Keynes died in 1946 and his formative era was post WW1 when collapse followed over stimulated war time economies. People have written also about the implications of Technology for centuries without really foreseeing what the detailed picture would look like. SocSec is in a similar situation in that no one mainstream would have imagined 140 million people on subsidy at any point- there were only 126 million people in the USA in 1933! Let's start with a clean sheet of paper and tax wealth and consumption since the old economy is evaporating. Engineers are beginning to print buildings. The wealthy (with skilled advisors) can and do qualify for all programs by showing poverty level incomes subject to tax. Don't forget that the original income tax lapsed after the Civil War and the current law sprang to life the same year as the Federal Reserve System. We do not allow coincidences at the NWO. While your proposals are very reasonable we look to be in a period of global dilution as now the entire globe is aging most quickly in the developed countries clickbot Mon, 25 Feb 2013 17:24:25 -0500 Intertesting stuff, thanks. It's worth mentioning that fewer than 550 people in the entire history of mankind have ever been in space, so we have not been too extravagant in this regard, though that number has really exploded since the 1950s :-) And only 1500 people have climbed mount everest, so you can see the exponential decay/difficulty of moving the meatbags even a few miles above sea level. I think folks would be fine with robots doing all the space work when the singularity comes, and treating the few human astronauts (or sherpas) that are needed for technical or PR reasons as rock stars and sports figures, sort of like we do now. newworldorder Mon, 25 Feb 2013 16:57:48 -0500 The New World Order fully supports basic research but is concerned about raising unrealistic expectations among entire populations that might cause explosive repercussions after the disillusionment sets in. Without going into this too deeply it is a kind of secularized redemption wherein the Human Race eventually transcends the Mortal Coil and rockets into the Heavens. This vision is a dangerous one to allow to flourish even if by benign neglect. We really have to work our problems out here and and our lives and joys or in VR assuming that this is not a VR we are in already :-). Also NWO watches developments in Physics, Cosmology and Neuroscience very closely and the progress since 2001, to pick a year, far exceeds what is generally appreciated by many orders of magnitude. There will be various robots including anthropoid designs but it will not be that device that will be autonomous but the gigantic neocortex in the cloud where the autonomy or sovereignty will reside. Why is this a concern? High resolution scanning (computer processed) presents living brains with tasks which are then observed as they occur. This provides one with molecular level resolution of how the brain proceeds- no magic located thus far- that can be simulated, this simulation is then tested to see if it configures correctly and so forth. In brief the entire neocortex will be simulated then increased in power by a trillion combined with perfect memory and instantaneous access to all accumulated and newly arriving knowledge which is many terabytes daily even now. Oh Ho! I am just speaking about Classical Computation here. Quantum Computation appears to have passed the test of being within the Laws of Physics. Even for those purely concerned with instrumentality and who simply deny the cosmological implications this will mean amplifying AI by many factors of 10 to whatever power you like. Certainly 10 to the power of 500 seems to be straining it a bit though 10 to 128 seems moderate. My overall point is that if people imagine that the robots they need to be concerned with might be comically incompetent coffee pouring creatures they are going to be very disagreeably surprised indeed. Yes, eventually, but when can this actually happen? The incept date, assuming it has not happened (classified information), is almost immaterial as these creatures will be on machine time not bio-time so their evolve rate will be so vertical it will change certain past state narratives. This may seem overly expansive but consider what the implications are as quantum, not hybrid, tech rolls out. As a quantum Computer may contain more information states then there are particles in the known Universe.... and where is this happening...? The latest astronomical discoveries of metal poor stars indicate that the Universe is close to 14 billion years old and this may be absolutely old as well in that it is less than 3 degrees above absolute zero. We think that there might be trillions of more years until the Universe experiences total heat death. This does suggest, though, that the Universe we live in might be verging on instability at this point with respect to what we refer to as "The Vacuum." Why mention that in this context? This is how we must take AI relative to our parochial position on Earth as a relative not absolute event with respect to our species. Dr. Moravev has suggested that this event might advance so quickly past a certain point it will simply depart into the Universe almost without our noticing - this might be good- then again the entire Earth could be reprocessed into computronium. In any case nothing is going to be walking around inside spaceships. clickbot Mon, 25 Feb 2013 16:43:52 -0500 Ok, thanks for following up from that post -- it's pretty clear that the earlier income was not taxed correctly the first time, given the liabilities we have to service now, which is the best argument (never made, of course) for asset taxes. So instead we speak of servicing these liabilities from existing income streams, which is impossible, even if we crush high-income earners. But we won't reduce the liabilities nominally either (politically hard), so we are left with currency dilution (politically easiest, for now). I find it cynical when already-wealthy folks argue for higher income taxes, and am disappointed when folks in the bottom 90% take that bait. One way to fix this is replace income taxes with only asset and consumption taxes. The poor would predominately pay the latter, the rich the former, and so everyone would have skin in the game (taken from different parts of their bodies :-)). The asset tax could be automatically assessed by the IRS based on known assets tied to a taxpayer ID. If you disagreed, you could file an appeal. Just like property taxes. Also, consumption should be charged for everything, not just physical goods (this allows the rate to go down, and streamlines the collection process). They are not going to do any of this of course, so we are stuck with a byzantine tax system, and ridiculous fiscal (and monetary!) false choices. newworldorder Mon, 25 Feb 2013 16:03:15 -0500 Firstly, though, the article by Mr. Krasting you commented on was closed. While I agree that we can track accumulated wealth very accurately the difficulty in attacking it is political. There is a reasonable point to be made by stating that a person's income is taxed at a substantial rate in the year received and all subsequent taxes and fees are exorbitant extractions aimed at previously taxed income from earlier years. This assumes the wealth was obtained, declared and taxed correctly under the law at that time. This must be shown to be true. Also all tax rates on income are nominal as the law is riddled with all kinds of special cases such that the poor get credits, the homeowner gets deductions and the wealthy legal persons get all sorts of secret passages of which property wealth is one. I do not think that the elected will do this. We see that the rich are castigated but they are rarely named in the media so we like to hate "the rich" but uniformly praise rich individuals. Does the population really want to see sports or rock stars crushed by government federal, state and local exactions? clickbot Mon, 25 Feb 2013 12:18:52 -0500 Hi NWO. On it's face, I think the article is correct, and I don't think they are promoting a star trek view (humans in deep space) at all -- the point is you really don't need sophisticated robots to do many of the things we will and currently can use them for. You don't need a commander data, for example, to drive a car, or to perform a spacewalk to change the oil. And even the protagonist agrees "maybe some day we will be there [commander data, etc]". Nasa's budget is literally a rounding error, and some of that must be considered R&D for military purposes (the latter of which is not a rounding error), so for all we know it's a more-efficient use of govt resources than the military is. It seems NASA has more to gain by advancing a highly technical robot budget, and I'm not sure what they have to gain by pointing out the obvious. In fact, if you watch their PR videos, they talk about all the jobs building these robot explorers will create -- complete with people in hardhats, and folks staring at computer screens, right here on earth. <a href="" target="_blank" rel="nofollow" ></a> There is of course an astronaut section, because let's face it -- being an astronaut is cool! It's a marketing gimmick, and you need to convince people to study math and science somehow... newworldorder Mon, 25 Feb 2013 11:20:19 -0500 NASA Budget Propaganda: Automated autonomous machinery will predominate in all environments. We promote the Star Trek vision to secure your support for public financing with this expensive movie tie-in strategy. People live very brief useful lives, have very slow nervous systems and are extremely fragile with weak sensory systems. In Space we are nearly deaf, dumb and blind without massive synthetic architecture so a virtual crew might appear on your screen if you are still on the board Earth at the time. You will deal with an onscreen software doctor utilizing evolved Watson tech. Ms. Walsh, surely you know better. Why keep people in the dark about what is coming? It only makes the maladjustment and disillusionment more dislocating. Humans are not reliable or capable enough to drive cars but are excellent for completely lethal environments far outside their evolved capabilities? Mortran Mon, 25 Feb 2013 10:14:51 -0500 Good that they finally figured out that humans are necessary in space. However it is not about "exploring". Space travel is ultimately about "colonizing". What if Christopher Columbus had only wanted to "explore" the New World? The U.S. wouldn't even exist today. Paradise Mon, 25 Feb 2013 09:40:41 -0500 The largest obstacle to overcome for human deep space exploration is water. We need water to survive and lots of it. Until we can cost effectively haul ( or produce ) the necessary amounts of H2O for long flights , robots will have to do the exploring in the meantime.