The Dudeism Forum

The future of technology... who knows?

Predicting the future shape of the technology industry is a risky business.

Check it out - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-17510101

Here's the chief engineer of the Post Office, Sir William Preece, in 1878: "The Americans have need of the telephone, but we do not. We have plenty of messenger boys."

Or the boss of a major computer manufacturer in 1977: "There is no reason for any individual to have a computer in his home."

The world that we live in is developing at an incredible rate. Many parts of our daily lives were almost unimaginable just a decade ago.

Cities of the future - http://funguerilla.com/cities-of-the-future/

(http://funguerilla.com/images/creative-art/cities-of-the-future/cities-of-the-future11.jpg)

Thanks DB,

I love pictures like this.

Sci-Fi is always about now not the future (as in using allegory to pinpoint social or economic problems in the now), trying to predict the future you're instantly onto a looser.

Quote from: DigitalBuddha on March 27, 2012, 02:29:15 PM
The future of technology... who knows?

Predicting the future shape of the technology industry is a risky business.

Check it out - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-17510101

Here's the chief engineer of the Post Office, Sir William Preece, in 1878: "The Americans have need of the telephone, but we do not. We have plenty of messenger boys."

Or the boss of a major computer manufacturer in 1977: "There is no reason for any individual to have a computer in his home."

The world that we live in is developing at an incredible rate. Many parts of our daily lives were almost unimaginable just a decade ago.

Cities of the future - http://funguerilla.com/cities-of-the-future/

(http://funguerilla.com/images/creative-art/cities-of-the-future/cities-of-the-future11.jpg)

Awesome city pics at that link...  It's good to remember that science fiction often becomes reality, as the authors, artists, and illustrators are themselves visionaries.  Think of Gene Rodenberry for example.

Quote from: meekon5 on March 28, 2012, 12:54:02 PM
Thanks DB,

I love pictures like this.

Same here, great illustrations! And I agree, predicting the future often makes fools of people, but there are those who sometimes get it right; in sci-fi names such as Arthur C. Clark (space station, space shuttle), Gene Rodenberry (iPads, quantum tele-portation), and others.

Quote from: Hominid on March 28, 2012, 02:40:01 PM

Quote from: DigitalBuddha on March 27, 2012, 02:29:15 PM
The future of technology... who knows?

Predicting the future shape of the technology industry is a risky business.

Check it out - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-17510101

Here's the chief engineer of the Post Office, Sir William Preece, in 1878: "The Americans have need of the telephone, but we do not. We have plenty of messenger boys."

Or the boss of a major computer manufacturer in 1977: "There is no reason for any individual to have a computer in his home."

The world that we live in is developing at an incredible rate. Many parts of our daily lives were almost unimaginable just a decade ago.

Cities of the future - http://funguerilla.com/cities-of-the-future/

Awesome city pics at that link...  It's good to remember that science fiction often becomes reality, as the authors, artists, and illustrators are themselves visionaries.  Think of Gene Rodenberry for example.

Apple iPad, 2010 (or many other tablet computers).......

(http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/archive/01567/ipad2_1567432c.jpg)

(http://ffenyxia.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/blackberryplaybook.jpg)

Star Trek Data Pad, 1987.......

(http://i.zdnet.com/blogs/ds9-padd.jpg)

(http://www.muktware.com/sites/default/files/images/generic/stpd.jpg)

Quote from: DigitalBuddha on March 28, 2012, 04:12:00 PM

Quote from: Hominid on March 28, 2012, 02:40:01 PM

Quote from: DigitalBuddha on March 27, 2012, 02:29:15 PM
The future of technology... who knows?

Predicting the future shape of the technology industry is a risky business.

Check it out - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-17510101

Here's the chief engineer of the Post Office, Sir William Preece, in 1878: "The Americans have need of the telephone, but we do not. We have plenty of messenger boys."

Or the boss of a major computer manufacturer in 1977: "There is no reason for any individual to have a computer in his home."

The world that we live in is developing at an incredible rate. Many parts of our daily lives were almost unimaginable just a decade ago.

Cities of the future - http://funguerilla.com/cities-of-the-future/

Awesome city pics at that link...  It's good to remember that science fiction often becomes reality, as the authors, artists, and illustrators are themselves visionaries.  Think of Gene Rodenberry for example.

Apple iPad, 2010 (or many other tablet computers).......

(http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/archive/01567/ipad2_1567432c.jpg)

(http://ffenyxia.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/blackberryplaybook.jpg)

Star Trek Data Pad, 1987.......

(http://i.zdnet.com/blogs/ds9-padd.jpg)

(http://www.muktware.com/sites/default/files/images/generic/stpd.jpg)

check out HP in 2003 they had a really nice unit just nicer touch screens and other advances in batteries have come along to make small tablets worth it now. I think the PH newer models are on clearance now as well. I hate HP monitors and computers but always liked their pocket items for some reason.

(http://pics.blameitonthevoices.com/012010/ipad_vs_hp_tc_1100.jpg)

Yeah, in reality, Steve Jobs, was NOT the inventor of the pad computer; he just stole the idea and "Apple-ized" it.

;D Here is something Steve didn't think of.........

(http://www.justanotherbad.com/UserFiles/image/ihop%281%29.jpg)

Quote from: DigitalBuddha on March 28, 2012, 06:45:31 PM
Yeah, in reality, Steve Jobs, was NOT the inventor of the pad computer; he just stole the idea and "Apple-ized" it.

Wasn't that Jobs' entire business platform?

Quote from: Landshark on March 28, 2012, 08:38:41 PM

Quote from: DigitalBuddha on March 28, 2012, 06:45:31 PM
Yeah, in reality, Steve Jobs, was NOT the inventor of the pad computer; he just stole the idea and "Apple-ized" it.

Wasn't that Jobs' entire business platform?

Hell yeah, here is where he stole the idea for the Lisa GUI and Mac GUI (look familiar?)...

The "Xerox Star"...... First commercially sold in 1981 (three years before the Apple Mac and two years before the Apple Lisa), the Original Xerox 8010, Codename Dandelion......

(http://toastytech.com/guis/starbitmap2sm.gif)

(http://toastytech.com/guis/star_8010.jpg)

Check out - http://toastytech.com/guis/star.html

Quote from: Landshark on March 28, 2012, 08:38:41 PM

Quote from: DigitalBuddha on March 28, 2012, 06:45:31 PM
Yeah, in reality, Steve Jobs, was NOT the inventor of the pad computer; he just stole the idea and "Apple-ized" it.

Wasn't that Jobs' entire business platform?

Actually that could probably describe the entire hi-tech industry.

As for future technology, I bet computers and entertainment platforms will continue to improve. Everything else like better fuels, transportation methods, energy production, housing, food, and anything else related to human needs, will all depend on if people stop chasing the big bucks and decide that progressing as a species is more important. It may be undude of me to say this (or not, I'm not sure), but if we ever want to progress to what we see in awesome sci-fi paintings, we need to eliminate the social evils of financial inequality and everything that comes with it, like poverty, starvation, homelessness, and the like. How can a culture truly call itself civilized when those are big issues all over the world? Maybe my thinking on this is to uptight?

Quote from: RevJason83 on March 29, 2012, 03:13:37 PM

Quote from: Landshark on March 28, 2012, 08:38:41 PM

Quote from: DigitalBuddha on March 28, 2012, 06:45:31 PM
Yeah, in reality, Steve Jobs, was NOT the inventor of the pad computer; he just stole the idea and "Apple-ized" it.

Wasn't that Jobs' entire business platform?

Actually that could probably describe the entire hi-tech industry.

As for future technology, I bet computers and entertainment platforms will continue to improve. Everything else like better fuels, transportation methods, energy production, housing, food, and anything else related to human needs, will all depend on if people stop chasing the big bucks and decide that progressing as a species is more important. It may be undude of me to say this (or not, I'm not sure), but if we ever want to progress to what we see in awesome sci-fi paintings, we need to eliminate the social evils of financial inequality and everything that comes with it, like poverty, starvation, homelessness, and the like. How can a culture truly call itself civilized when those are big issues all over the world? Maybe my thinking on this is to uptight?

Good thoughts there, dude. Have to agree.

Who cares about the cities. What about A.I????

Quote from: Admiral Von Snuggles on March 29, 2012, 06:41:30 PM
Who cares about the cities. What about A.I????

The question is; can we build a robot who would be a dude-like A.I.? Cyber-dude? ;D

Author Ted Bell: Artificial Intelligence Could Evolve Into Evil Reality

Artificial intelligence is ?growing exponentially as a tool? that may be used increasingly in cyber warfare, Bell said. As an example, he points to the Stuxnet computer worm attacks on Iran.

(http://www.montrealfilmjournal.com/dat/pic/M0001411.jpg)

Check out - http://www.newsmax.com/US/Bell-Phantom-artificial-intelligence/2012/03/25/id/433778

Quote from: Admiral Von Snuggles on March 29, 2012, 06:41:30 PM
Who cares about the cities. What about A.I????

I personally do not subscribe to the AI Vs Humans crisis in the future (aka The Terminator/Matrix storyline).

For a long time now I have been a transhumanist (human+ (http://hplusmagazine.com/)).


Michio Kaku (http://mkaku.org/) (above) in his excellent Sci-Fi Science (http://press.discovery.com/asia-pacific/dsc/programs/sci-fi-science/) where he attempts to use modern science to address Sci-Fi issues did cover the problem (episode called A.I. Uprising (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u-Fs5qN8Cts&feature=results_main&playnext=1&list=PLB78F0BC6497BB292)).

Now I was a little disappointed in this particular episode because he presented his conclusion as though it was an entirely new solution to the problem that he had just come up with.

His solution (in the TV program) is the only logical one. Evolve and accept technology into ourselves.

The Transhumanist ideal, man become machine.

There is unlikely to be any AI Vs Human conflict because the point at which the AI is able to think for itself (and not just use a lot of computing power to mimic very closely) we the human race will be so much sysnthesised ourselves that it will be difficult to tell the AI apart from the humans.

(see also Discover Magazine (http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/sciencenotfiction/category/philosophy/transhumanism/))

Quote from: cookiemeat on March 28, 2012, 05:39:21 PM

(http://pics.blameitonthevoices.com/012010/ipad_vs_hp_tc_1100.jpg)

I'm so glad someone else pulled out a copy of this (I was just about to post my copy). ;D

Quote from: meekon5 on March 30, 2012, 07:13:42 AM

Quote from: Admiral Von Snuggles on March 29, 2012, 06:41:30 PM
Who cares about the cities. What about A.I????

I personally do not subscribe to the AI Vs Humans crisis in the future (aka The Terminator/Matrix storyline).

For a long time now I have been a transhumanist (human+ (http://hplusmagazine.com/)).

Michio Kaku (http://mkaku.org/) (above) in his excellent Sci-Fi Science (http://press.discovery.com/asia-pacific/dsc/programs/sci-fi-science/) where he attempts to use modern science to address Sci-Fi issues did cover the problem (episode called A.I. Uprising (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u-Fs5qN8Cts&feature=results_main&playnext=1&list=PLB78F0BC6497BB292)).

Now I was a little disappointed in this particular episode because he presented his conclusion as though it was an entirely new solution to the problem that he had just come up with.

His solution (in the TV program) is the only logical one. Evolve and accept technology into ourselves.

The Transhumanist ideal, man become machine.

There is unlikely to be any AI Vs Human conflict because the point at which the AI is able to think for itself (and not just use a lot of computing power to mimic very closely) we the human race will be so much sysnthesised ourselves that it will be difficult to tell the AI apart from the humans.

(see also Discover Magazine (http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/sciencenotfiction/category/philosophy/transhumanism/))

Hey M5 dude, great series!

Research into ai pops up in strange places. When there was a big fire about 8 years ago in the old part of Edinburgh, I was involved in checking out some buildings next to the damage to see if they were safe and one of them housed Edinburgh uni ai research department. Had to go through through all manner of security checks before we could go in. They were good men, and unfortunately very thorough! ;)

I know where that fire took place!

I was in England at the time...in case of any misunderstandings you understand! ;)

 (https://fbcdn-sphotos-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-prn1/553759_124872720976822_100003622851154_116252_640571806_n.jpg)

Here's a child like drawing I made with paint...I assume were all on the same page.


After reading some of your posts I had some opinions. Of course evolution may well be technological for humans, thats an oldie goodie, but some of the fear behind it doesn't make sense. They say AI grows more rapidly than we do, which is true because look at how irresponsible we are with technology, but the human mind is capable of doing things we arn't even conciously aware of.  DO androids dream of electric sheep? Really...Even if we get to a point where blade runner esque bots feel human, they will never be able to produce the way the human mind does. It will be survival for them, not creation.  Now that I wrote that, I'm wondering what's the difference. Kinda blury. Maybe I'm a robot. Maybe I'm a machine for experimental memory capture and were all just biologically engineered by some space jockey who used osmosis to implant progressive traits in us, and our solar system is just some big labratory and conciousness is just a signal to communicate information faster and has no individual meaning. Nah...

Quote from: Koog-meister on April 01, 2012, 06:12:14 PM
(https://fbcdn-sphotos-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-prn1/553759_124872720976822_100003622851154_116252_640571806_n.jpg)

Here's a child like drawing I made with paint...I assume were all on the same page.

Is that some kind of Eastern thing? ;D

"Going to plaid" well fuck me!

It's always Scottish tehcnology in the end!

:) :) ;)

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-17547694

documentary on AI to be aired tonight in the UK

I think the major question has to be "What do you mean by Artificial Intelligence?"

All I see at the moment are the equivalent of our Autonomic functions, something happens and a preprogrammed response is executed. for instance in this film squeeze the robots hand and it shakes your hand, a little subtly on how hard it can squeeze back, but it's not a true learnt response.

It's more like a trained dog (blow the whistle and they jump through the hoop) than a true response to it's surroundings.

We're back to a lot of computing power mimicking functionality not instigating it independently.

IMDO of course.

Oh no too late!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=aqCmX5dMYHg#!

An interesting point made in the program I cited was at what point does action or thought change from automatic response to a conscious decision that would validate the use of the term ai. The human brain 99% of the time is on auto pilot so what quality of thought changes us from automaton to sentient ?

I agree with m5 that all we are doing just now is replicating human actions without independent determination, which is the hurdle to get over before true ai exists.

Ai is perhaps the wrong term for what is sought. Perhaps artificial sentience would be a truer goal? Imdo