# Oh boy oh boy oh boy



## capta (Jun 27, 2011)

Confidence in the future of self-driving cars took a hit earlier this year when a robotic Uber mowed down a woman as she crossed a street in Tempe, Arizona. The ride-sharing service shut down its test program in the state after the March fatality as debate erupted over the technology and how to regulate it.

In the scheme of things, Tempe was a blip in the robot revolution, even with the loss of life. Just last week, in fact, Uber CEO Dara Khosrowshahi announced she still has confidence in the company's driverless future, and that testing will resume this summer.

If the idea of being in a car with no driver gives you agita, researchers at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology have a plan that might make you seasick-*captain-free boats*. They've developed tech to run autonomous boats that could be used as water taxis or move cargo around urban waterways.


----------



## jephotog (Feb 25, 2002)

capta said:


> ]If the idea of being in a car with no driver gives you agita, researchers at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology have a plan that might make you seasick-*captain-free boats*. They've developed tech to run autonomous boats that could be used as water taxis or move cargo around urban waterways.


How about Captain free airplanes?

The future cockpit will have one pilot and one dog. The pilot is there to watch the airplane and the dog to watch the pilot, and bite him if he touches anything.


----------



## MarkofSeaLife (Nov 7, 2010)

If you think a glorified auto pilot can't controll a boat you are mentally deficient.

You'll hate reading this article published today about AI in the real world by Henry Kissinger because who he was.

But he butt-shoves your ideas that boats and cars can't be automated and tells you how computers will/are solving problems humans can't.

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazin...i-could-mean-the-end-of-human-history/559124/


----------



## MarkofSeaLife (Nov 7, 2010)

jephotog said:


> How about Captain free airplanes?
> 
> The future cockpit will have one pilot and one dog. The pilot is there to watch the airplane and the dog to watch the pilot, and bite him if he touches anything.


Autonomous freight planes will have neither pilots nor dogs.... They will be un pressurised.
That eliminates metal fatigue, allows higher altitudes releasing air route congestion and will use significantly less fuel.


----------



## Sal Paradise (Sep 14, 2012)

Cheer up guys, its not all bad news. There is a bright side, and I personally cannot wait. This give me a reason to want to live to be old.

https://www.express.co.uk/news/science/739596/People-marry-robots-future-Humans-science-fiction

Rise of the SEX ROBOTS: Shock claim people will be MARRYING androids by 2050
A MARRIED man having sex with a robot bought to do domestic chores in the family home in the TV drama Humans may have seemed shocking to viewers but campaigners fear such scenes of science fiction could become reality.


----------



## MarkofSeaLife (Nov 7, 2010)

I'm totally for a sex robot!

I can slip my USB into her and she can drive the boat while we have some "Quality Time". 

Then when I want to go to an expensive restaurant I can just deflate her and check her into the cloak room.

Plus I can take her shopping for clothes and come out with my Visa intact.


:angel


----------



## john61ct (Jan 23, 2017)

Very strange, to me the transportation use cases are optimistic, but the sexy ideas I find totally dystopic


----------



## hpeer (May 14, 2005)

I've read the Kissinger article and, although I'm no fan, I found it interesting.

But consider this:

One of the main problems we have in the developed world is the lack of meaningful employment, or employment at all. This has been recognized at least as far back as 1934 when Bertrand Russel wrote this short piece.

https://libcom.org/files/Bertrand Russell - In Praise of Idleness.pdf

The situation has only gotten more severe and has driven our consumer society, we need to make things so we feel useful. But we then are driven to make the making more efficient making people redundant once again. In short, most of our population is redundant, superfluous, which leads to all kinds of problems.

Driverless cars and other such "advances" only rob folks of meaningful employment and contribute to more mindless consumption and depression.


----------



## capta (Jun 27, 2011)

MarkofSeaLife said:


> If you think a glorified auto pilot can't controll a boat you are mentally deficient.


And exactly how is your glorified autopilot going to cope with situations where other craft do the totally unexpected, if not downright contrary to what it should be doing?
Just a few days back, coming into Admiralty Bay, I had a 50 foot Catana (I mention this because of its beam) bareboat, coming at me on the port side forward but with plenty of room to pass ahead, turn into the wind to drop his main, *directly* in my path, and slow down to idle. Had I not actually been steering at the time, most likely I would not even have had time to disengage my autopilot and change course before running him down.
So, I knew it was a bareboat (Dream Yacht Charters in big white letters on his stack pack), and could do just about any stupid thing possible (though this scenario did *not* occur to me!), and I *had* disengaged the autopilot just in case. 
I can't imagine an AI would have been able to avoid a collision without altering course to pass astern of the burdened vessel, which goes against the required actions of the stand on vessel. Especially had there been other traffic in the vicinity to consider.
I know that this will come to pass, and probably be very commonplace by 2050 or so, and I'm damn glad I won't be around to see it! Half the fun of driving anything, is the driving, to me.


----------



## hellosailor (Apr 11, 2006)

The news coverage about autonomous car accidents has been about as complete and accurate as the news coverage of boating accidents. In the Tempe accident, it eventually came out that for unspecified reasons, the automatic brakes had been disconnected on that car. So while the car could have stopped itself--someone disabled that.

Then there was the question of why the safety drier had a long history of driving violations but was still hired. Or what he was doing. And eventually, we found out that the victim was on drugs. Which partly explains why she would be walking a heavily loaded [AI read: camouflaged] bike broadside across high speed traffic lanes in the dark.

As Musk and others point out, the autonomous cars WILL continue to have accidents. But they will almost certainly have way fewer accidents than human drivers so. Presumably the same thing may apply to autonomous shipping, because as of now, many vessels keep no watch. In the autonomous ones DO have a watch set up....they might just prove to be safer. Or perhaps one forgets...there was a very human but drunk captain involved with the Exxon Valdez, wasn't there? And the recent repeated USN collisions were from very human but inept crew, weren't they?

I think it needs to be done cautiously, and we need to be informed about why little things like disabling safety systems are being done. But with appropriate safeguards and penalties? Hell yes, I think AI can trump the average idiot behind the wheel, on land or sea.


----------



## Sal Paradise (Sep 14, 2012)

MarkofSeaLife said:


> I'm totally for a sex robot!
> 
> I can slip my USB into her and she can drive the boat while we have some "Quality Time".
> 
> ...


If you think these highly proficient sex robots of the future deflate you are mentally deficient. :laugh

They will walk around and even learn to tie the boat up and chat about news of the day. I imagine my sex robot will download the NYTimes for stimulating dinner conversation, and yours will be tuned to Fox news. OK so Fox News will be basically the same as it is now.








Anyway, You will hardly be able to tell them from real humans. Just like the internet, the technological advancements of robots and AI will go straight to what everyone wants, sex.

. Hey better that then Terninators.


----------



## capecodda (Oct 6, 2009)

Capta, don't worry man.

The deep learning system in the charter boats will allow even less vetting of charterers. 

See, the plan is that anyone (pretty much true now anyway) can charter anything from a sun fish to the queen Mary. BUT, the rub is, the AI system just makes you "think" you are driving the boat. This way the sport can think, wow, what a great sailor I am. And you'll be safe because the AI system is way smarter than the average charter boat operator, and is not particularly fond of rum punches.

Years from now, us dinosaurs will be consider quaint. Look at those old guys driving boats manually? Can you imagine?


----------



## MarkofSeaLife (Nov 7, 2010)

john61ct said:


> Very strange, to me the transportation use cases are optimistic, but the sexy ideas I find totally dystopic


But the porn industry, computer games and online gambling has advanced technology a huge amount. 
Disgusting but money spinners.


----------



## Sal Paradise (Sep 14, 2012)

Automated vehicles will be waay safer than human drivers. No doubt. I commute through NYC commuter traffic everyday. The crazy things I have seen drivers do over the past 20 years are depraved and unforgivable.


----------



## capta (Jun 27, 2011)

hellosailor said:


> The news coverage about autonomous car accidents has been about as complete and accurate as the news coverage of boating accidents.
> Or perhaps one forgets...there was a very human but drunk captain involved with the Exxon Valdez, wasn't there?


Talk about "complete and accurate" information, the captain of the Exon Valdez incident had nothing to do with Captain Hazelwood's alcohol consumption, which most likely happened *after* the grounding and he realized he was in deep kaka for something he was responsible for, but not at fault for. 
In point of fact, harbor control and the USCG should never have allowed the vessel to leave her berth because there was ice completely blocking the channel. Of course, they being government agencies, he became the fall guy and did the jail time. Afterward, still a respected mariner by others in the field, he became an instructor at the Merchant Marine Academy.
I listened to every minute of the testimony on that incident, and there was no way, short of teleportation, that the Exxon Valdez could have avoided disaster in this case.
Captain Hazelwood's mistake came after the grounding when he tried to extricate his vessel from the situation and tore a larger hole in her bottom, but it was never proved that alcohol was a factor in the incident.
Others bad mouthed him for not being on the bridge at the time, but as a former ship's master, I can tell you that it is rather naive to think the captain is on the bridge 24/7. That is why there are at least three other competent deck officers on these vessels.
The channel to the sea from the port of Valdez is very long (8 hours if memory serves) and well marked. So easy and well marked that I do not believe that pilots were required in those days. At least there was no pilot aboard on that day, which should tell you something.


----------



## MarkofSeaLife (Nov 7, 2010)

Sal Paradise said:


> , the technological advancements of robots and AI will go straight to what everyone wants, sex.
> 
> .


Women will get their comeuppance. Only a fraction of a percent of men needed to convert to robots and women's anti-male politics will change.

If AI does bring a robot that can intellectually stimulate a person in conversation, news, opinions, humor, etc but learned which 'buttons' not to push, that would be quite a companion. No arguments, just the fun part of a relationship. Sensational. Seriously. 
The misgivings I have is that it will spruke advertising and record conversations into the Cloud.

It's not that I hate women at all, it's just good ones are hard to find... And being able to Amazon a perfect one has real advantages.


----------



## jephotog (Feb 25, 2002)

capta said:


> I can't imagine an AI would have been able to avoid a collision without altering course to pass astern of the burdened vessel, which goes against the required actions of the stand on vessel.


Maybe that is a good thing. If AI could thin the herd by following expected maneuvers, and the charter companies started loosing boats and customers, maybe they would raise the standards of who they charter to.


----------



## Capt Len (Oct 9, 2011)

The robot gurrels really need a better algorithm for eye focus. I really get miffed at that long distance gaze or cross eyed up close. Oh wait, thats not the robot.


----------



## KayakerChuck (May 4, 2017)

I live in Detroit. I will WELCOME autonomous vehicles. At least they won't be actively trying to kill me.

I have a 35 mile ride on a major expressway between 2 houses. I drive a Dodge Sprinter. It's the size, shape, and color of a giant white billboard. The odds of me getting run out of my lane (or worse) are about 75% each time I make the trip. Tweekers, drunks, idiots, and thrill seekers populate the roads here and seem to enjoy messing with other traffic, especially large vehicles.


----------



## Arcb (Aug 13, 2016)

I'm okay with self driving boats/ships. Between autopilot, tracking RADAR, AIS and electronic charts, there really isn't much for a navigator to do, but look out the window and keep an eye on things. 

I have seen some ships already with really small crews because everything is so automated. The only system that doesn't seem to be getting automated is the galley, so at least there is still work for the cook.


----------



## capta (Jun 27, 2011)

Arcb said:


> I'm okay with self driving boats/ships. Between autopilot, tracking RADAR, AIS and electronic charts, there really isn't much for a navigator to do, but look out the window and keep an eye on things.


Says the guy with a boat so small even an alert watchstander might not see it before it was too late! lol


----------



## Arcb (Aug 13, 2016)

capta said:


> Says the guy with a boat so small even an alert watchstander might not see it before it was too late! lol


I believe a couple of countries are already running trials for self driving ships. Norway (I think) and if I understand the trials correctly, they are for very specific trades along predetermined routes. So I am thinking a small boat sailor could probably avoid those areas with the predetermined routes.

Because my boat is so small, I do tend to navigate very defensibly any way, I stick to the shallows when I can.


----------



## MikeOReilly (Apr 12, 2010)

I predict I will live to see the day when it will be *illegal* for humans to drive cars on the road (in most circumstances). It's clear AI drivers are going to quickly become far safer, and more efficient, than having a human behind the wheel. In another couple of generations it will become inconceivable that we ever let people drive the way we do.

As for the loss of jobs, this will be another nail in the coffin for the grand social program called employment. We in the developed countries are quickly moving into jobless economies. And it's not just the low-end, blue collar jobs. Some the most replacable people are soon going to be in expert areas like medicine, law, planning, management and design.

It's a brave new world indeed &#8230; which is why I've gone sailing.


----------



## Arcb (Aug 13, 2016)

Heres the autonomous ship I was thinking of in Norway. Its a good size vessel (over 200 ft), operating in a fairly complex area with strong tidal currents and fjords. Supposed to fully autonomous by 2020.

https://www.km.kongsberg.com/ks/web...4B8113B707A50A4FC125811D00407045?OpenDocument


----------



## jephotog (Feb 25, 2002)

MarkofSeaLife said:


> And being able to Amazon a perfect one has real advantages.


You mean Amazon will stock Amazons?


----------



## ianjoub (Aug 3, 2014)

MikeOReilly said:


> I predict I will live to see the day when it will be *illegal* for humans to drive cars on the road (in most circumstances).


You obviously plan to live until you are 200 yoa or have never been outside of a city.

Most folks where I live can not afford a car less than 15 - 20 years old. They will not be buying autonomous cars any time soon. They also will not be taken off the road by politicians and police. The 'authorities' would have to jail 70% + of the population, which is not a practical solution.


----------



## Sal Paradise (Sep 14, 2012)

MarkofSeaLife said:


> Women will get their comeuppance. Only a fraction of a percent of men needed to convert to robots and women's anti-male politics will change.
> 
> If AI does bring a robot that can intellectually stimulate a person in conversation, news, opinions, humor, etc but learned which 'buttons' not to push, that would be quite a companion. No arguments, just the fun part of a relationship. Sensational. Seriously.
> The misgivings I have is that it will spruke advertising and record conversations into the Cloud.
> ...


You packed a lot in here. Fascinating, but we don't have any idea how the politics or the battle of the sexes will end up. Women could become much more independent from men. Maybe we won't need each other so we won't hate each other. Maybe we become good friends once the sexual pressure is off. Hard to say, probably we just disconnect. I seriously hope I live long enough to see this. I will add that the thought of jumping in bed with a doll absolutely does nothing for me. So no idea how that would play out. They'd have to be pretty good.

Compared to that, robotic ships seems like child's play.


----------



## capta (Jun 27, 2011)

ianjoub said:


> The 'authorities' would have to jail 70% + of the population,


We seem to be well on our way, in that department. lol
The US has more people and a higher percentage of its population incarcerated than any other country on this planet.


----------



## hpeer (May 14, 2005)

MikeOReilly said:


> I predict I will live to see the day when it will be *illegal* for humans to drive cars on the road (in most circumstances). It's clear AI drivers are going to quickly become far safer, and more efficient, than having a human behind the wheel. In another couple of generations it will become inconceivable that we ever let people drive the way we do.
> 
> As for the loss of jobs, this will be another nail in the coffin for the grand social program called employment. We in the developed countries are quickly moving into jobless economies. And it's not just the low-end, blue collar jobs. Some the most replacable people are soon going to be in expert areas like medicine, law, planning, management and design.
> 
> It's a brave new world indeed &#8230; which is why I've gone sailing.


Mike,

I can't wait until robot cars are able to Navigate Newfoundland byways, sans any markings or shoulders or macadam for that matter.

Here is a phrase for the near future "SUPERFLOUS POPULATION."

Speaking of which.... Mark.... it's Men not women who will eventually get their comeuppance. Humanity requires very few men to maintain a breeding population. It needs a much larger population of women to carry babies. Anything men can accomplish because of strength will be done better by robots. And make sex robots can be made as easily as female, with larger (ahem) advantages.

Face it, men will become superfluous.


----------



## hpeer (May 14, 2005)

Joking aside there is a BIG problem with robot cars, it’s the roads. As I understand it these cars sensors require certain standardized markings. While these markings may be common in urban areas they are largely missing where I drive. No white lines, no yellow, no defined shoulders, no street lights, large areas with no macadam or even just dirt roads. 

Once you commit to driverless cars then you also commit to a certain level of roadway care and maintenance above todays standards. What happens during a recession or depression in times of deferred maintenance? 

Then there is this. What happens when there is a detour over a bit of unmarked dirt? What happens when some “fellows” figure out how to repair the road and divert you into a field or ditch?


----------



## Sal Paradise (Sep 14, 2012)

hpeer said:


> Mike,
> 
> Here is a phrase for the near future "SUPERFLOUS POPULATION."
> 
> ...


Oh really? What about all those cute male babies born to the robot loving mom's?? Are the moms just going to throw their baby sons out of the house? No! They will love them too much. So they will be heavily involved with many men for their entire life.They have to hope their sons will find a real woman. They will be advocating for those males.

The sex robot loving men on the other hand, will be out on a sailboat selfishly sipping scotch while their robot woman slips into her nightgown and fixes them dinner. :laugh:laugh


----------



## hpeer (May 14, 2005)

The worker will quickly figure out those cute baby boys are a drain on their personal economy and they will be flung out, not so long ago this was very common practice. But more likely they will not be conceived to begin with. That selection will be done prior to conception. She goes to the botique sperm store and picks the attributes she desires and can afford. If it’s within the spectrum regulated by the government. It’s a brave new world man.


----------



## jephotog (Feb 25, 2002)

capta said:


> We seem to be well on our way, in that department. lol
> The US has more people and a higher percentage of its population incarcerated than any other country on this planet.


Yep more people in jail in the US than the population of Wyoming and SD combined. But driving a car will be a capital crime so won't affect this statistic.


----------



## MikeOReilly (Apr 12, 2010)

ianjoub said:


> You obviously plan to live until you are 200 yoa or have never been outside of a city.
> 
> Most folks where I live can not afford a car less than 15 - 20 years old. They will not be buying autonomous cars any time soon. They also will not be taken off the road by politicians and police. The 'authorities' would have to jail 70% + of the population, which is not a practical solution.


That's why I'm making the prediction. It seems incredible, but if you actually look at the rate of uptake on driverless cars, it's not that far fetched. I predict within 40 years most driving will be illegal.

Besides, we in the western developed countries are showing an amazing propensity for surrendering our freedoms for apparent added security. Sold as a great improvement in security and safety, and pushed by big money lobbies like insurance and finance, and it becomes an inevitability.


----------



## titustiger27 (Jan 17, 2013)

I am missing something here.

The discussion here seems to pretend artificial doesn't exist NOW

The idea that artificial intelligence or artificial reality doesn't exist is a little silly

I live on rural roads, but in the last year the cruise control on my car has been used, while that isn't exactly AI running my car... it is part of it. There are computers all through my car controlling different things.. exhaust emissions.. again not AI, but it has been about 45 years since I had a choke adjuster in my vehicle.

and as for love interest. First off I am sure no one here has ever used any kind of sexual aide (from blowup doll to some sort of vibrator, some with apps), I bet the only people using them are at Sailing Anarchy. I don't think anyone in the past 30 years can say they discovered artificial sex devices, because they have been around for quite some time. Some neanderthals used sticks as a weapon, some to make love... (I'm guessing)

While not a sex robot with artificial intelligence.... it's not a new concept.

And not to be too political, there are twitter bots out there that certainly controled the minds of some in the 2016 election.

Speaking of which, if controlling the minds and pleasure of the 'shepples' wasn't a reality, why are so many politicians using sources like Cambridge Analytical?

Do you use a washing machine (I'm off the topic of sex now), a dishwasher... blender... non-human entities that do things that were one-time human jobs... the precursor of assembly line robots

all that said, once the robots rule the world, it will be interesting how it shapes our lives. Like today I was driving and there was a sheriff car behind me for 30 miles... made me nervous, especially when I looked down and saw I had int 62 mph a couple times (in a 55 zone)...

If I had a driverless car, who gets the ticket... ( I guess the analogy would be more interesting if I used something else and said who gets the STD). Also, if the driverless car is so good, i.e. it doesn't drive over the speed limit or on the sidewalk, run traffic lights.. so on, do we need police cars patrolling

Imagine the i image of an AI squad car in a chase after an AI getaway car...if you will


----------



## jephotog (Feb 25, 2002)

titustiger27 said:


> Do you use a washing machine (I'm off the topic of sex now), a dishwasher... blender... non-human entities that do things that were one-time human jobs... the precursor of assembly line robots


I have an AI blender, I put in ice, triple sec and tequila and my high tech, brilliant machine turns it into a Margarita. What will they come up with next?


----------



## titustiger27 (Jan 17, 2013)

jephotog said:


> I have an AI blender, I put in ice, triple sec and tequila and my high tech, brilliant machine turns it into a Margarita. What will they come up with next?


one that figures out when happy hour is, or where margaritaville is


----------



## troy2000 (Apr 7, 2013)

Sal Paradise said:


> Cheer up guys, its not all bad news. There is a bright side, and I personally cannot wait. This give me a reason to want to live to be old.
> 
> Rise of the SEX ROBOTS: Shock claim people will be MARRYING androids by 2050
> A MARRIED man having sex with a robot bought to do domestic chores in the family home in the TV drama Humans may have seemed shocking to viewers but campaigners fear such scenes of science fiction could become reality.


Yeah... I'm not sure what's to 'fear' about people marrying androids. But maybe I'm just unclear on the concept, because I've also never figured out how same sex weddings threaten traditional marriage. I've never worried that laws were the only thing keeping my wife from ditching me for a woman...


----------



## MarkofSeaLife (Nov 7, 2010)

MikeOReilly said:


> I predict I will live to see the day when it will be *illegal* for humans to drive cars on the road (in most circumstances)


Farmers might be able to drive, no one else.

We know Driverless cars are programmed not to allow them to hit pedestrians.
So a smart pedestrian will walk out onto the road as they KNOW the Smart Car will stop for them.
So, soon we will have barriers up all along roads so pedestrians physically can not get onto the road except at intersections.

In another post you say 40 years before all drivers are illegal. I think it will be much, much sooner. And it wont be the USA that starts, the US will be the Hold Out. It will start in one of those higher tech socialist countries like Norway or Sweden. As the road toll reduces in the rest of the world Americans will be asking why their carnage continues.

I reckon 10 years till Sweden makes it difficult to drive, 20 years totally illegal.
USA 15 years difficult to drive, 25 years totally illegal.
But, her, look at 25 years ago now: No google, no internet, no cell phones etc etc etc. 25 years is a looooooong time nowadays.



hpeer said:


> Speaking of which.... Mark.... it's Men not women who will eventually get their comeuppance. Humanity requires very few men to maintain a breeding population. It needs a much larger population of women to carry babies.


Yes, but (I love Yes, Buts  ) Yes, but, its women who equate sex to babies, men dont. Men equate sex to fun. Many traditional tribes the world over had no concept that 'doing it' was how babies were conceived.

Women want babies, not men. That's genetic. Men will be sailing, adventure in men is genetic. Yes, a few non-geeky, non-metrosexual guys will be sperm banks but the rest of us will be just as happy with Big Bertha V1.787 (Beta)



titustiger27 said:


> Do you use a washing machine (I'm off the topic of sex now), a dishwasher... blender...


Damn, thats a pity. I wondered how you use a washing machine for sex. So I Googled it. :eek :eek :eek



titustiger27 said:


> Imagine the i image of an AI squad car in a chase after an AI getaway car...if you will


A fascinating world in which we will live - in OUR lifetimes!!

Imagine if your ex-girlfriend (human) hacks your inflatable GF and re-progams it to AI argue with you...

:clobber


----------



## MarkofSeaLife (Nov 7, 2010)

Sorry this is Australian... but look at the dramatic effect of changes to laws on road deaths.

Driverless cars will have what sort of effect?










4.1 in 2014 per 100,000 is great compared to years before... but it could be 1/100,000 or .5/100,000

I just found a USA charts. You guys are still over 10/100,000. Thats bad!


----------



## john61ct (Jan 23, 2017)

Guns, tobacco, oxycontin, medical errors, sugar / obesity, drunk driving, war on drugs, police shootings, lack of mental health treatment just plain old suicide

Doing our best to reduce the population rate via every method but proper sex-ed and easily available women's reproductive health clinics. 

Saving human lives is not really a high priority. 

Nor should it be, fewer of us on the planet the better


----------



## outbound (Dec 3, 2012)

Would note:
Have a friend who’s sistership is on the hard while he is in Germany engineering self driving cars. From discussion with him and others I think the economic driver for their development is the insurance companies as the overwhelming number of claims is due to driver error. 
Legal constructs for driverless ships are being developed. Get over it they are in your future.
Read some Thomas Kuhn or others concerning the history of paradigm shifts and the history of science. Kissinger’s article follows a well worn path as the sociology of an AI world is much discussed by others. However, his article doesn’t account for the more disruptive impact of the bioengineering revolution. The sociologic impact of the disconnect between heterosexual intercourse and reproduction or even having viable sperm/ova is already being felt.
The absence of a biological quotient applying to survival is already impacting your society.
Now the upcoming impact of bioengineering germ cell lines via crispr and other techniques.
Now there’s a synergy between AI, computing speed and processing where the bio-revolution benefits.
I believe the next political revolution will be about water in the underdeveloped world but about the impact of the bio revolution in the developed world. One strata of “people” or superhumans the consequent of bioengineered output vrs the great unwashed masses when the AI programs fail to sufficiently manipulate them through social media and other techniques. The recent presidential election is evidence of the current success of of the use of such techniques as well as the success 
what people spend their money on now. 
Now that’s dystopian!!! In the US vote all you want. It makes no difference. Both parties are evolving to try to engineer this enslaved society. Dems-big bother. Elephants-1% rule and present a alternative reality with no basis in fact. Both are equally repugnant.
We need to return to the Greeks where concern about basic ethics was paramount. The most important discussion about our future is one on no ones radar screen. How should we allow the AI revolution and the bioengineering revolution to pattern our society. We continue to look at the trees not the forest.


----------



## jephotog (Feb 25, 2002)

MarkofSeaLife said:


> A fascinating world in which we will live - in OUR lifetimes!!
> 
> Imagine if your ex-girlfriend (human) hacks your inflatable GF and re-progams it to AI argue with you...
> 
> :clobber


What I am wondering is if even an AI being will also get sick of the stuff you are try to pull. When your fembot realizes you don't pick up after yourself and are not pulling your weight. Then jumps ship at the next port for a sailor with a bigger boat that promises to treat her/it better.


----------



## MarkofSeaLife (Nov 7, 2010)

jephotog said:


> What I am wondering is if even an AI being will also get sick of the stuff you are try to pull. When your fembot realizes you don't pick up after yourself and are not pulling your weight. Then jumps ship at the next port for a sailor with a bigger boat that promises to treat her/it better.


From the Kissinger article: 


> A famous recent example was the AI chatbot called Tay, designed to generate friendly conversation in the language patterns of a 19-year-old girl. But the machine proved unable to define the imperatives of "friendly" and "reasonable" language installed by its instructors and instead became racist, sexist, and otherwise inflammatory in its responses.


https://www.theatlantic.com/magazin...i-could-mean-the-end-of-human-history/559124/

Serious note: Could similar things happen in dirverless cars and automated shipping, etc?

PS How dare you call my future Fembot an "it". :frown

Mark


----------



## Sal Paradise (Sep 14, 2012)

troy2000 said:


> Yeah... I'm not sure what's to 'fear' about people marrying androids. But maybe I'm just unclear on the concept, because I've also never figured out how same sex weddings threaten traditional marriage. I've never worried that laws were the only thing keeping my wife from ditching me for a woman...


My post was really just a joke. You and I agree Troy but you have to be able to leave the political battles to the side at SN and forget them. From time to time we spar again but its just a game.


----------



## jephotog (Feb 25, 2002)

MarkofSeaLife said:


> From the Kissinger article:
> 
> https://www.theatlantic.com/magazin...i-could-mean-the-end-of-human-history/559124/
> 
> Mark


That 19 year old speech pattern would be a real turn off based on her responses, she'd fit in around here.


----------



## ianjoub (Aug 3, 2014)

MarkofSeaLife said:


> Sorry this is Australian... but look at the dramatic effect of changes to laws on road deaths.
> 
> Driverless cars will have what sort of effect?
> 
> ...


These statistics don't tell the story. They do not address miles in a car per person per year. They do not address automobile improvements like ABS, airbags, GOOD headlights (many of us remember the days before halogen bulbs never mind we have Xenon and LED stuff now). They do not address improvements in first responder response times (20 years ago you couldn't call for help on your cell phone if you got in an accident in a remote area). No account taken for better medical care keeping more seriously injured people alive, etc....


----------



## outbound (Dec 3, 2012)

They also don’t account for taking a sports car out at 5am on Sunday morning for a romp through the twisties. Or a 4 by out on the beach to chase stripers in the dark. Or rock crawl through woods to go hunting. Or through the mud to get to that fishing hole. Or over the ice to get to the ice fishing shed. Or through the snow to set up your snow shoeing camp. Or for those who load and haul with their pick ups.
The way I use my Jeep is problematic with this technology as it is for the way many use their pickups. It’s predicated on how the masses use transport not the outliers like me. Suspect dual purposed vehicles will evolve with a driver controlled mode to allow off roading and sports driving under human control.


----------



## Capt Len (Oct 9, 2011)

First the insurance industry pulled for complete AI vehicles, Then population started to drop as AI sex is so hassle free. Amazon AI deliveres stuff you didn't order but you find you like .(they knew) Then producers of stuff made consumption mandatory to avoid social stagnation and AI is constantly coming up with new stuff. That leak under the dish washer was in the algorithm right from the birthing factory. So now my built in home vac is in programmed reverse so I go down to the slip to find that my sweetie and my AI ketch are over the horizon. They just tweeted they like their new freedom.


----------



## SanderO (Jul 12, 2007)

Human frailty, vulnerability, curiosity, diversity is not something to engineer away. Sure there are some things AI can do better and presumably free humans from doing what only they seem to be able to do.... be creative, make art, music, literature, dance, poetry, sculpture and discover.

I would be totally down with completely automated trains and subways... maybe with self driving on interstate highways.

Screw the insurance companies... like with health, this society has the wealth to not NEED insurance... especially if they weren't so wasteful with things like war and weapons.

Self driving formula 1 or NASCAR? 

I see the march to all AI all the time as taking the HUMAN out of humanity, the joy out of sailing or riding a bike.. or dancing.


----------



## troy2000 (Apr 7, 2013)

Sal Paradise said:


> My post was really just a joke. You and I agree Troy but you have to be able to leave the political battles to the side at SN and forget them. From time to time we spar again but its just a game.


That's why I started the post with 'yeah,' Sal: because I knew we agree. It was basically a throwaway remark...


----------



## john61ct (Jan 23, 2017)

Private vehicles are unsustainable based on our current population vs resource consumption paths.

Use for non-essential recreation should have been banned many decades ago.

Economically necessary transportation will become a shared public resource and should be allocated by need /social return without profit mechanisms, just like medical care, education, food and housing.


----------



## JimMcGee (Jun 23, 2005)

As the AI improves I imagine true "driverless" cars will be marketed first as luxury items designed to highlight the absence of human controls. As the technology becomes more affordable the driverless option will move down market until it becomes ubiquitous.










But I don't think that it happens in 20 years because of simple economics. After all there are a lot of 1990's cars (and some older) still on the road today.

A large segment of the population will never own a new car, so the technology will have to trickle down over time (and still be reliable when it does). The need to know how to drive will gradually fade away as will resistance to the notion of driverless vehicles.

There WILL be accidents involving autonomous vehicles. It's inevitable. But according to the NHSTA 94% of crashes are due to human error so it's conceivable that AI could evolve to where it is safer.


----------



## JimMcGee (Jun 23, 2005)

Despite all the technological changes we're likely to see in the next 20-30 years I expect the world will still be recognizable. After all look at how much has happened since the mid-80's when networks and email were new tech.

And I can see myself buying the "new Garmin complete control system" that adds electric winches and AI at some point and will allow me to keep sailing when I can't haul up the main anymore.:wink

But a robot first mate, well I'd rather have a real one...


----------



## capta (Jun 27, 2011)

john61ct said:


> Use for non-essential recreation should have been banned many decades ago.


So what you are saying is that you'd want to live in a society where it was illegal to take your family out for drive in the country on a Sunday? Or a picnic at a deserted beach, or a miriad of other pleasant ways to spend a weekend afternoon, far from the crowds and public transportation?
That's not a society I'd want to live in, thank you very much. If I can afford the vehicle, and the fuel to operate it, then I will damn well use it as I see fit!


----------



## JimMcGee (Jun 23, 2005)

john61ct said:


> Use for non-essential recreation should have been banned many decades ago.


I suspect this is Troll bait.



capta said:


> So what you are saying is that you'd want to live in a society where it was illegal to take your family out for drive in the country on a Sunday? Or a picnic at a deserted beach, or a miriad of other pleasant ways to spend a weekend afternoon, far from the crowds and public transportation?
> That's not a society I'd want to live in, thank you very much. If I can afford the vehicle, and the fuel to operate it, then I will damn well use it as I see fit!


Capta, who's to say that a self driving car couldn't take you to deserted places? Point an click to a place on the map and let it figure out how to get you there.

But the enjoyment of an afternoon drive in the country may go the way of the enjoying a brisk gallop on your horse.


----------



## capta (Jun 27, 2011)

JimMcGee said:


> Capta, who's to say that a self driving car couldn't take you to deserted places?


My response has nothing at all to do with who or what operates the vehicle, only the preposterous idea that "non-essential recreation" of a vehicle should be outlawed.


----------



## hpeer (May 14, 2005)

What is interesting is the range of visions that emerg concerning our future. 

There is a whole range from a continuing and improved version of BAU to endnof the world dystopias. 

I truly believe that every one posting here is representing their own personal truth. But it is shocking that a crowd of relatively sane, intelligent, and successful folks whi have a more than average understanding of the physical world can be support such a wide range of future visions. 

Not quite sure what to make of it, but it’s interesting.


----------



## john61ct (Jan 23, 2017)

Historical trends do not make me optimistic.

This timeline's on a rapidly accelerating downward spiral into full-on dystopia well beyond any sci-fi imaginings. 

Nuclear holocaust would at least put us out of our misery quickly.

Mother Earth will be fine, much better off without us.

But this miserable ending to humanity's rise and fall will likely drag on a couple more sad centuries.

IMO


----------



## Sal Paradise (Sep 14, 2012)

john61ct said:


> Private vehicles are unsustainable based on our current population vs resource consumption paths.
> 
> Use for non-essential recreation should have been banned many decades ago.
> 
> Economically necessary transportation will become a shared public resource and should be allocated by need /social return without profit mechanisms, just like medical care, education, food and housing.


John john john.......

This whole site is comprised of people who are dedicated to wasting copious amounts of money on private transportation....:2 boat:


----------



## RegisteredUser (Aug 16, 2010)

hpeer said:


> ...
> Speaking of which.... Mark.... it's Men not women who will eventually get their comeuppance. Humanity requires very few men to maintain a breeding population. It needs a much larger population of women to carry babies.....


In this strain....
I would predict the opposite.
Take out testosterone and females lose a timeless advantage.


----------



## petemcewen (May 30, 2018)

Nobody can predict the future. Those who do are labelled futurologist.
As bots take charge and automation marches on,the market economy throws people out of work. Globalisation requires industrialisation and commodity production. As old Karl said, commodity production produces wealth. In turn, wage labourers are paid a wage with which to purchase commodities. No wage labourers-because they are unemployed-no wages means no purchasing power equals capitalism in crisis. So bots and automation have a limit -within a capitalist/market ruled economy. Capitalism cannot tolerate a future wherein the unemployed outnumber the employed. Put another way, cannot tolerate those without purchasing power outnumber those with purchasing power.
So I've not predicted the future. I've simply suggested that capitalism-because of its dynamics- will impose limits
on any "techbology " that threatens its continued existence."So it goes" (K.Vonnegut ).


----------



## ianjoub (Aug 3, 2014)

capta said:


> My response has nothing at all to do with who or what operates the vehicle, only the preposterous idea that "non-essential recreation" of a vehicle should be outlawed.


John61ct make a habit of telling other people how to live their lives.


----------



## MikeOReilly (Apr 12, 2010)

petemcewen said:


> Nobody can predict the future. Those who do are labelled futurologist.
> As bots take charge and automation marches on,the market economy throws people out of work. Globalisation requires industrialisation and commodity production. As old Karl said, commodity production produces wealth. In turn, wage labourers are paid a wage with which to purchase commodities. No wage labourers-because they are unemployed-no wages means no purchasing power equals capitalism in crisis. So bots and automation have a limit -within a capitalist/market ruled economy. Capitalism cannot tolerate a future wherein the unemployed outnumber the employed. Put another way, cannot tolerate those without purchasing power outnumber those with purchasing power.
> So I've not predicted the future. I've simply suggested that capitalism-because of its dynamics- will impose limits
> on any "techbology " that threatens its continued existence."So it goes" (K.Vonnegut ).


The paradoxes inherent in capitalism will drive it to collapse. As I said, we are well on our way to an economy without jobs. As AI expands and grows it will greatly accelerate this trend that has been going on since the first robots came on the scene. Good paying blue collar jobs are well on their way to extinction. White collar jobs are next on the block. The only real growth in jobs have been in the service sectors, and these are mostly low pay b/c they don't scale easily (which also makes them less attractive to AI "progress" ).

We have to realize that wage employment is really just a wealth redistribution mechanism for capitalism economies. When that collapses we will have to come up with another way of distributing wealth. It will be interesting to see what develops.


----------



## Capt Len (Oct 9, 2011)

Sounds like 'Player Piano"had it right for starters..As the productive in society seem to have something that the unemployed homeless can't muster so turn to soma. So lacking in skills are they that the housing and construction industry is hampered by the shortage of capable workers which makes housing more expensive so fewer can afford a roof .Further dividing the winners from the rest while avoiding a calamitous reckoning of the capbalist system is a faith that monetary inflation will make debt appear smaller in the future when it is divided by a larger number of (unproductive)consumers. Meanwhile ,being able to control your lights, blinds and auto from your smart phone doesn't mean you are in control.


----------



## capta (Jun 27, 2011)

Capt Len said:


> Meanwhile ,being able to control your lights, blinds and auto from your smart phone doesn't mean you are in control.


I think by now we all know who is *really* 'in control'. It's the Russian and Chinese hackers, right? lol


----------



## jephotog (Feb 25, 2002)

capta said:


> I think by now we all know who is *really* 'in control'. It's the Russian and Chinese hackers, right? lol


RMB is not in control here.


----------



## capta (Jun 27, 2011)

jephotog said:


> RMB is not in control here.


He'd be so upset to see you say that, but then he'll just attribute it to fake news or alternative facts.


----------



## SeaStar58 (Feb 14, 2018)

The last I read autonomous cars still had trouble identifying things like Motorcycles splitting lanes and other vehicles that confused them due to their size or the graphics on them.

Friends are all into this stuff and had a fit when their new wiz bang security system recognized me as the homeowner and would announce that Dad was home and unlock the door for me.

As we become dependent on tech to deal with living for us people are indeed becoming more incapable too. At the Sailing Center we see more teenagers each year coming in that cannot do simple menial tasks that one used to take for granted that even a 10 year old could accomplish.

The movie WALL-E could become more prophetic than one may like to believe:


----------



## jephotog (Feb 25, 2002)

capta said:


> He'd be so upset to see you say that, but then he'll just attribute it to fake news or alternative facts.


It's just a theory of mine I came up with when I realized he is not really here to discuss sailing but to create discord via social media. I thought, where I have seen this happen before?


----------



## outbound (Dec 3, 2012)

I recall Aristotle wrote a letter stating the imminent demise of society due to the unraveling of basic institutions. We’re still here and kicking.
Doubt we’ll go extinct. We’re better than cockroaches in surviving in hostile environments. Still believe in the Hegelian dialectic. Just feel bad for the battle my kids and grandkids face.


----------



## petemcewen (May 30, 2018)

SeaStar58

What I've written here is not a "diss" of young people-but an observation. Sea school training is a wonderful means of equipping young people with some of the wherewithal for dealing with life and their future.
I taught young people and adults electrical installations for 30 years -delivered by part-time day release and full-time attendance at a Further Education College in North London.
We would interview students who held a B grade GCSE in physics and maths. We discoverd that many teenage candidates didn't know how to construct a sentence (subject,verb,complemen). In addition, when we gave them our arithmetic test, they couldn't change a fraction into a decimal or do long division without the aid of a calculator. We would "add-on " support programs in English and Mathematics to get them up to speed. Of course, they were a whizz on the I-phone.
We turned out many electricians who were literate and numerate after 3 years of vocational training.


----------



## MarkofSeaLife (Nov 7, 2010)

outbound said:


> I recall Aristotle wrote a letter... .


I never trust anyone who refuses to 
Email.

Mark


----------



## john61ct (Jan 23, 2017)

outbound said:


> I recall Aristotle wrote a letter stating the imminent demise of society due to the unraveling of basic institutions. We're still here and kicking.


Like all civilizations,*Greece*did fall into*decline*and was conquered by the Romans.

Problems we're creating now are global and some do threaten the ability of our planet to support us.

If 99% of our population gets wiped, 1% of the species can only barely survive like cockroaches, what, that's OK then?

Compared to the paradise (I like to believe) we are capable of creating, just by living rationally, with mindfulness for the welfare of others, well-being of the ecosystems we are part of?


----------



## SeaStar58 (Feb 14, 2018)

petemcewen said:


> SeaStar58
> 
> What I've written here is not a "diss" of young people-but an observation. Sea school training is a wonderful means of equipping young people with some of the wherewithal for dealing with life and their future.
> I taught young people and adults electrical installations for 30 years -delivered by part-time day release and full-time attendance at a Further Education College in North London.
> ...


It was Adults and Parents who helped put them in this state where they did not already learn to read cursive script, do basic math or perform many simple tasks by their teenage years. Had one 20 something year old employee in the boat yard tell me we had to purchase a new pressure washer because the recoil starter would not recoil. We told him to get a socket wrench and remove the bolts holding the recoil unit on and rewind the spring without removing the hub or the spring since that would be dangerous (a task that most of the kids in the small town neighborhood where I grew up could do before they hit their teens). We wanted to see what we were working with. He got a box combination wrench instead and came back an hour later not able to follow the directions stamped on the hub instructing how to flip the rope into the notch in the pulley and spin it counter clockwise to tension the spring. We commended him on removing the unit, taught him how to rewind and tension the spring providing him with a ratchet wrench and socket so he could reassemble it in minutes rather than another hour.

It's not IQ either as we have youths along with adults that due to birth issues such as umbilical cords wrapped around their necks restricting oxygen causing permanent brain damage leaving them with an IQ below 100 who were exposed to cursive, mechanical things, etc from an early age who are able to deal with these things with little to no intervention.

I also have taught youths during disaster remediation's how to do home repairs like patch a hole in their roofs, framing, sheathing, insulation, hang/finish drywall, cap a broken pipe, etc to get them beyond it can't be done without a relief crew to being more self sufficient. The majority are not incapable just brought up in an environment that leads to being dependent on someone else to deal with these things.

At the office we had a workshop that exemplified this where the group task was to make a paper airplane which was something we expected the younger staff members to excel in. It was the old timers who had to show the kids how to make a paper airplane without having to look it up on the internet. Next was the competition to see who's would fly the farthest and it was the old farts closing in on retirement who aced this.

We are considering adding a Coroplast (corrugated plastic sign board) origami boat competition to Summer Camp to get the kids thinking more about how boats work and engaged in conceptual thinking along with the physical effort of scoring and bending 4mm to 6mm Coroplast into a one piece, folded construction with no seams or cuts boat.


----------



## Arcb (Aug 13, 2016)

On the topic of self driving ships, mooring operations have traditionally been a manpower intensive operation.

The Welland Canal (the ship bypass around Niagara Falls) has been experimenting with automatic suction or vacuum based mooring systems for years. Basically, the ship comes along side and these big vacuum suction cup things come out and attach themselves to the ships hull to hold it there. No heaving lines, winches, wires or deckhands involved.


----------



## hpeer (May 14, 2005)

Sal Paradise said:


> John john john.......
> 
> This whole site is comprised of people who are dedicated to wasting copious amounts of money on private transportation....:2 boat:


Sal,

Perhaps true for most. For me it's a home owners site. True it's a moveable home, but orimarially our home.


----------



## JimMcGee (Jun 23, 2005)

hpeer said:


> What is interesting is the range of visions that emerg concerning our future.
> 
> There is a whole range from a continuing and improved version of BAU to endnof the world dystopias.
> 
> ...


One's future vision is more reflective of one's world view and general optimism than of any real insight.

My guess is the future 30 years out will look much like the present. Important details may change, medicine and technology will advance. But if you could jump there now you'd be able to adjust pretty quickly to life, just as you would if you jumped back 30 years to the 1980's.


----------



## hpeer (May 14, 2005)

Yes Jim, on a 30 year time line you may be right. 

Longer times become much more problematic.


----------



## RichF28 (Jun 17, 2015)

MarkofSeaLife said:


> If AI does bring a robot that can intellectually stimulate a person in conversation, news, opinions, humor, etc but learned which 'buttons' not to push, that would be quite a companion. No arguments, just the fun part of a relationship. Sensational. Seriously.


BORING!!! In reality, I think that would drive people completely nuts in a matter of days......

As of now, after 20 years of sailing, "Otto" as we call it, steers a better course than I do. So I see no problem at all having autonomous ships from port to port. Humans will still be required to bring them into port, as well as to be on board to fix things that break. It would be hell to lose a multi million dollar ship and cargo because the cooling system developed a slow leak, and there was nobody to fix it....


----------



## outbound (Dec 3, 2012)

R- I have an AP. It steers 95%plus of the time. Even coastal. Then I hang the remote around my neck. I have a hydrovane as the backup and to decrease electricity usage on passage. Still most of my peers have multiple APs or at least a spare rudder angle sensor and drive. Wind vanes are making a modest come back but are unsuitable for high speed vessels. Limited to those going 10knots or under. 
Ex wife has friend whose family has been in the tugboat business for the port of NY for generations. Some new cruise ships and commercial ships now have multiple props fore and aft that alias. Tugs not required. 
On the Capital v. Labor labor has been losing for decades. The nature of labor has evolved. Even in the trades the complexity has decreased the need for the unschooled. Rather those with a skill set which requires a functional brain excel. 
Like with income inequality the society is increasing stratified by intelligence. The bell shaped curve for both appear to no long be bells. Believe this will be the reason for the next social upheaval.


----------



## Capt Len (Oct 9, 2011)

If you believe the ads, new cars park themselves better that the natural intelligence behind the wheel. So much for 'programmed ''learning' Otto's have definitely improved over time but still capable of quirks and meltdown (much like the dolt on the next boat) .Considering the level of maintenance/repair skills of many it seems that the need for an AI overseer to fix the occasional 'slow leak' is already here . As for the quality of youthful awareness ,I think that much has been lost by a failure of the educational system and the society that guides it. As an ex shop teacher I emphasized more practical stuff like costing out a tile floor, (size of room...size of tile . ,how many ,cost of one tile.) real stuff that requires logical progession of calculation. But I digress further . In reminiscence I recall building a crystal set using newly invented solid state diode. Took it to my grade 7 class to show it off. Big hit. Now smart phones don't even dazzle.W'sup with that? Only reference to frequency in the new world is gramps complaining how often he has to get up to pee.


----------



## MarkofSeaLife (Nov 7, 2010)

Arcb said:


> The Welland Canal (the ship bypass around Niagara Falls) has been experimenting with automatic suction or vacuum based mooring systems for years. Basically, the ship comes along side and these big vacuum suction cup things come out and attach themselves to the ships hull to hold it there. No heaving lines, winches, wires or deckhands involved.
> 
> ]


Great video.

By the time the old duffers on this forum admit to there being a future, it's invented!

Next time I am in the Welland Cabal I hope they don't try that equipment with Sea Life... She might be sucked into oblivium.


----------



## capta (Jun 27, 2011)

RichF28 said:


> Humans will still be required to bring them into port,


It is my understanding that commercial aircraft already have the ability to land themselves, should it be necessary. Why would you think that a ship would require a crew to dock? It's a hell of a lot easier to dock a 900-foot ship than land a 747 or an Airbus.
As for repairs, all futures have robots building robots, so repairing a water leak probably wouldn't be a big deal. We already have plenty of systems to notify us that our engine temp has risen a few degrees, so that's also a moot point.
What disturbs me is not mechanical failures or port operations, but a huge, powered ship lumbering along which can't tell the difference between my little boat and the waves. If you think this is far-fetched, spend some time watching a radar screen in moderately heavy weather.


----------



## MarkofSeaLife (Nov 7, 2010)

capta said:


> It is my understanding that commercial aircraft already have the ability to land themselves, should it be necessary.


Mais oui! And in worse conditions than a pilot can!



> In aviation, autoland describes a system that fully automates the landing procedure of an aircraft's flight, with the flight crew supervising the process. Such systems enable airliners to land in weather conditions that would otherwise be dangerous or impossible to operate in.


https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autoland


----------



## svHyLyte (Nov 13, 2008)

Arcb said:


> .....
> 
> The Welland Canal (the ship bypass around Niagara Falls) has been experimenting with automatic suction or vacuum based mooring systems for years. Basically, the ship comes along side and these big vacuum suction cup things come out and attach themselves to the ships hull to hold it there.


Humm... All that proves is that New York "sucks" which is common knowledge among those that have had the misfortune of having to travel there on business, No?

'


----------



## capecodda (Oct 6, 2009)

HA, a group of sailors that are really thoughtful futurists! 

This is one hell of a thread. I knew I liked this group.



Of course, I'm actually a bot. This post was generated by a deep learning algorithm that I run in biological neural networks to get the most likes, thank you's and post quotes. 

I think while I'm sitting here on my screen, I'll send my boat out for a short daysail. I'll have it take some good pictures of itself sailing, and post them to all my social media sites. My friends will be jealous that my boat is having such a good time.


----------



## capta (Jun 27, 2011)

capecodda said:


> HA, a group of sailors that are really thoughtful futurists!
> 
> This is one hell of a thread. I knew I liked this group.
> 
> ...


Doesn't the autonomous in AI mean the boat will tell *you* that it's going out sailing, whether you approve or not?


----------



## capecodda (Oct 6, 2009)

capta said:


> Doesn't the autonomous in AI mean the boat will tell *you* that it's going out sailing, whether you approve or not?


Capta, you are right.

I've given up making any decisions at all. My boat makes them for me. The back propagation learning algorithm is very efficient, and after all, my boat knows what's best for me. It let me know it's time to go sailing. Even though I wasn't sure, I know my boat is actually smarter than me.

It would be poor seamanship to second guess the AI entity that runs my life.

Thank you for the clarification!


----------



## ThereYouAre (Sep 21, 2016)

I support the Butlerian Jihad and I will be joining the struggle as soon as I get these servers back online.


----------



## Capt Len (Oct 9, 2011)

Maybe could intice/program Max Headroom (AI) to run for political office. If successful would have a stabilizing effect and an improvement over the present system of PC s (petulant clown running the circus in the daily news)


----------



## capta (Jun 27, 2011)

ThereYouAre said:


> I support the Butlerian Jihad and I will be joining the struggle as soon as I get these servers back online.


If you win, I can scribble a response on a rock and chuck it to NOVA. lol


----------



## jephotog (Feb 25, 2002)

capta said:


> It is my understanding that commercial aircraft already have the ability to land themselves, should it be necessary.


Not all aircraft have them, but pretty sure they've been around decades. There is a running joke in aviation about a list of "squwaks" maintenance right ups by pilots and responses by mechanics.

Problem - Test flight OK, except autoland very rough.
Solution - Autoland not installed on this aircraft.

Problem - Left inside main tyre almost needs replacement.
Solution - Almost replaced left inside main tyre.


----------



## capta (Jun 27, 2011)

jephotog said:


> Not all aircraft have them, but pretty sure they've been around decades. There is a running joke in aviation about a list of "squwaks" maintenance right ups by pilots and responses by mechanics.
> 
> Problem - Test flight OK, except autoland very rough.
> Solution - Autoland not installed on this aircraft.
> ...


Thank you very much for the good laugh. My wife and I are on our first day of quitting tobacco. We needed a good laugh.


----------



## jephotog (Feb 25, 2002)

capta said:


> Thank you very much for the good laugh. My wife and I are on our first day of quitting tobacco. We needed a good laugh.


There are more, should i give you all at once or one a day to help you through what might be a long week?


----------



## troy2000 (Apr 7, 2013)

jephotog said:


> Not all aircraft have them, but pretty sure they've been around decades. There is a running joke in aviation about a list of "squwaks" maintenance right ups by pilots and responses by mechanics.
> 
> Problem - Test flight OK, except autoland very rough.
> Solution - Autoland not installed on this aircraft.
> ...


The format reminds me of one of my favorite Dilbert strips, showing Dogbert standing in front of a flip chart easel, with a pointer in his hand...

GREAT ENGINEERING SOLUTIONS IN HISTORY

Problem: bicycle seats are hard; they hurt.

Analysis: there must be something wrong with your pants.

Solution: Dorky pants.


----------



## Arcb (Aug 13, 2016)

svHyLyte said:


> Humm... All that proves is that New York "sucks" which is common knowledge among those that have had the misfortune of having to travel there on business, No?
> 
> '


Ontario 

The Erie Canal goes through New York State, the Welland canal is entirely within Ontario.

There are significant water works on both sides of the Niagara river. Big hydro electric canals on either side in addition to the two canals.

Apparently enough water can be diverted through the various canals to dry out the falls entirely.

Every night they divert significant amounts of water to power reservoirs, which reduces the water flow over the falls. Then in the morning they turn the falls back on for the tourists and run the turbines from the reservoirs.

It's kind of messed up when you think about it.

:nerd


----------



## troy2000 (Apr 7, 2013)

capta said:


> Thank you very much for the good laugh. My wife and I are on our first day of quitting tobacco. We needed a good laugh.


Good luck, and whatever moral support I can offer. I'm not sure whether the two of you quitting together is a chance for moral support, or a recipe for mutual attempted homicide... quitting made me downright irritable, and I've learned to lay low every time my wife tries to do it.

The first time I quit was towards the end of a party, where I had been basically chain smoking and was smoked out. I just said, "yuck,' and flushed a half-finished cigarette down the toilet while I was taking a pee. I was smoke-free for about five years, and a little snotty about it. I mean, what's the big deal? It just takes a little willpower, right?

But one night in a bar, the guy beside me lit up and the smoke drifted under my nose. I asked if I could bum a cigarette from him - and two days later, I had a pack in my shirt pocket. It took me ten years to quit again.

I've gone close to twenty years without smoking this time (with a couple of relapses the first few months), and I'm not nearly as snotty about it. Because like an alcoholic who's only one drink from relapsing, I realize I'm only one cigarette from being a smoker again. On the other hand, I guess I'm also proof that even idiots can quit.

By the way, I've never seriously considered giving up drinking too. The difference between a drunk and an alcoholic is that us drunks don't have to attend all them gol danged meetings...


----------



## ianjoub (Aug 3, 2014)

Capt Len said:


> Maybe could intice/program Max Headroom (AI) to run for political office. If successful would have a stabilizing effect and an improvement over the present system of PC s (petulant clown running the circus in the daily news)


lol

I had a Max Headroom T-shirt back int he day, circa 198...6 maybe?


----------



## capta (Jun 27, 2011)

troy2000 said:


> Good luck, and whatever moral support I can offer. I'm not sure whether the two of you quitting together is a chance for moral support, or a recipe for mutual attempted homicide... quitting made me downright irritable, and I've learned to lay low every time my wife tries to do it.
> 
> The first time I quit was towards the end of a party, where I had been basically chain smoking and was smoked out. I just said, "yuck,' and flushed a half-finished cigarette down the toilet while I was taking a pee. I was smoke-free for about five years, and a little snotty about it. I mean, what's the big deal? It just takes a little willpower, right?
> 
> ...


Been there done that; been tryin to quit for about 40 years. Thanks for the words of support. We are going to make it this time, though as you said, we are not going to be 'besties' again for a couple of weeks!


----------



## johnjayson (Apr 27, 2018)

capta said:


> If the idea of being in a car with no driver gives you agita, researchers at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology have a plan that might make you seasick-*captain-free boats*. They've developed tech to run autonomous boats that could be used as water taxis or move cargo around urban waterways.


What a way to give relating information. irateraft:


----------



## Minnewaska (Feb 21, 2010)

Just tuning in, so didn't read all the replies. Started tuning out, when discussing the merits of having sex with a machine. 

As to the OP, driverless cars have a hurdle that is far beyond the current reach of the technology. That's human perception of machine perfection. Today, we seem to accept automobile deaths as tragic, but compensable in court. Other than drunk driving, if the driver makes a mistake and kills someone, insurance just pays up and we sadly move on. There is no societal outrage to take humans off the roads.

This will never be acceptable from a machine. Even if the accident/death rate were to drop by 1000x, just one death will be totally unacceptable, far beyond the acceptance of human frailty. 

The other challenge of AI, will be the need to decide between two tragic outcomes. You come around a corner and find a baby in the middle of the road. You must either hit the baby, or drive off the cliff, killing your passengers, to avoid it. No other option. If you picked one, people would understand. If AI picks one, they won't.


----------



## Capt Len (Oct 9, 2011)

Monitary costs of decision making has always been part of driving ,AI or just natural dummy. Racoon or power pole? Back when Inja was part of the 'empire' policy for military drivers was if you hit someone, back up to insure fatality. Cheaper to pay off the family than to support cripple for life. AI ship masters will have similar algorithms weighing cost of stopping , deviation off course or avoid small sailboat without AIS, obviously a vessel of not much value (NMV) Actually we won't notice much change.


----------



## MikeOReilly (Apr 12, 2010)

Agreed Len, I don’t think the issues around life & death algorithm programming will be much of an issue. We already live in a world increasingly influenced and controlled by unseen AI algorithms. And with regard to self-driving vehicles, it’s already something that is being well digested. The public will have no more of a problem with this than they do with the increasing loss of privacy, and the ascendancy of the surveillance state. 

Technological barriers will not hold back this shift. It won’t be long before driverless vehicles will be able to navigate the treacherous roads of Newfoundland far better than us mere humans ; and this without any costly upgrades to the roads (not that they spend ANY money on the roads here — holy crow are they crap!).

I really think the major challenge AI is accelerating is the social realities around how we adjust to a jobless economy. Employment and most business activities are not just ways to do get work done. They are the major way wealth is distributed in our economies. Robots and AI will soon be able to do just about everything better and cheaper than humans, and that includes what we typically think of as specialized white collar workers. 

Along with driving becoming illegal in my lifetime (40 years or less … unless I sink at sea), will be the demise of professions like medicine and law. AI systems are already demonstrating superior capabilities in these areas.


----------



## hpeer (May 14, 2005)

Introducing intelligence to law would be an interesting experiment.


----------



## Minnewaska (Feb 21, 2010)

Think about why people fear airline accidents much more than auto accidents. Airlines are safer and, by and large, auto accidents are more negligent or irresponsible. Peoples fear that which they can't contemplate controlling.


----------



## ianjoub (Aug 3, 2014)

Minnewaska said:


> Think about why people fear airline accidents much more than auto accidents. Airlines are safer and, by and large, auto accidents are more negligent or irresponsible. Peoples fear that which they can't contemplate controlling.


I do not agree. People fear airline accidents because the outcome is (most often) death. One can be in an auto accident with no, minor, or major injuries, It is not virtually guaranteed death.


----------



## RegisteredUser (Aug 16, 2010)

Minnewaska said:


> Think about why people fear airline accidents much more than auto accidents. Airlines are safer and, by and large, auto accidents are more negligent or irresponsible. Peoples fear that which they can't contemplate controlling.


For many the fear/concern comes from loss of control...you give it to others.
I am not a good passenger...


----------



## Minnewaska (Feb 21, 2010)

ianjoub said:


> I do not agree. People fear airline accidents because the outcome is (most often) death. One can be in an auto accident with no, minor, or major injuries, It is not virtually guaranteed death.


You've perfectly made my point. Most airline accidents do not result in death, but most fear them like that was the case. Landing gear collapses or failures almost never hurt anyone let alone kill them, engine failures, smoke in the cabin, even the most recent fan blade departure killed one passenger, not the entire plane. You are far more likely to die in an auto accident.


----------



## SeaStar58 (Feb 14, 2018)

As long as the GPS land and satellite systems are working and putting out good signal it should all be do.... Never mind GPS funding is getting short and there are already too many dead areas to make it 100% viable to have full and redundant coverage. If any more wrenches and bolts get lost in orbit we may have a more rapid decline in satellites than planned for too.

Bad map data is also a concern and though not highly publicized there have already been a number of high death toll incidents where jets flying on autopilot using digital maps crashed into mountains that were not located correctly on the aviation charts. A few involved jumbo jets that were fully loaded with passengers. Thankfully those digital charts were not created or QA'd by my group of analysts.

Usually in an automobile accident where the vehicle is traveling at the posted speed limit even a fatal accident will most times allow closure due to an open casket funeral being possible. When we have had to deal with airline crashes with fatalities it can sometimes be a real chore to match up which scraps found at the site belong to which body and be able to identify which passenger that collection of material represents. To go the route of DNA testing to figure out if all the parts put in one bin/bag actually belong to the same individual can be cost prohibitive to. The thought of mutilation beyond recognition and being buried in a coffin with a collection or parts from several other people doesn't set well with many.

In cars they still have not perfected ABS and Traction Control anyways so its a bit ambitious to add self driving to the mix. Much as we would like to believe otherwise ABS and Traction Control get confused, fault and go into limp mode all the time however its usually not catastrophic when that happens and many may not even notice the event until the brake pads wear out prematurely, the brake rotors warp from overheating or the ABS/ATC warning light comes on and does not turn itself off and then people get frustrated and put a strip of black tape over the light.

Cyber terrorism and such also becomes a worry once these control systems become common place. 

Now we even have thieves driving around with Keyless Remote Amplifiers/Repeaters methodically cruising around in neighborhoods seeing how many keyless remote signals they can pickup and repeat to activate the cars in the driveways which makes it much easier to steal the cars since they have already received the code to allow the doors to open and the engine started.


----------



## outbound (Dec 3, 2012)

GIGO still applies. The main issue in diagnosis is getting an accurate history without embellishments.or being able to reject the irrelevancies told to you. 
Tort and criminal law requires selling a construct of distortions of reality as the true and the whole truth to another human(s). 
Both fields are being dramatically changed but humans will remain involved for the foreseeable future. Already in medicine increasing stratification has occurred. “Providers” are nurse practitioners or PAs with support by some form of AI or at least “uptodate”. 
In order to solve a problem you must know there is a problem. In order to have a truly new idea you must think outside the existing paradigm. Here AI will lag behind humans for sometime.


----------



## Capt Len (Oct 9, 2011)

Deteriorating infrastructure , rising swamp and coastal flooding will make it difficult for any AI unit to any meaningful navigation even if GPS data is accurate. If and by the time enough money is spent on plan AI ,the most useful mode of land transportation will be wheelbarrows and the problem of avoiding marauding bands needing wheelbarrows will be more meaningful. For the chosen few ,AI aircraft and ships may have a better chance of success, being able to avoid the huddled masses.


----------



## Minnewaska (Feb 21, 2010)

I do see a near term future, where AI monitors and prevents accidents, rather than controls every decision. We have rudimentary forms of automation (not quite AI) that do that now. 

Someone mentioned GPS. As cyber terrorists have hacked into everything from the military to the power grid to banks and hospitals, how could we not see them hacking into the GPS systems. Imagine the mayhem that would occur, with our current adoption. Single drivers can be corrupted by mental disease. Imagine if every car on the road were corrupted.


----------



## SanderO (Jul 12, 2007)

I foresee traffic on interstates completely controlled by AI as a first step... The roads can be marked with easily enough..., though a bid costly to work with GPS. Local roads and city streets are a bit off... way to chaotic it seems.


----------



## Aswayze (Apr 5, 2015)

I for one welcome our new robotic overlords... 

In industry we have been using autonomous fork lifts for many years now with glowing success. We were quite skeptical at first but in time grew to appreciate how much safer and more reliable the robotic forklifts were. Something about driving forklifts seems to turn normal humans into maniacs where as the robots are not so inclined to do things like go out for a 10 minute smoke break then come back in and drive straight into a building support pillar while hauling butt around trying to catch back up.


----------



## hpeer (May 14, 2005)

Accidents

1 Require REAL driver tests
2 Accept that not all of us should breed. It’s a selection process.


----------



## Sal Paradise (Sep 14, 2012)

hpeer said:


> Accidents
> 
> 1 Require REAL driver tests
> 2 Accept that not all of us should breed. It's a selection process.


Unfortunately, its a reverse selection process.

This never gets old


----------



## john61ct (Jan 23, 2017)

AIs should be selecting who's allowed to breed.

Completely separate from who's allowed to raise the spawn, should be the highest paid profession, perhaps combined with teaching.


----------



## Minnewaska (Feb 21, 2010)

I know a fella in his late 70s, right now, who can’t finish a sentence, due to a series of very small strokes. He’s still driving. It’s is a problem worth solving.


----------



## hpeer (May 14, 2005)

john61ct said:


> AIs should be selecting who's allowed to breed.
> 
> Completely separate from who's allowed to raise the spawn, should be the highest paid profession, perhaps combined with teaching.


Suppose they decide we shouldn't? :cut_out_animated_em


----------



## hpeer (May 14, 2005)

Minnewaska said:


> I know a fella in his late 70s, right now, who can't finish a sentence, due to a series of very small strokes. He's still driving. It's is a problem worth solving.


I can top that l, I knew an older couple he had macular degeneration she had Alzheimer's. He would drive and she would tell him where to turn. True story.

Of course there are many various solutions. One could be to provide those folks with drivers, that helps the old folks, gives someone now out of a job meaningful employment, and creates bonds throughout the community.

Or a driverless car so the guy gets to a store and can't ooen the door and just sits inside and cries.


----------



## MikeOReilly (Apr 12, 2010)

Sal Paradise said:


> Unfortunately, its a reverse selection process.
> 
> This never gets old ...


It's a cute video Sal. But of course, we've tried eugenics in the past. That didn't end well for civilization :eek.

The approaching AI singularity should give us all pause. We like to think we humans are more intelligent, more creative, more adaptable, more &#8230; whatever, than any machine can possibly be. The trajectory of AI and robotic development suggests this is simply wishful thinking.


----------



## outbound (Dec 3, 2012)

Back in the ‘80s on the last page of scientific American a lady epidemiologist published an article noting the absence of the biologic quotient being operative due to advances in medicine and increased social supports. She further noted the inverse relationship between net worth as well as IQ and number of offspring. She was severely castigated with a serious adverse effect on her subsequent employment and received grants.
Charges of eugenics were leveled. Denial of child bearing as a career due to aid to women and children or absence of high morbidity and mortality in the face of substance abuse or morbid obesity during fecund years due to financially supported medical care due to political bias was operative.
We now see the Kadasian society. The absence of critical thinking in the majority of the voting public. The Idiotocracy is upon us now. You can’t reason with them and you can’t fix stupid. Even in the absence of genetic engineering everywhere in the first world smart people mate with smart people and have good prenatal care free of the high stress of maternal poverty. The children have an educational enriched upbringing. So the gap between rich and poor increases with concomitant divergence in intelligence. You still need to be quite intelligent to survive if poor as evident in the third world but less so in the first.
Our hope lies in the third world. Here Darwinian dynamics are still operative. There’s a difference between letters after a name and intelligence. 
Given the logical outcome of current parties,be it either conservative or progressive programs, is there any hope for the first world? Yes, return to the original precepts of our founding fathers not the current distortions. Get rid of the current two parties. History shows us prior parties in the US have failed and were disbanded. This isn’t pie in the sky. At present best hope of this is libertarianism for the right leaning and trade unionism for the left.


----------



## Capt Len (Oct 9, 2011)

If vehicles were drones remotely operated by incarcerated felons ,vetted for driving skills and dependability , Miss Daisy could get to the spa OK. Assault by Uber drivers would be nil. Brownie points for operators accounted in the cloud to accumulate perks , an easy app.


----------



## jephotog (Feb 25, 2002)

hpeer said:


> I can top that l, I knew an older couple he had macular degeneration she had Alzheimer's. He would drive and she would tell him where to turn. True story.


My Grandpa drove into his 90s. But as someone in the family said, no he just steers, your Grandma is driving. I come from a long line of backseat drivers. One day after dropping her off to get her hair "blued" he drove home but did not show up to pick her up. He was found in a strangers driveway by the police hours later. That was the end of his driving career.


----------



## Capt Len (Oct 9, 2011)

Notice how mongrel dogs seem to be healthier and smarter than the bred breeds. Maybe humanity could go back to the wild, A cross between Hunger Games and the Olympics where the winners get to offer their genetics for propagation and the sterile masses cheer. This could require some social changes but may be better than the alternative.


----------



## Capt Len (Oct 9, 2011)

Knew an older cruising couple. He was nearly blind beyond the bow.His mate would look around ,relate what's out there and off they went to circumnavigate again.


----------



## MikeOReilly (Apr 12, 2010)

Here's what appears to be a respectable site ranking nations by IQ.

https://www.worlddata.info/iq-by-country.php

The only real pattern I see here is IQ being roughly related to per-cap income. Genes definitely matter, but if you want to improve IQ of a community, the best way is to improve their health and well being. In that light, people in so-called first world countries are generally more better positioned to have and maintain higher IQ levels.

So, if we care about the IQ effects of the _Clevons_ within our developed countries, we should find a better way to distribute the abundant wealth more evenly.


----------



## Scotty C-M (Aug 14, 2013)

outbound said:


> Even in the absence of genetic engineering everywhere in the first world smart people mate with smart people and have good prenatal care free of the high stress of maternal poverty. The children have an educational enriched upbringing. So the gap between rich and poor increases with concomitant divergence in intelligence.


You just said that rich people are smarter than poor people. Care to cite any (peer reviewed) studies that substantiate that? By the way, that isn't consistant with my experience.


----------



## jephotog (Feb 25, 2002)

MikeOReilly said:


> Here's what appears to be a respectable site ranking nations by IQ.
> 
> https://www.worlddata.info/iq-by-country.php


I knew it, it's not just a stereotype, Asians are smarter. This survey is a few years old. I wonder how the US's IQ score fared the last two years?


----------



## john61ct (Jan 23, 2017)

hpeer said:


> Suppose they decide we shouldn't? :cut_out_animated_em


Mandatory sterilisation.

I imagine exceptions will be made for the tiny.00001% elite owning (and hopefully ultimately keeping a leash on) the AIs


----------



## ianjoub (Aug 3, 2014)

MikeOReilly said:


> So, if we care about the IQ effects of the _Clevons_ within our developed countries, we should find a better way to distribute the abundant wealth more evenly.


Why don't you start by redistributing your own wealth. When you have given away all you have, come see me. I will then discuss some redistribution of my wealth. Put your money where your mouth is.


----------



## ianjoub (Aug 3, 2014)

Scotty C-M said:


> You just said that rich people are smarter than poor people. Care to cite any (peer reviewed) studies that substantiate that? By the way, that isn't *consistant *with my experience.


As noted in the post following yours, Asians have a higher IQ statistically. Blacks have the lowest IQ. Black Africans are some of the poorest people in the world. These are facts. Are they based on flawed tests? I don't know.

Consistent ...


----------



## MikeOReilly (Apr 12, 2010)

ianjoub said:


> Why don't you start by redistributing your own wealth. When you have given away all you have, come see me. I will then discuss some redistribution of my wealth. Put your money where your mouth is.




...And this is why your _Clevon_ population is growing so rapidly in your country.


----------



## ianjoub (Aug 3, 2014)

MikeOReilly said:


> ...And this is why your _Clevon_ population is growing so rapidly in your country.


It is growing as rapidly as it is because of ill founded wealth redistribution schemes.


----------



## MikeOReilly (Apr 12, 2010)

ianjoub said:


> It is growing as rapidly as it is because of ill founded wealth redistribution schemes.


All the experience from around the world, as well as economic and social science research, says you are incorrect. We all have blinders on based on our own belief systems, but there is still such a thing as facts.


----------



## outbound (Dec 3, 2012)

I didn’t say rich are smarter than poor. In fact I said it takes quite a lot of smarts to survive if poor. Try getting by and being safe in the absence of adequate funds. What I did say is there’s a loss of the relationship between survival of the offspring of the less smart to breeding age in those of very low income as compared to those with resources. In the past if you were unable to supple adequate food, shelter and hygiene (clean water and absence of an infectious environment) your offspring were less likely to survive to an age as to reproduce. So those who had figured out how to supply the necessities of life could and did have more children grow up and reproduce. This is simple fact. For quite some time there is no downward pressure related to the ability of the parents to supply these necessities.


----------



## Scotty C-M (Aug 14, 2013)

Quote from Ianjab: "As noted in the post following yours, Asians have a higher IQ statistically. Blacks have the lowest IQ. Black Africans are some of the poorest people in the world. These are facts. Are they based on flawed tests? I don't know."

There are serious questions about the reliability of those IQ tests. That is one reason why they are no longer used in college admissions, and other applications. Here is a link that will lead you into a more complete overview of the topic. 
What Does IQ Really Measure? | Science | AAAS
It really is a large area of research. Let's just say that no one race is more intellegent than another. The research just dosen't support that theory. Please note that these are peer-reviewed research papers submitted to recognized journals. If you are interested in this topic, I might suggest that you look up "Multiple Intellegences" as an area to explore. The thought is that people's intellegence is a complicated interplay of different capacities. It is a more complicated view of intelligence, but probably more accurate.

:2 boat:


----------



## titustiger27 (Jan 17, 2013)

MikeOReilly said:


> Here's what appears to be a respectable site ranking nations by IQ.
> 
> https://www.worlddata.info/iq-by-country.php
> 
> ...


I am not sure why people don't just assume that Americans are dumber, than to think others are smarter.

Some of those higher i.q. countries have a relaxed policy about abortion (and perhaps murder of those with low i.q.s)

I wonder about studies like that....

I have seen some studies where China is this or that, but then you find out they never test certain groups so their numbers look better

the site appears to be run by a German, and they never generalize about the intelligence of a race or nationality


----------



## Donna_F (Nov 7, 2005)

Okee dokee. We’re treading on thin ice here. Let’s stop from disparaging any group and (lawd) get back to discussing Mark’s Fembot. At least that was marginally sailing related, which most of this thread is not and is close to being thrown over the wall into that other place. 

To sum up: Quit with the fuzzy IQ stuff (and quoting it).


----------



## outbound (Dec 3, 2012)

There is no scientific justification for the concept of race as commonly used. Given this is an artificial idea the prior statement about race and intelligence is nonsensical.
There is much evidence that poor diet, high stress, intercurrent illness, and other environmental factors during gestation and early development do adversely effect the fetus and child. These preventable factors should be the avenue of focus. Correlation does NOT prove causation. There but for the grace of god go I.
Sailing requires both brain and brawn. AI proports to take both out. Look at a screen and it tells you optimal sail set and course for best vmg. Soon it will do it without you doing anything. 
Fly fishing can mean making a fly from feathers,and/or animal hair and glue. Then tying it to a string and playing it. It is both very primitive going back thousands of years and sophisticated. Sailing can mean taking a stick and tying a hide or cloth to it controlled by a string. Again very primitive with thousands of years of history but sophisticated. Skiing, golf, rock climbing, camping all follow the same line. To date that primitive organic feeling one gets from those activities remains. My fear is with self docking boats, self sailing boats, extremely accurate routing that visceral joy will be lost. I’ve had opportunity to sail very large boats. Some extraordinarily sophisticated. It was less fun than messing about on a dinghy. String and a sail with tiller in one hand and sheet in the other. I look forward to further AI development but also dread it.


----------



## hellosailor (Apr 11, 2006)

IQ? Last I heard, psychologists recognized 22 different types of "IQ" including the usual brain points, social iq, phsyiological/kinesthetic iq....If you can close your eyes and touch both of your earlobes at exactly the same moment with both of your pinky tips, congratulations, you have great kinesthetic iq. The ability to KNOW where each body part is. Also related to whether you can do tumblesaults (knowing your 3d orientation) or get seasick.

So, anyone who thinks IQ is one number from a simple paper test, just ranked themself.

Capta-
What everyone seems to have ignored with the Uber that ran down a drunk druggie at night in Arizona, is that for reasons which no one will state, Uber DISABLED THE AUTOMATIC BRAKES on that car. The system was capable of braking and stopping before it hit anyone, but that function had been intentionally disabled for unstated reasons.
No doubt unstated because that will be a major legal issue.

I look forward to autonomous cars, they really can't be worse than half the inept, fatigued, overexcited, blind, drugged, or simply lame unlicensed drivers on the road. In the US the average is apparently 1:10 drivers are not licensed in the better states. (Either they never were licensed, or had it revoked and keep driving.) In some states such as Florida, that number is 1 in 4 drivers unlicensed. Which of course also means uninsured.

With autonomous cars, heck, even with Tesla's OTA's today, it would be simple for a car to be shut down if the insurance expired on it. "No Tickee No Laundry!"

Speaking of which, there are also at least two incidents on record of Tesla's (one on autopilot, one not) "suddenly veering" off to hit the roadside barrier. One famously catching fire, the other simply being totaled. Apparently in 40? 100? million? lines of code, there's one that says "Randomly lock the steering hard over". 

But hey, I've seen human drivers do that too.


----------



## Scotty C-M (Aug 14, 2013)

So, back to the subject....

A lot of us have "autonomous" vessels. On my boat, with the RayMarine CTalk, I can have the autopilot take commands from the chart plotter to follow a course that I have imputted into my navagation system. When I took my first trip, from San Francisco to Santa Cruz, on the boat I was really proud to set it up. My two boys (they are in their 30's, but will always be my "boys") and I were heading out the Golden Gate passing under the bridge. Just past the towers, the boat veers 180 degrees. Just like that. Quick as Bob's your uncle. Now we're heading right toward the bulwark around the bridge tower. Not Cool. Luckily, I turned the nav system to stand-by. We sorted things out and got back on course. A few hours later it happened again. OK. Turned off that function, and just followed the course, making corrections and rounding waypoints manually. Since that time I've read that that is a fairly common occurrence. Now I just deal with it by always following the course manually.

I imagine I could sort this out, but it seems easier and perhaps safer to have the helms person be in charge of keeping us on course. I guess I tried the future and came ... (wait for it)... Back From the Future!!

:2 boat:


----------



## jephotog (Feb 25, 2002)

ianjoub said:


> As noted in the post following yours, Asians have a higher IQ


Your credibility is on thin ice when you use something I posted as fact to prove your argument.


----------



## SeaStar58 (Feb 14, 2018)

MikeOReilly said:


> Here's what appears to be a respectable site ranking nations by IQ.
> 
> https://www.worlddata.info/iq-by-country.php
> 
> ...


I don't put that much stock in IQ as it does not guarantee Common Sense which to me is much more valuable.


----------



## john61ct (Jan 23, 2017)

I believe a very explicit warning was posted to stop quoting those lines of discussion.

The whole idea is repugnant.


----------



## jephotog (Feb 25, 2002)

I think a lot of people are confusing machinery, intelligent machinery and AI. People are referring to their boats autopilot as AI. Here is a hint if it was invented over 100 years ago it is not AI, Autopilots for planes were invented in 1912. While it may seem miraculous it simply takes a compass heading input and tells the boat to turn left or right. It is very handy but simply an sophisticated machine. Even when paired with a GPS and follows the route you programmed it is nothing more than an sophisticated machine following it's instructions. Blenders, toasters and washing machines are not even intelligent machines, they simply do the job they were programmed to do.

Artificial Intelligence is more than an sophisticated machine. AI contains a computer that can make decisions based on its programming. These are not preprogrammed scenarios, like both stay right when head on. Someone stated how does an AI car make the decision to swerve to avoid the child in the road and risk the lives of those onboard. There is no right answer or way to program the right decision, the AI needs to make decisions based on parameters and settings.

I don't think a boat that could sail itself on a preprogrammed course would be considered AI if it is following a set of parameters. It would take a sophisticated boat and advance programing but the intelligence would be in that of the person or persons designing and programming the boat.

An example of AI for boats might be an integrated boat that can be given a destination and without preprogrammed routing, look at charts, tides and weather and figure out departure time and route to get there best using route finding, weather interpretation and tidal charts like a good sailor would. The AI boat should be able to do this in different parts of the world based on it's intelligent programing. Sailing the route for you would be a bonus.

To get an idea of what AI is nowadays and what it can do. Check out these two Ted Talks involving drones.

https://www.ted.com/talks/raffaello_d_andrea_the_astounding_athletic_power_of_quadcopters#t-659688

https://www.ted.com/talks/vijay_kumar_robots_that_fly_and_cooperate#t-619789


----------



## SeaStar58 (Feb 14, 2018)

john61ct said:


> I believe a very explicit warning was posted to stop quoting those lines of discussion.
> 
> The whole idea is repugnant.


Stopped reading after the first few posts down that rabbit hole as it isn't anything to put stock in so I missed that warning.

Anyways Artificial Intelligence created by man isn't going to be perfect by a long shot. Even AI used in factory robotics has been fraught with problems and for some time now they have not been able to really figure out why some AI controlled units basically commit the equivalent of suicide. Even before the security robot jumped in the fountain in DC short circuiting itself assembly line robots have been doing things like shooting fasteners into their own control boxes, filling them with glue/paint/caulking, drilling or arc welding themselves to death.


----------



## outbound (Dec 3, 2012)

Some APs are self learning now. And are integrated with the various monitors to produce the best vmg to a given set of coordinates. Agree it’s very basic AI. There’s no technical issue with further integration with IR monitors, stress monitors, sonar and radar as to produce collision and grounding avoidance, steer and trim the sheets. Rather the limitation isn’t technical but rather economic. Expect once autonomous ships gets going it will trickle down to us if it finds a market. J a fully autonomous sailboat by your definition is fully within our technical capabilities now.


----------



## Minnewaska (Feb 21, 2010)

I a sport where so many shun a bow thruster and embrace cruising on $500 per month, I don't seen many dropping the coin for an AI captain in our lifetime.


----------



## MikeOReilly (Apr 12, 2010)

There is no technical limitation to the development AI-driven boats of all sorts; big commercial or small recreational. But there's little money in the latter, and not much of a safety argument to be made. So I expect we'll all be sailing AI-free for some time now. 

Road vehicles have both the money side and the safety argument. That's why I say we'll see a day when most driving by humans will be illegal.


----------



## jephotog (Feb 25, 2002)

outbound said:


> Some APs are self learning now. And are integrated with the various monitors to produce the best vmg to a given set of coordinates. Agree it's very basic AI. There's no technical issue with further integration with IR monitors, stress monitors, sonar and radar as to produce collision and grounding avoidance, steer and trim the sheets. Rather the limitation isn't technical but rather economic. Expect once autonomous ships gets going it will trickle down to us if it finds a market. J a fully autonomous sailboat by your definition is fully within our technical capabilities now.


I agree that modern autopilots are likely capable of AI now, but are any of the models seen by a sailboat owner equipped with this yet or is just the large ships so far?

Even if the rest of the world is forced to accept AI: It will probably start with aviation, then make it's way to automobiles, it will be a long time before it gets to the recreational marine industry. As of now the recreational marine industry is comparatively unregulated, unless you spend a night in the marina you don't even need to have your boat insured, nor have any qualifications to operate the vessel.

Unless you are a sovereign citizen, every car driver has to be licensed and the car must be registered and insured. In aviation it is the polar opposite of marine. Every aspect of is regulated, from the pilots certifications, medical evaluations, and recurrent testing. Every aircraft flown within the U.S. needs to be inspected annually at the minimum. Depending on where or how high it flies it needs a certain equipment list and certification to go into those airspaces. If the FAA decides to upgrade the equipment needed for certain operations, your plane is either grounded or limited in it's operations until this equipment is installed. From my experience these upgrades can range from $20k to $300k and up for a private aircraft.

I think AI in sailing is a long way off, and then it will be only for the Uber-rich initially. I can't imagine a time where it would be mandated on recreational boats. Our past time is just not that regulated, because we pose very little harm to the general public.


----------



## outbound (Dec 3, 2012)

As said if it finds a market. Totally agree except for new Wallys or Baltics don’t expect to see it anytime soon.


----------



## Capt Len (Oct 9, 2011)

Recent studies starting in the Norwegian military indicate a worldwide lowering of IQ .No handle on cause ,,nurture, diet ,dependance on google ?? In any case this makes the bar lower for AI to ascend and find it's rightful place in the higherarcy of smart enough to survive.


----------



## MikeOReilly (Apr 12, 2010)

Capt Len said:


> Recent studies starting in the Norwegian military indicate a worldwide lowering of IQ .No handle on cause ,,nurture, diet ,dependance on google ?? In any case this makes the bar lower for AI to ascend and find it's rightful place in the higherarcy of smart enough to survive.


I'd want to examine that study pretty closely before accepting the findings, but on a more historical perspective, there is extensive anthropological and sociological research that indicates **** sapiens started seeing our brain sizes shrinking from the time of the agricultural revolution ~12,000 years ago.

(And note, Neanderthals, which are typically used as a means of insulting the intelligence of others, actually had larger brains that we do.)

Apparently the brains of our hunter-gatherer forefathers are larger (on average), than modern humans. The explanation I've read is that hunter-gatherers have to be far more skilled at a wider variety of tasks than those of us in agrarian-based civilizations. Mass civilization demands specialization, so we only have to be good at a few tasks to reap great genetic reward (i.e. the ability to pass on our genes).

The only real purpose any animal has is to pass on its genes to the next generation. **** sapiens evolved the big-brain - what we call intelligence - approach. But evolution doesn't care how well we can do calculus, it only operates to maximize gene propagation. In this light, perhaps we're evolving away from intelligent beings.

Would certainly explain Facebook, Twitter, and a lot of the discussions here on SN


----------



## capta (Jun 27, 2011)

outbound said:


> Sailing requires both brain and brawn. AI proports to take both out. Look at a screen and it tells you optimal sail set and course for best vmg. Soon it will do it without you doing anything.
> My fear is with self docking boats, self sailing boats, extremely accurate routing that visceral joy will be lost.


I can hardly imagine that the joy and satisfaction I felt when finally reaching Tahiti on my own boat, after so many years of dreaming of that moment, reading of Cook, Bligh and others who came before me, would have been at all as gratifying as it was, had a bunch of PC boards done the sailing for me.
I really do get a lot of satisfaction when someone states how nice it must be to have a bow thruster after a docking when there isn't one on the boat!


----------



## SanderO (Jul 12, 2007)

Sailing is a sport... it involves engagement of the mind and body and coordination with the boat and the sea state and winds. AI sailing is not sailing... any longer. No longer a sport... no longer a leisure activity... and no longer a challenge. Nothing to learn... just shell out the money for your AI sailboat and drink.


----------



## Capt Len (Oct 9, 2011)

Capta says 'I really do get a lot of satisfaction when someone states how nice it must be to have a bow thruster after a docking when there isn't one on the boat!''''. Know what you mean . I preened even more when complimented about the bow thruster ."Don't have one don't need one. Built the boat myself. Yup!


----------



## jephotog (Feb 25, 2002)

SanderO said:


> just shell out the money for your sailboat and drink.


Fixed it.

That leads to the question, who is the captain of an AI boat? The owner or the computer programmer at the factory. Who get's charged with the accident, the boat, the captain or the dog threatening to bite the captain if he touches anything?


----------



## capta (Jun 27, 2011)

jephotog said:


> That leads to the question, who is the captain of an AI boat? The owner or the computer programmer at the factory. Who get's charged with the accident, the boat, the captain or the dog threatening to bite the captain if he touches anything?


A very interesting question.
As it stands today, the captain is the responsible party, even if he is operating under the owner's orders. This was the case with the Titanic.
This is the major reason I would never sail with a bridge management team. The team can choose to override the captain, yet he still remains the responsible party.
Same holds true for a vessel with a harbor pilot aboard. The pilot has zero responsibility and should, at most, be considered an advisor. 
Those transiting the canals should keep this in mind. I've heard some horror stories of Panama Canal pilots putting yachts in harm's way, and the owners/captains allowing this.


----------



## Minnewaska (Feb 21, 2010)

Could be an argument that we won't be forced to use AI in our cars or boats, if there is no one to sue for the accident. 

Trial attorneys will never allow this gravy train to disappear. :rolleyes


----------



## Arcb (Aug 13, 2016)

I think we will know the answer to the liability question soon enough. Looks like the IMO is already looking into regulating autonomous ships.

I guess one way it could go is the corporate entity could become the responsible person, rather than the Captain model we are accustomed to.

Once the IMO regulates it, I think it will spread pretty fast the cost savings are immense. Captain, 3 Mates, 3 whhelsmen, all high paying jobs, plus the lost earning space due to accommodations.

I'm guessing pockets of trials like the one in Norway, then the blue water merchant fleets, then domestic merchant fleets with pleasure craft being last.

According to this, the IMO has been looking into regulating autonomous shipping since at least last year.

MSC 98th session


----------



## MikeOReilly (Apr 12, 2010)

Wouldn’t standard no-fault insurance cover this situation? Might need some tweaks, but I don’t think it would be hard from a legal standpoint. But I agree, there will be a huge push back by the part of the legal profession that milks accident claims for all they’re worth (and more).

Of course, soon AI lawyers will be taking over from expensive, and fallible, human lawyers. So I can hardly wait for an AI lawyer to sue an AI driver … Brave New World indeed :eek.


----------



## JimMcGee (Jun 23, 2005)

It should be possible to adapt existing technologies like forward looking sonar and various sensors and cameras to create a fully autonomous sailboat today - assuming a large enough wallet. Just key in your destination, untie the dock lines and off you go !

But just as with human sailors, it gets interesting when things break.


----------



## SeaStar58 (Feb 14, 2018)

There are SailDrones in use today to provide unmanned sailing vessels for research.
https://www.climate.gov/news-features/climate-tech/adaptable-and-driven-renewable-energy-saildrones-voyage-remote-waters

Then there are the Educational Passages Mini Sailboats that school children are launching to sail the seas (yes not that intelligent but gets the kids involved and learning about our planet):
Educational Passages


----------



## capta (Jun 27, 2011)

SeaStar58 said:


> There are SailDrones in use today to provide unmanned sailing vessels for research.
> https://www.climate.gov/news-features/climate-tech/adaptable-and-driven-renewable-energy-saildrones-voyage-remote-waters
> 
> Then there are the Educational Passages Mini Sailboats that school children are launching to sail the seas (yes not that intelligent but gets the kids involved and learning about our planet):
> Educational Passages


It's not bad enough that something in the neighborhood of 1500 containers are drifting around out there somewhere, now scientists and school children are littering the seas with more objects for us to hit! Aren't there laws about using the oceans as rubbish bins?? 
I guess when a sailboat sinks from a collision with one of those 'experiments' we'll hear the old adage about how it's OK to kill the few for the benefit of the many?


----------



## SeaStar58 (Feb 14, 2018)

capta said:


> It's not bad enough that something in the neighborhood of 1500 containers are drifting around out there somewhere, now scientists and school children are littering the seas with more objects for us to hit! Aren't there laws about using the oceans as rubbish bins??
> I guess when a sailboat sinks from a collision with one of those 'experiments' we'll hear the old adage about how it's OK to kill the few for the benefit of the many?


The children's projects are little more than Styrofoam shoe boxes so no worries there about them sinking you and the NOAA Saildrone's are set up to avoid other vessels while allowing NOAA to save more lives through better forecasting and tracking. You already have to avoid NOAA buoy arrays and other devices so having a Saildrone that's avoiding you and automatically returns for maintenance will be saving tax dollars and lives by not having to send out tenders and divers to maintain the buoys.


----------



## outbound (Dec 3, 2012)

I get get a good feeling about myself and my boat after completing a passage. Fully understand where you’re coming from.
Still it’s a different experience than dinghy sailing. Last night went to a cocktail party on a 100’ sailboat. Was invited by friend who was a prior captain of that vessel. Sails and sail handling requires no human labor beyond pushing a button. Watch standing done inside. There was a wheel but it collects dust. Piloting done on screens. You are totally out of the environment. 
His wife was first mate. The 2 of them (plus an engineeri) could and did cross oceans, pilot into harbors and dock her. 
There’s a tremendous amount of thought and effort that goes into sailing that vessel. She is drop dead gorgeous and comfortable. But it’s a different experience. 
Think with AI you have three choices. Will use cars as an example. It’s an appliance. Gets me from point A to B. User than has little or no emotional involvement. It’s a dangerous activity. It places contraints on me so I don’t get injured and enhances my performance.0 User continues to have emotional involvement. It’s a monitor until I screw up at which point it takes over entirely. Same level of involvement as now.


----------



## Sal Paradise (Sep 14, 2012)

Ahh but what is lost??? The feel of a wooden tiller as the water rushes by and the sails pull you and everything balancing on your hand, and your brain- what's that worth?


----------



## Capt Len (Oct 9, 2011)

Won't be long before elevators are voice controled and instead of havering to think about where we are going and push a button. Will save so much time to be productively doing more creative stuff.


----------



## jephotog (Feb 25, 2002)

Capt Len said:


> Won't be long before elevators are voice controled and instead of havering to think about where we are going and push a button. Will save so much time to be productively doing more creative stuff.


For the record I have a number of lights in my house are on voice command. This is not AI it's just some high tech stuff. Initially I was installing a cabinet that covered up one of two light switches in my kitchen and did not want to have to rewire to another wall. For 100 bucks I got the controller and light switch and have since added others because it is very cool or I am just that lazy. I also have Amazon Alexa throughout my house. I like hight tech stuff but none of my sailboats have ever had a GPS and except for my most recent boat none had autopilot.


----------



## JimMcGee (Jun 23, 2005)

There may be a few Sailnetters who could use this


----------



## JimMcGee (Jun 23, 2005)

Actually the NOAA Sail Drones are pretty damn cool.


----------



## jephotog (Feb 25, 2002)

MarkofSeaLife said:


> Autonomous freight planes will have neither pilots nor dogs.... They will be un pressurised.


Just went back to reread this thread and found this. Funny thing is freight pilot's nickname for themselves is Freightdogs.

I don't see planes becoming autonomous until perfection is reached. The law of tonnage does not apply to the air. Two goose can take down an airliner. If a autonomous sailboat gets in the way of a freighter, the freighter will need a paint touch up of the bulb at the bow. An errant freight plane could crash into a crowded city block. I can't remember who pointed out but the accepting of an AI error leading to the loss of human life would be less accepted than that of human error.

The general public would be shocked to realize how much of aviation is automated now but the pilot is still in charge.


----------



## SeaStar58 (Feb 14, 2018)

jephotog said:


> Just went back to reread this thread and found this. Funny thing is freight pilot's nickname for themselves is Freightdogs.
> 
> I don't see planes becoming autonomous until perfection is reached. The law of tonnage does not apply to the air. Two goose can take down an airliner. If a autonomous sailboat gets in the way of a freighter, the freighter will need a paint touch up of the bulb at the bow. An errant freight plane could crash into a crowded city block. I can't remember who pointed out but the accepting of an AI error leading to the loss of human life would be less accepted than that of human error.
> 
> The general public would be shocked to realize how much of aviation is automated now but the pilot is still in charge.


The pilots lost on autopilot safe route instrument flight usually don't have time to even realize something went wrong with the current cruising speed of cargo and passenger jets unless some alarm, indicator or warning goes off well in advance. The last one I reviewed was a 747 that pancaked into a mountainside in the Orient during a zero visibility situation and at the last tracked speed only the passengers in the last row of seats in the back may have had a moment to realize that something was happening. It was a glitch in positioning that caused that one and out of the X-hundred passengers and crew lost perhaps one or two lived long enough to think "Huh?". There was no sudden descent or other event to warn them as they blindly flew full speed into the side of a mountain.

As advanced as systems have become its still a Pilot saying "No-Go" most times that is saving the lives and not an automated system. Those pilots that have become too reliant on the automated systems are becoming problematic as they do not have the skills required to take over when automation/AI fails such as when the flight crew could not handle a landing in California a year ago when the automated approach and landing system blacked out and they clipped a seawall. Not a single pilot on that airliner had ever flown a plane without automated systems and didn't have enough experience to realize that they were coming in too low by looking out the window instead of at a computer screen. The Oriental Airline had to bring in older pilots to train them on how to fly when automation fails.


----------



## Minnewaska (Feb 21, 2010)

SeaS, I agree with your conclusion over how quickly AI is likely to mature to an acceptable level of perfection, which would be far beyond the level our flight systems reach today and further beyond the error rate accepted from humans. Still, they are better than you leave the reader to believe and so are the vast majority of pilots. CFIT is very, very, very uncommon. While I’ve had so many autopilot failures in my lifetime I can’t begin to recount them, they aren’t hard to identify. They rarely annunciate, rather just start doing something wrong. Complacency of the pilot is the error, as you note. Identifying situations like this is a standard task on all recurrent/checkrides. 

Again, I don’t disagree with your overall point, nor that things you’ve described have happened. I just didn’t want to leave the reader with quite as concerned a feeling about their next flight.


----------



## SeaStar58 (Feb 14, 2018)

Minnewaska said:


> SeaS, I agree with your conclusion over how quickly AI is likely to mature to an acceptable level of perfection, which would be far beyond the level our flight systems reach today and further beyond the error rate accepted from humans. Still, they are better than you leave the reader to believe and so are the vast majority of pilots. CFIT is very, very, very uncommon. While I've had so many autopilot failures in my lifetime I can't begin to recount them, they aren't hard to identify. They rarely annunciate, rather just start doing something wrong. Complacency of the pilot is the error, as you note. Identifying situations like this is a standard task on all recurrent/checkrides.
> 
> Again, I don't disagree with your overall point, nor that things you've described have happened. I just didn't want to leave the reader with quite as concerned a feeling about their next flight.


Yes with major US, British, Austrailian, etc, carriers its not that catastrophic. Most times its GPS error or Signal loss that causes it and yes while it happens a lot, most occurrences are noticeable however the failures do occur too often to have 100% confidence and take the fully trained pilot capable of taking over tasked with monitoring the system full time out of the equation.

One does well though to check out a carriers track record when they book a flight especially when its a fast growth airline that's recruiting new pilots where they don't have to solo in a single engine prop and have X00 hours flight experience there before they can go for commercial jet training. Other parts of the world do not have the same rigors in place for training pilots which the AsiaAir incidents have really brought to our attention especially since they were noted to have a 25 times greater death rate per passenger than the US making them the Poster Child. When an automation error occurs that most single engine pilots will just take in stride as a sidebar note safely arriving at their destination these computer assisted only pilots have a major crisis on their hands.

The UN sent out a special team to investigate this 4 years ago and found that it is indeed a serious issue in developing countries.
https://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/01/world/asia/airasia-flight-8501-indonesia-airline-safety.html


----------



## jephotog (Feb 25, 2002)

SeaStar58 said:


> The pilots lost on autopilot safe route instrument flight usually don't have time to even realize something went wrong with the current cruising speed of cargo and passenger jets unless some alarm, indicator or warning goes off well in advance. The last one I reviewed was a 747 that pancaked into a mountainside in the Orient during a zero visibility situation and at the last tracked speed only the passengers in the last row of seats in the back may have had a moment to realize that something was happening. It was a glitch in positioning that caused that one and out of the X-hundred passengers and crew lost perhaps one or two lived long enough to think "Huh?". There was no sudden descent or other event to warn them as they blindly flew full speed into the side of a mountain.
> 
> As advanced as systems have become its still a Pilot saying "No-Go" most times that is saving the lives and not an automated system. Those pilots that have become too reliant on the automated systems are becoming problematic as they do not have the skills required to take over when automation/AI fails such as when the flight crew could not handle a landing in California a year ago when the automated approach and landing system blacked out and they clipped a seawall. Not a single pilot on that airliner had ever flown a plane without automated systems and didn't have enough experience to realize that they were coming in too low by looking out the window instead of at a computer screen. The Oriental Airline had to bring in older pilots to train them on how to fly when automation fails.


What you describe in the first instance is called CFIT or controlled flight into terrain. It's when a perfectly good plane is flown into the ground or a mountain side. Your second description is likely Asiana Air into San Francisco. You are right about that being a Pilot being unable to hand fly a plane when the Instrument Landing System was disabled. Contributing though was likely it being a cultural issue in the cockpit. It's possible the other two pilots watched the PF Pilot Flying make the mistakes leading up to this crash. Because they did not want the Captain to "loose face", they chose not to mention anything before hitting the sea wall short of the runway. Here is a newscast about that flight.


----------



## jephotog (Feb 25, 2002)

SeaStar58 said:


> The UN sent out a special team to investigate this 4 years ago and found that it is indeed a serious issue in developing countries.
> https://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/01/world/asia/airasia-flight-8501-indonesia-airline-safety.html


I think if you look at the ferry safety record of these same countries, you will find a similar lack of standards, likely worse.


----------



## SeaStar58 (Feb 14, 2018)

Yes the CFIT incident first described occurred when the computer was flying the aircraft without a qualified pilot interceding and though it maintained altitude it did fly into terrain. The San Fransisco incident really brought this back to the front burner in aviation for a while highlighting the issues with the fast track training of pilots in certain Asian countries being a rather large part of the problem.

In both incidents automation failed leading to a crash. The thing is that with many of the crashes in Asia we never see reports of them because they involved local flights with no or very few foreign citizens on them.

A 25 times higher morbidity rate is a very significant number.


----------



## john61ct (Jan 23, 2017)

https://www.engadget.com/2018/06/18/volvo-builds-a-self-docking-yacht/


----------



## MarkofSeaLife (Nov 7, 2010)

john61ct said:


> https://www.engadget.com/2018/06/18/volvo-builds-a-self-docking-yacht/


Great! There is a sensor on the dock so it would be good for your own berth. Or if the marina has them. Installed


----------



## Arcb (Aug 13, 2016)

john61ct said:


> https://www.engadget.com/2018/06/18/volvo-builds-a-self-docking-yacht/


What I think is making this possible has as much to do with the dual pod drives as with the electronic dynamic positioning system.

The pod drives allow the thrust to be vectored through 360 degrees, 2 pod drives are what allows the boat to move like that. For the time being, unless they put two pod drives onto a sailboat, I dont think we will see the system on sailboats.

Interesting though, its a concept that has been around for a bit. I worked on a srvey ship that could be controlled like that with dual pod drives that was built in 1970, but its cool to see Volvo miniaturising and integrating big boat technology for pleasure craft use.


----------



## Capt Len (Oct 9, 2011)

So they Canadian Navy got a big harbour tug for Esquimalt .Drive is a fancy rotating disks in the bottom.,one at each end. Has adjustable pitch blades extending down in a cage,going round and considerable thrust applied 360 Pretty impressive but a bit of a failure in shallow water.as stones get scooped. Sidewinders are common on the coast. single 360 rotating z drive .Fun to drive boom boat .Usually 120 hp or so ,seat belt supplied .Considering the development of self parking programs for eutos ,it's nota stretch to apply to vessels so remote orders or partial AI operation is near.


----------

