4 ms·

I think Boston Dynamics is more of a huge practical research project that won't have commercialization results for at least 10 years (random number I generated

by warent 9y ago

I think Boston Dynamics is more of a huge practical research project that won't have commercialization results for at least 10 years (random number I generated on intuition), whereas companies like Google are committed to justifying their efforts on quarter-by-quarter basis. If a company owns Boston Dynamics and has one bad quarter, you have to trim the fat or deal with the bloodbath of angry impatient investors EDIT: That being said, companies like Boston Dynamics are, in my opinion, Star Trek tier, and, as a tangent, is a perfect example of why we need to eventually live in a world that doesn't thrive on currency profit

opportune 9y ago
Boston Dynamics' technology may be Star Trek tier, but its main use in the near future is going to be to kill, or help kill, rebels in Yemen That's why I think Google dropped them. Google doesn't want to be seen as Saudi Arabia's accomplice in a present or future conflict
- foobarian 9y ago
  It doesn't need to be. Just sell the robots to both sides, and let the robots destroy each other.
  - opportune 9y ago
    Guess which side can afford robots and which one can't
    - forapurpose 9y ago
      Throughout history military power has been tied closely to wealth and population. Theorists of AI and robotic weapons talk about how that relationship could significantly weaken: You don't need a large population to build a robotic army, and while you need wealth, it may be that you just need better AI developers (who could be AIs themselves) more than you need more robots. Or maybe you just need to find the right combination of AI, hardware, and tactics first; win quickly and it's too late for the enemy to learn. Singapore with its high-tech foundation, for example, could become one of the most powerful nations in SE Asia, and maybe even beyond.
  - krapp 9y ago
    It does kind of need to be.. for the same reason we use drones against people and not just infrastructure.
slantaclaus 9y ago
Google is kind of like Skynet, if they had killer robots, the Terminator comparison would be too robust to ignore. Kind of a joke, kind of not a joke.

by warent 9y ago

opportune 9y ago

Boston Dynamics' technology may be Star Trek tier, but its main use in the near future is going to be to kill, or help kill, rebels in Yemen That's why I think Google dropped them. Google doesn't want to be seen as Saudi Arabia's accomplice in a present or future conflict

foobarian 9y ago
It doesn't need to be. Just sell the robots to both sides, and let the robots destroy each other.
- opportune 9y ago
  Guess which side can afford robots and which one can't
  - forapurpose 9y ago
    Throughout history military power has been tied closely to wealth and population. Theorists of AI and robotic weapons talk about how that relationship could significantly weaken: You don't need a large population to build a robotic army, and while you need wealth, it may be that you just need better AI developers (who could be AIs themselves) more than you need more robots. Or maybe you just need to find the right combination of AI, hardware, and tactics first; win quickly and it's too late for the enemy to learn. Singapore with its high-tech foundation, for example, could become one of the most powerful nations in SE Asia, and maybe even beyond.
- krapp 9y ago
  It does kind of need to be.. for the same reason we use drones against people and not just infrastructure.

slantaclaus 9y ago

Google is kind of like Skynet, if they had killer robots, the Terminator comparison would be too robust to ignore. Kind of a joke, kind of not a joke.