2 ms·
Why would that be bad? A submarine salesman convincing you that his submarine "swims" doesn't change the set of missions a submarine might be suitable for. It
by LarryMullins 4y ago
Why would that be bad? A submarine salesman convincing you that his submarine "swims" doesn't change the set of missions a submarine might be suitable for. It makes no practical difference. There's no point where you get the submarine and it meets all the advertised specs, does everything you needed a submarine for, but you're unsatisfied with it anyway because you now realize that the word "swim" is reserved for living creatures.
And more to the point, nobody believes that "it thinks" is sufficient qualification for a job when hiring a human, so why would it be different when buying a machine? Whether or not the machine "thinks" doesn't address the question of whether or not the machine is capable of doing the jobs you want it to do. Anybody who neglects to evaluate the functional capability of the machine is simply a fool.
- wizzwizz4 4y ago> but you're unsatisfied with it anyway because you now realize that the word "swim" is reserved for living creatures. There are swimming robots.[0][1] Swimming is qualitatively different to what submarines do. The exception is helical flagella, not robots. [0]: https://robot.cfp.co.ir/en/robots/swimming https://robot.cfp.co.ir/en/robots/swimming [1]: https://www.robotswim.com/?lang=English https://www.robotswim.com/?lang=English
- LarryMullins 4y ago> The exception is helical flagella, not robots. Don't you think they're an exemption because they're alive? If seals had propellers we'd still say they swim. Squids use jet propulsion and we still say they swim; do jetskis also swim? Somehow not.