3 ms·
I think people are mostly bad at value judgements, and AI is no exception. What they naively wished the future was like: Flying cars. What they actually got (
by jstummbillig 1y ago
I think people are mostly bad at value judgements, and AI is no exception.
What they naively wished the future was like: Flying cars.
What they actually got (and is way more useful but a lot less flashy): Cheap solar energy.
- aleph_minus_one 1y ago> What they naively wished the future was like: Flying cars. This future is already there: We have flying cars: they are called "helicopters" (see also https://xkcd.com/1623/ https://xkcd.com/1623/).
- AstralStorm 1y agoOh they're not even close in availability as cars, much harder to operate, much more expensive and tend to fall out of the sky. Thank you for providing an example that directly maps to usefulness of ANN in most research though.
- AngryData 1y agoHelicopters don't just fall out of the sky, atleast not any different than planes fall out of the sky, they can auto-rotate to the ground without engine power.
- agurk 1y agoYou are absolutely correct about autorotation and helicopters not falling out of the sky. There is one nuance that the rotor blades still need to be able to rotate for this, and a failed gearbox can prevent that. Anecdotally that feels like the most common cause when I read about another crash in the North Sea.
- vunderba 1y agoTrue but even lowering collective and letting autorotation take over you still hit the ground REALLY hard - enough to sustain injuries to your back and neck in some cases. Glide ratios in GA (like highwing cessnas) is much more forgiving assuming you can find a place to put down.