Re: [Vo]:Progress in humanoid robots

[Axil Axil]

AI beats human Go grandmaster... again (Update)

http://phys.org/news/2016-03-ai-human-grandmaster.html

AI has creativity and intuition now,

On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 3:34 PM, Jed Rothwell  wrote:
> There is a remarkable video in this article, showing the latest humanoid
> robot from Boston Dynamics. Clearly this machine is not humanoid in the
> emotional sense, because if it were, it might punch the operator in the
> nose. I felt sorry for the poor thing, which is like feeling sorry for a
> dishwasher.
>
> http://www.slate.com/blogs/future_tense/2016/02/26/atlas_the_new_robot_from_boston_dynamics_sets_a_new_standard_for_robot_capabilities.html
>
> - Jed
>

Re: [Vo]:Progress in humanoid robots

[H LV]

Great. Here is an American interviewing a Canadian about an upcoming
Basic income experiment in Ontario, Canada.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Okx60F3eHpo

Harry

On Sun, Mar 6, 2016 at 11:17 PM, Lennart Thornros  wrote:
> Harry,
> I liked the discussion.
> There was much to take from this debate.
> Just as important is to change the tax  system and the power distribution.
> Obviously a progressive tax system but a smooth progress. Take away all
> deductions and tax all type of income equally.
> Eliminate all double taxation.
> The definition of work needs to be looked upon with reality in mind.
> When the garbage workers go on strike it is an emergency after a week or
> two.
> When the bankers went on strike in Ireland everything went on as usual and
> after six months the bankers began work again.
> There is work and then there is work.
> Finland an Switzerland are considering seriously to implement the idea.
> I suppose the US should try at least to look into the issue. We certainly
> have a more complicated social system than most European countries.
> The debate showed that there are not without problem to implement something
> like basic income.
> Unfortunately there is a lot of people that think a step wise change would
> be good.
> It reminds me of the proposal when Sweden went from left to right side
> driving in -67; "why don't we start with the trucks?"
> We have a tendency to overthink things. In Switzerland they talk about 2,500
> CH franken (CHF) per adult and 800 CHF for children.
> I think that type of complication will open up for complications.
> Anyhow, the debate was good. I think we need something to make things more
> equal all over the world.
> I think the timing is ripe. Just like all changes it has resistance.
>
> Best Regards ,
> Lennart Thornros
>
>
> lenn...@thornros.com
> +1 916 436 1899
>
> Whatever you vividly imagine, ardently desire, sincerely believe and
> enthusiastically act upon, must inevitably come to pass. (PJM)
>
>
> On Sun, Mar 6, 2016 at 5:23 PM, H LV  wrote:
>>
>> http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p03kptyk
>> BBC audio
>> What if governments paid all their citizens a basic income? Whether
>> rich or poor, you would receive the same amount of money, and you
>> would keep it whether you went out to work and received a salary or
>> not. It is an idea that has been around for centuries, but one that
>> has been gaining traction in recent times as welfare payments become
>> ever more complex and expensive to administer. Proponents also argue
>> that it would remove the 'poverty trap' where people are dissuaded
>> from seeking work because they would lose their benefits if they did
>> so. There is also the issue of machines taking over many of the jobs
>> that we all do to earn a living - not just basic manual tasks, but
>> increasingly 'intelligent' work that will in the future be carried out
>> by robots. Join Owen Bennett Jones and his panel of expert guests as
>> they discuss the future of work and how we pay for it. Should we give
>> free money to everyone and let robots take the strain?
>>
>

Re: [Vo]:Progress in humanoid robots

[Alain Sepeda]

basic income is interesting in the "liberal" (French meaning, ie economic
liberal, "laisser-faire") way.

usual charity inspired system put tax on good outcome, par tof which are
caused by good behaviors (most which only people themselves have control on
and can see) . they put tax on good behaviors!

people seldom refuse to get a work to keep help, but they often suffer from
lack of good consequence from their good(productive) behaviors.

basic income simply make that you don't lose more money by earning more
money.
It push people to work, and to get out of trouble as if nobody was helping
them.

it is hard to accept that people with unfair trouble should not be helped
more than people without unfair trouble, but if you accept that people with
trouble have a little capacity to avoid part of it, to prevent it from the
origin, ...
people will brush their teeth more, care of their eyes, will avoid sick
colleagues and aven sens them at home to avoid epidemy, they will save the
cost of glasses and repair them...
while they will be free to buy expensive teeth, and sexy glasses if it is
their desire, at the expense of their restaurant budget. not at the expense
of public money.

what I find shocking in the morality driven social system it is that it
prevent people to be different, to have a different morality tha hurts
nobody on the material side.

I know people who were living in a trailer (forbidden in france, to avoid
poverty symptom), eating potatoes and pasta, working like crazy, just to
pay skydiving.

Some people would like to tax more people having sailboat, because it is
perceived as luxury, but what if it is your passion and you accept to have
a poor life beside ?

basic income will just say :
- I (your neighbour) won't let you starve, dies of diseases or would
- working in any way is always good
- saving cost is always good
- I (your neighbour) won't put my nose in your decisions, to work, to save,
to waste, and to have vacations


one expected advantage, don't laugh, is that people will work more, consume
less insurances and costs, because they see a direct interest and they are
not taxed on their good behaviors.

i see that revolution to be accompanied by few changes :

- all expense that are done to contribute to any activity, should be tax
exempted like for a company. tax should only be paid on the pleasure you
get. (avoid double taxing...). It put nanny when you work in that domain
(if your wife is more productive than a nanny, but less than a taxed nanny,
it is stupid for her to be self-nanny just for money), or DIY on a
productive good (if you take longer to repair your truck than a mechanic,
and can produce more than him meanwhile, tax should not make it profitable).

- like in US, if you did really stupid economic decision, or get very
unlucky, you should be allowed to file a chapter 11, even if managed by
"senior executive" if judge feel you really are incompetent... you have the
right to "reset your life", and
investors should know it if they invest in you. bankruptcy law are
essential in a "liberal" society.


anyway like for hot fusion, there are too many mouse in the cheese that
profit from verifying expenses, planning, selling political programs for
and against,



2016-03-07 5:17 GMT+01:00 Lennart Thornros :

> Harry,
> I liked the discussion.
> There was much to take from this debate.
> Just as important is to change the tax  system and the power distribution.
> Obviously a progressive tax system but a smooth progress. Take away all
> deductions and tax all type of income equally.
> Eliminate all double taxation.
> The definition of work needs to be looked upon with reality in mind.
> When the garbage workers go on strike it is an emergency after a week or
> two.
> When the bankers went on strike in Ireland everything went on as usual and
> after six months the bankers began work again.
> There is work and then there is work.
> Finland an Switzerland are considering seriously to implement the idea.
> I suppose the US should try at least to look into the issue. We certainly
> have a more complicated social system than most European countries.
> The debate showed that there are not without problem to implement
> something like basic income.
> Unfortunately there is a lot of people that think a step wise change would
> be good.
> It reminds me of the proposal when Sweden went from left to right side
> driving in -67; "why don't we start with the trucks?"
> We have a tendency to overthink things. In Switzerland they talk about
> 2,500 CH franken (CHF) per adult and 800 CHF for children.
> I think that type of complication will open up for complications.
> Anyhow, the debate was good. I think we need something to make things more
> equal all over the world.
> I think the timing is ripe. Just like all changes it has resistance.
>
> Best Regards ,
> Lennart Thornros
>
>
> lenn...@thornros.com
> +1 916 436 1899
>
> Whatever you vividly imagine, ardently desire, 

Re: [Vo]:Progress in humanoid robots

[Lennart Thornros]

Harry,
I liked the discussion.
There was much to take from this debate.
Just as important is to change the tax  system and the power distribution.
Obviously a progressive tax system but a smooth progress. Take away all
deductions and tax all type of income equally.
Eliminate all double taxation.
The definition of work needs to be looked upon with reality in mind.
When the garbage workers go on strike it is an emergency after a week or
two.
When the bankers went on strike in Ireland everything went on as usual and
after six months the bankers began work again.
There is work and then there is work.
Finland an Switzerland are considering seriously to implement the idea.
I suppose the US should try at least to look into the issue. We certainly
have a more complicated social system than most European countries.
The debate showed that there are not without problem to implement something
like basic income.
Unfortunately there is a lot of people that think a step wise change would
be good.
It reminds me of the proposal when Sweden went from left to right side
driving in -67; "why don't we start with the trucks?"
We have a tendency to overthink things. In Switzerland they talk about
2,500 CH franken (CHF) per adult and 800 CHF for children.
I think that type of complication will open up for complications.
Anyhow, the debate was good. I think we need something to make things more
equal all over the world.
I think the timing is ripe. Just like all changes it has resistance.

Best Regards ,
Lennart Thornros


lenn...@thornros.com
+1 916 436 1899

Whatever you vividly imagine, ardently desire, sincerely believe and
enthusiastically act upon, must inevitably come to pass. (PJM)


On Sun, Mar 6, 2016 at 5:23 PM, H LV  wrote:

> http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p03kptyk
> BBC audio
> What if governments paid all their citizens a basic income? Whether
> rich or poor, you would receive the same amount of money, and you
> would keep it whether you went out to work and received a salary or
> not. It is an idea that has been around for centuries, but one that
> has been gaining traction in recent times as welfare payments become
> ever more complex and expensive to administer. Proponents also argue
> that it would remove the 'poverty trap' where people are dissuaded
> from seeking work because they would lose their benefits if they did
> so. There is also the issue of machines taking over many of the jobs
> that we all do to earn a living - not just basic manual tasks, but
> increasingly 'intelligent' work that will in the future be carried out
> by robots. Join Owen Bennett Jones and his panel of expert guests as
> they discuss the future of work and how we pay for it. Should we give
> free money to everyone and let robots take the strain?
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Progress in humanoid robots

[H LV]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p03kptyk
BBC audio
What if governments paid all their citizens a basic income? Whether
rich or poor, you would receive the same amount of money, and you
would keep it whether you went out to work and received a salary or
not. It is an idea that has been around for centuries, but one that
has been gaining traction in recent times as welfare payments become
ever more complex and expensive to administer. Proponents also argue
that it would remove the 'poverty trap' where people are dissuaded
from seeking work because they would lose their benefits if they did
so. There is also the issue of machines taking over many of the jobs
that we all do to earn a living - not just basic manual tasks, but
increasingly 'intelligent' work that will in the future be carried out
by robots. Join Owen Bennett Jones and his panel of expert guests as
they discuss the future of work and how we pay for it. Should we give
free money to everyone and let robots take the strain?

Re: [Vo]:Progress in humanoid robots

[Jed Rothwell]

Published today:

A Plan in Case Robots Take the Jobs: Give Everyone a Paycheck - The New
York Times

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/03/technology/plan-to-fight-robot-invasion-at-work-give-everyone-a-paycheck.html

On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 3:34 PM, Jed Rothwell  wrote:
>
> There is a remarkable video in this article, showing the latest humanoid
robot from Boston Dynamics. Clearly this machine is not humanoid in the
emotional sense, because if it were, it might punch the operator in the
nose. I felt sorry for the poor thing, which is like feeling sorry for a
dishwasher.
>
>
http://www.slate.com/blogs/future_tense/2016/02/26/atlas_the_new_robot_from_boston_dynamics_sets_a_new_standard_for_robot_capabilities.html
>
> - Jed
>

Re: [Vo]:Progress in humanoid robots

[Lennart Thornros]

Jed,
This is the classical discussion about; is the glass half full or half
empty.
It really should be the only comment as it only is an issues about mindset
(attitude).
It is obvious to us with a half full attitude that one can always find
things and ways to widen the horizon.
Be it Space, peace, robot design / implementation or for that  matter get
LENR a reality.
Trade unions and many other organizations are revolting to changes with the
half empty attitude and that in itself creates most of the problems that
comes from progress.
Today we have established a government body, which is slow and built for
the 'empty' attitude.
I believe that with a 'full' attitude we will just be able to reach levels
we find hard to even imagine today.
Think back for a moment. I can remember my grand parents (in the 1950-is)
and there thinking. They were born in the 1870-is.
Most of their fears where wrong, most of their believes about the future
were off. The reason was they could not see how they could fit in.
One example; "I was sail flying at the time. My grandfather's opinion,
about that, was filled with so many 'empty' responses that this email would
go on for days before I could convey his attitude.
He worked in modern industry and had a leader job plus did political work
as representative for the county parliament, so it was not that he was
without insight in the modern life as it was in the 50-is".

Best Regards ,
Lennart Thornros


lenn...@thornros.com
+1 916 436 1899

Whatever you vividly imagine, ardently desire, sincerely believe and
enthusiastically act upon, must inevitably come to pass. (PJM)


On Sat, Mar 5, 2016 at 8:52 AM, Jed Rothwell  wrote:

> Patrick Ellul  wrote:
>
>
>> One more that links to some other research:
>> Automation won’t destroy jobs, but it will change them:
>> https://blog.csiro.au/automation-wont-destroy-jobs-but-it-will-change-them-2/
>>
>>
>
> I don't buy that, for the reasons given in this video. (This video is one
> of the best summaries I have seen, in any medium.)
>
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Pq-S557XQU
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Progress in humanoid robots

[Jed Rothwell]

Patrick Ellul  wrote:


> One more that links to some other research:
> Automation won’t destroy jobs, but it will change them:
> https://blog.csiro.au/automation-wont-destroy-jobs-but-it-will-change-them-2/
>
>

I don't buy that, for the reasons given in this video. (This video is one
of the best summaries I have seen, in any medium.)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Pq-S557XQU

Re: [Vo]:Progress in humanoid robots

[Patrick Ellul]

One more that links to some other research:
Automation won’t destroy jobs, but it will change them:
https://blog.csiro.au/automation-wont-destroy-jobs-but-it-will-change-them-2/


On Sat, Feb 27, 2016 at 3:35 PM, Axil Axil  wrote:

> Another story on the subject
>
> http://techxplore.com/news/2016-02-next-gen-atlas-door-woods.html
>
>
>
> On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 3:34 PM, Jed Rothwell 
> wrote:
>
>> There is a remarkable video in this article, showing the latest humanoid
>> robot from Boston Dynamics. Clearly this machine is not humanoid in the
>> emotional sense, because if it were, it might punch the operator in the
>> nose. I felt sorry for the poor thing, which is like feeling sorry for a
>> dishwasher.
>>
>>
>> http://www.slate.com/blogs/future_tense/2016/02/26/atlas_the_new_robot_from_boston_dynamics_sets_a_new_standard_for_robot_capabilities.html
>>
>> - Jed
>>
>>
>


-- 
Patrick

www.tRacePerfect.com
The daily puzzle everyone can finish but not everyone can perfect!
The quickest puzzle ever!

Re: [Vo]:Progress in humanoid robots

[Axil Axil]

Another story on the subject

http://techxplore.com/news/2016-02-next-gen-atlas-door-woods.html



On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 3:34 PM, Jed Rothwell  wrote:

> There is a remarkable video in this article, showing the latest humanoid
> robot from Boston Dynamics. Clearly this machine is not humanoid in the
> emotional sense, because if it were, it might punch the operator in the
> nose. I felt sorry for the poor thing, which is like feeling sorry for a
> dishwasher.
>
>
> http://www.slate.com/blogs/future_tense/2016/02/26/atlas_the_new_robot_from_boston_dynamics_sets_a_new_standard_for_robot_capabilities.html
>
> - Jed
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Progress in humanoid robots

[Patrick Ellul]

Nearly half of Australia's workforce at risk of computerisation and
automation, CSIRO report finds

   - In the next 20 years, 44 per cent of Australian jobs are at risk of
   computerisation and automation
   - All industries will be affected by automation
   - More people will work in shared "co-working" spaces
   - There will be even more casualisation of the workforce
   - Careers in the service industry will grow with the ageing population
   - Generation Z will need to be creative and entrepreneurial
   -
   
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-02-26/robots-will-take-over-44pc-of-workforce:-csiro/7203782


On Sat, Feb 27, 2016 at 7:34 AM, Jed Rothwell  wrote:

> There is a remarkable video in this article, showing the latest humanoid
> robot from Boston Dynamics. Clearly this machine is not humanoid in the
> emotional sense, because if it were, it might punch the operator in the
> nose. I felt sorry for the poor thing, which is like feeling sorry for a
> dishwasher.
>
>
> http://www.slate.com/blogs/future_tense/2016/02/26/atlas_the_new_robot_from_boston_dynamics_sets_a_new_standard_for_robot_capabilities.html
>
> - Jed
>
>


-- 
Patrick

www.tRacePerfect.com
The daily puzzle everyone can finish but not everyone can perfect!
The quickest puzzle ever!

[Vo]:Progress in humanoid robots

[Jed Rothwell]

There is a remarkable video in this article, showing the latest humanoid
robot from Boston Dynamics. Clearly this machine is not humanoid in the
emotional sense, because if it were, it might punch the operator in the
nose. I felt sorry for the poor thing, which is like feeling sorry for a
dishwasher.

http://www.slate.com/blogs/future_tense/2016/02/26/atlas_the_new_robot_from_boston_dynamics_sets_a_new_standard_for_robot_capabilities.html

- Jed