Stanford's souped-up Volkswagen blasted through the Mojave Desert, blew away the competition, and won Darpa's $2 million Grand Challenge. Buckle up, human - the driverless car of the future is gaining on you.
http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/14.01/stanley.html ------------------------ Frank Caggiano frankcag at crystal-objects dot com http://www.crystal-objects.com
The best education for the best is the best education for all. Robert Maynard Hutchins
Frank Caggiano puso en su mail :
Stanford's souped-up Volkswagen blasted through the Mojave Desert, blew away the competition, and won Darpa's $2 million Grand Challenge. Buckle up, human - the driverless car of the future is gaining on you.
Well Frank , thanks for sharing this.
I confess have some doubts as in Argentina today 28 December is "Dia de los inocentes", same as for US April first.
And this was an incredible news... But true.
Edgar
PS) when the joke ends, we say "que la inocencia te valga"
___________________________________________________________ 1GB gratis, Antivirus y Antispam Correo Yahoo!, el mejor correo web del mundo http://correo.yahoo.com.ar
Frank Caggiano wrote:
Stanford's souped-up Volkswagen blasted through the Mojave Desert, blew away the competition, and won Darpa's $2 million Grand Challenge. Buckle up, human - the driverless car of the future is gaining on you.
From a technical viewpoint, I think this is an admirable achievement. However, from a political standpoint, it seems this is one more step on the way to automated warfare. I refuse to consider this an admirable goal.
Cheers, Hans-Martin
On Wed, 28 Dec 2005 12:16:58 -0800, Hans-Martin Mosner hmm@heeg.de wrote:
Frank Caggiano wrote:
Stanford's souped-up Volkswagen blasted through the Mojave Desert, blew away the competition, and won Darpa's $2 million Grand Challenge. Buckle up, human - the driverless car of the future is gaining on you.
From a technical viewpoint, I think this is an admirable achievement. However, from a political standpoint, it seems this is one more step on the way to automated warfare. I refuse to consider this an admirable goal.
Why? What if the gave a war and nobody had to come?<s>
Blake wrote:
On Wed, 28 Dec 2005 12:16:58 -0800, Hans-Martin Mosner hmm@heeg.de wrote:
[...snip...] However, from a political standpoint, it seems this is one more step on the way to automated warfare. I refuse to consider this an admirable goal.
Why? What if the gave a war and nobody had to come?<s>
Nice thought, but it does not work in reality :-( War typically affects those most who don't have a choice. But this is getting off topic (as political discussions in technical groups normally do).
Cheers, Hans-Martin
On Wed, 28 Dec 2005 13:52:33 -0800, Hans-Martin Mosner hmm@heeg.de wrote:
Nice thought, but it does not work in reality :-( War typically affects those most who don't have a choice.
By definition, everything affects those most who don't have a choice.<s>
But this is getting off topic (as political discussions in technical groups normally do).
Happy New Year!<s>
Blake wrote:
On Wed, 28 Dec 2005 12:16:58 -0800, Hans-Martin Mosner hmm@heeg.de wrote:
Frank Caggiano wrote:
Stanford's souped-up Volkswagen blasted through the Mojave Desert, blew away the competition, and won Darpa's $2 million Grand Challenge. Buckle up, human - the driverless car of the future is gaining on you.
From a technical viewpoint, I think this is an admirable achievement. However, from a political standpoint, it seems this is one more step on the way to automated warfare. I refuse to consider this an admirable goal.
Why? What if the gave a war and nobody had to come?<s>
you mean, even the enemy would not have to come ? that would be great. then let's call that "giving a party" instead of "giving a war" and let's design dancing robots so that we can watch all the fun going on.
On Thu, 29 Dec 2005 02:33:21 -0800, Stéphane Rollandin lecteur@zogotounga.net wrote:
From a technical viewpoint, I think this is an admirable achievement. However, from a political standpoint, it seems this is one more step on the way to automated warfare. I refuse to consider this an admirable goal.
Why? What if the gave a war and nobody had to come?<s>
you mean, even the enemy would not have to come ?
But of course. It's not war that's so bad, it's all the killing.
that would be great. then let's call that "giving a party" instead of "giving a war" and let's design dancing robots so that we can watch all the fun going on.
Well, that would require a change in humanity, which is a different nut to crack altogether. The idea would be to satisfy the apparent "need" for war without actual deaths. I doubt human organisms will be viable as soldiers for long once robots start being used, anyway.
that would be great. then let's call that "giving a party" instead of "giving a war" and let's design dancing robots so that we can watch all the fun going on.
Well, that would require a change in humanity, which is a different nut to crack altogether. The idea would be to satisfy the apparent "need" for war without actual deaths. I doubt human organisms will be viable as soldiers for long once robots start being used, anyway.
I say forget the robots and just have a Google Fight:
http://www.googlefight.com/index.php?lang=en_GB&word1=Bush&word2=Sad...
Hello...
Wednesday, December 28, 2005, 1:24:51 PM, you wrote:
FC> Stanford's souped-up Volkswagen blasted through the Mojave Desert, FC> blew away the competition, and won Darpa's $2 million Grand FC> Challenge. Buckle up, human - the driverless car of the future is FC> gaining on you.
[A] science is said to be useful if its development tends to accentuate the existing inequalities in the distribution of wealth, or more directly promotes the destruction of human life.
--- Harold Hardy Godfrey, A Mathematician's Apology, 1941
[A] science is said to be useful if its development tends to accentuate the existing inequalities in the distribution of wealth, or more directly promotes the destruction of human life.
--- Harold Hardy Godfrey, A Mathematician's Apology, 1941
There's no cynicism like 20th century cynicism. (Well, okay, maybe 19th century cynicism.<s>)
This is like the argument I have with my wife. She says there is no such thing as altruism and I always give in because I'm an unselfish caring kind of guy.
Ron Teitelbaum
-----Original Message----- From: squeak-dev-bounces@lists.squeakfoundation.org [mailto:squeak-dev- bounces@lists.squeakfoundation.org] On Behalf Of Blake Sent: Tuesday, January 10, 2006 3:06 PM To: Andres Valloud; The general-purpose Squeak developers list Subject: Re: Say Hello to Stanley
[A] science is said to be useful if its development tends to accentuate the existing inequalities in the distribution of wealth, or more directly promotes the destruction of human life.
--- Harold Hardy Godfrey, A Mathematician's Apology, 1941
There's no cynicism like 20th century cynicism. (Well, okay, maybe 19th century cynicism.<s>)
squeak-dev@lists.squeakfoundation.org
-
Andres Valloud -
Blake -
Frank Caggiano -
Hans-Martin Mosner -
Joerg Beekmann -
Lic. Edgar J. De Cleene -
Ron Teitelbaum -
Stéphane Rollandin