|
Krispy Wafer posted:I don't think anyone is saying publicly funded research isn't great. It's the idea that somehow private industry is wrong for building upon it. Part of what makes public research so valuable is it's ability to spur private innovation. The issue that's being conflated is looking at stuff like Siri and Space X and attributing the result of the good (cool tech poo poo) with the cause of the good (public research) and saying that Musk dumping money into trying to die on Mars will produce the same when realistically all of those developments will be patented away and locked out of public use unlike the very thing that Musk is building upon.
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2017 22:46
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 16:24 |
|
|
Crain posted:The issue that's being conflated is looking at stuff like Siri and Space X and attributing the result of the good (cool tech poo poo) with the cause of the good (public research) and saying that Musk dumping money into trying to die on Mars will produce the same when realistically all of those developments will be patented away and locked out of public use unlike the very thing that Musk is building upon. This is a weird objection in Musks' case since Musk has made so many Tesla patents public.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2017 22:47
|
|
|
motoh posted:Some of you have MASSIVELY chugged the flavor aid on technology. Tech has never been nor will be a panacea, and assuming that its good effects will 'trickle down' from those who have it is shockingly naive. Technology is how we separate the heads of plutocrats from their bodies efficiently axe and sword wielding gets tiring
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2017 22:48
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:This is a weird objection in Musks' case since Musk has made so many Tesla patents public. That's fair, but Musk is the topic at hand and in some cases the rare exception I mention. Private industry is interested in making money first and any problems that get solved along the way are incidental. The Apollo program went from inception to the moon in 8 years. So everyone can gently caress off with that "profit is faster" bullshit. Properly funded and backed programs are fast.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2017 22:52
|
|
|
bird cooch posted:No angry person, Tokyo is the area most immediately on the bay. Also it has a ton of sprawl that is largely geographically constrained resulting in building up instead of building out. It also has the advantage of an old and robust rail system that has been constantly upgraded. Here's a fun fact, when we were shopping for a house over there the price drops off by almost half if it is not connected by public transport. (At least in the Yokohama region.) The geography makes an enormous difference, if you're having a hard time conceptualising this take the entire Japanese island chain and plop it down in the Fly Over States. Or shoot start comparing population sizes. Or take a Valium, a walk in the park or a nice warm bath.  lots of open space. And I'm not sure what your point about home prices is supposed to show other than public transport being seen as a desirable and useful thing there, and actually built up enough for that to be true, versus the States where it's basically an afterthought.Even if your finding of fact here were correct, I'm still not sure what your point is even supposed to be. Japan, constrained by geography, was "forced" to build its cities in a sensible, efficient, sustainable manner, and US cities, apparently facing no such constraints, are therefore incapable of same? Is it possible to be that dumb?
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2017 22:53
|
|
|
Solkanar512 posted:Still waiting for answers to those questions. I don't think you have even asked me any questions? Just repeated over and over that you are some sort of vague secret expert because you work at an airplane factory (not just any airplane factory, the BIGGEST airplane factory) across like five threads threads now. Boeing already has unmanned military aircraft (autonomous and remote piloted) and has said they want to move some of that technology into their commercial airlines. But what do they know compared to some factory worker.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2017 22:54
|
|
|
Crain posted:The issue that's being conflated is looking at stuff like Siri and Space X and attributing the result of the good (cool tech poo poo) with the cause of the good (public research) and saying that Musk dumping money into trying to die on Mars will produce the same when realistically all of those developments will be patented away and locked out of public use unlike the very thing that Musk is building upon. If Musk sees his dream of interplanetary travel, Space-X or the East Mars Trading Company or whatever it's name is at that point would probably be heavily regulated or even nationalized under some kind of multinational banner. For all we know that's Musk's plan. He wants to go to Mars and get credit for it. He probably doesn't care if he accomplishes that as a CEO or head bureaucrat of the ministry of planets.There's a limit to how much money he can make launching satellites and rich tourists into orbit and that may not be enough to get to Mars. The government doesn't have those same limits if he can convince them it's a worthy cause. Private versus public may not matter in this case.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2017 22:56
|
|
|
Aves Maria! posted:ok cool, but machine learning isn't AI. e: I should expand on this - it's not AI, its an application of AI research. and that's cool, but just saying "AI helps people" as a blanket statement is kind of worthless unless you're talking specific applications I think one thing that was lost in this conversation, too, is that I'm not making the argument that current applications of AI research do not help anyone. I'm specifically questioning the value of open source AI as is described in the OpenAI mission, i.e. the democratizing of truly "intelligent" AI that is nowhere near on the horizon. I'm not talking about algorithms designed to increase efficiency in certain applications Aves Maria! fucked around with this message at 23:02 on Dec 29, 2017 |
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2017 22:56
|
|
|
Crain posted:The Apollo program went from inception to the moon in 8 years. So everyone can gently caress off with that "profit is faster" bullshit. Properly funded and backed programs are fast. It also built upon several years of research conducted during WWII by the Nazis, but yes.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2017 22:58
|
|
|
Party Plane Jones posted:Technology is how we separate the heads of plutocrats from their bodies efficiently Solar cell powered hot water pots? Metal as gently caress PPJ.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2017 22:58
|
|
|
Crain posted:The Apollo program went from inception to the moon in 8 years. So everyone can gently caress off with that "profit is faster" bullshit. Properly funded and backed programs are fast. That worked because we had an enemy to rally against and we were also at the precipice of a technological leap forward. It's was not sustainable.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2017 23:00
|
|
|
KickerOfMice posted:ThinkProgress - New Indiana bill would force Colts to provide fans a refund if any of its players kneel for anthem Yeah. Good luck defending that in court when both Civil Rights groups AND the loving NFL/Colts come at it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2017 23:00
|
|
|
KickerOfMice posted:ThinkProgress - New Indiana bill would force Colts to provide fans a refund if any of its players kneel for anthem If it actually becomes law, it'll die on the first stiff breeze.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2017 23:01
|
|
|
doesn't stop them from banning abortion every third wednesday so I'm positive that will pass
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2017 23:01
|
|
|
Krispy Wafer posted:If Musk sees his dream of interplanetary travel, Space-X or the East Mars Trading Company or whatever it's name is at that point would probably be heavily regulated or even nationalized under some kind of multinational banner. For all we know that's Musk's plan. He wants to go to Mars and get credit for it. He probably doesn't care if he accomplishes that as a CEO or head bureaucrat of the ministry of planets.There's a limit to how much money he can make launching satellites and rich tourists into orbit and that may not be enough to get to Mars. The government doesn't have those same limits if he can convince them it's a worthy cause. Private versus public may not matter in this case. Why should we assume Musk isn't in it for profit? Why wouldn't Musk want to own or control Martian assets rather than just be a bureaucrat? Musk hates bureaucrats. It is insane to presume that Musk would give up creating intergenerational wealth. Musk has the chance to use public funds to launch his family to a level of a wealth that makes the robber barons look poor. Remember this is a man who calls his own workplace "hell" without a glimpse of shame. Projecting altruism doesn't make sense.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2017 23:02
|
|
|
SpaceX is just taking advantage of the privatization of NASA by Republicans, so you really shouldn't praise it too much.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2017 23:03
|
|
|
Calaveron posted:I mean chemical weapons research gave us convenient nonstick cookware Let's not forget the massive benefits the Haber Process brought to agriculture.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2017 23:04
|
|
|
"He can't line his pockets because they're already stuffed!"
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2017 23:04
|
|
|
Your Boy Fancy posted:If it actually becomes law, it'll die on the first stiff breeze. Hey, I was just bringing it up for being astoundingly stupid.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2017 23:04
|
|
|
SourKraut posted:It also built upon several years of research conducted during WWII by the Nazis, but yes. Yeah, ultimately, and go deep enough and eventually we're congratulating some crazy dude from ancient China for it all because he shoved gunpowder into a length of bamboo. "We stand on the shoulder of giants", except capitalism ends up with little shits standing around on the collar button talking about how tall they are. Krispy Wafer posted:That worked because we had an enemy to rally against and we were also at the precipice of a technological leap forward. It's was not sustainable. Yes, I remember when NASA and the Apollo program were shutdown after the first moon landing and didn't go on to do literally anything else or develop new space flight or rocket systems.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2017 23:05
|
|
|
Mods please ban every person in this thread whose posts contain “Musk”. I’m okay with being counted as long as others get punished, which philosophically makes mine the most thread-appropriate post of this derail when you think about it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2017 23:07
|
|
|
technology is cool and good sorry if any of you losers disagree
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2017 23:08
|
|
|
enraged_camel posted:technology is cool and good In a vacuum. Capitalism makes it bad.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2017 23:09
|
|
|
you know what's actually cool and good? socialism
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2017 23:09
|
|
|
I'm really enjoying watching goons evenly separate into "Make earth better" and "gently caress it, fail forward" but the topic doesn't fit in any existing thread and the idea of writing a D&D thread OP is daunting 
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2017 23:12
|
|
|
My thumb is so tired from scrolling
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2017 23:15
|
|
|
Heck Yes! Loam! posted:Let's not forget the massive benefits the Haber Process brought to agriculture. I think the cool edgy internet "leftist" thing now is to hate agriculture on some premise it made people and people are bad.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2017 23:16
|
|
|
This thread could use a food derail. Towards that end, ya'll should all go try a Poke burrito, it's hawaiian/japanese fusion that is basically just a big sushi burrito. It's insanely delicious and it'll take your minds off Elon Musk.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2017 23:18
|
|
|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:I think the cool edgy internet "leftist" thing now is to hate agriculture on some premise it made people and people are bad. What is this poo poo
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2017 23:18
|
|
|
Crain posted:Yes, I remember when NASA and the Apollo program were shutdown after the first moon landing and didn't go on to do literally anything else or develop new space flight or rocket systems. It definitely got slower after Apollo 11. It's not a yes or no answer. There are degrees of progress. Trabisnikof posted:Why should we assume Musk isn't in it for profit? Why wouldn't Musk want to own or control Martian assets rather than just be a bureaucrat? Musk hates bureaucrats. Musk wants to go to Mars. He will do whatever it takes to do that. If he can create Pax Romana in space, he will. If he needs a government partner he will make concessions. Personally I don't think he can do it without someone who can print their own money.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2017 23:18
|
|
|
The self-landing booster rocket is neat and all but NASA didn't do it because they didn't think it would be cost effective or safe. Good thing we have capitalism around to just do wildly unsafe things with huge financial risks that are pushed entirely onto the public sector!
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2017 23:19
|
|
|
Cabbit posted:Man, the Trump thread is really humming along today, must be all those crazy tweets, that HIV advisory council he axed, and that NYT oh I dont know about you guys. I just assume trump says stupid poo poo everyday. Im basically on political outrage autopilot. Im biding my time until elections when I can unleash my fury
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2017 23:19
|
|
|
empty whippet box posted:This thread could use a food derail. Towards that end, ya'll should all go try a Poke burrito, it's hawaiian/japanese fusion that is basically just a big sushi burrito. It's insanely delicious and it'll take your minds off Elon Musk. that reminds me, i want an actual burrito
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2017 23:20
|
|
|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:I think the cool edgy internet "leftist" thing now is to hate agriculture on some premise it made people and people are bad. you have no loving clue what you're talking about
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2017 23:21
|
|
|
Alright before I start calling some of you fuckers neo-futurists I need to check, did we ever wind up getting rid of the first batch or no
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2017 23:21
|
|
|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:I think the cool edgy internet "leftist" thing now is to hate agriculture on some premise it made people and people are bad. Owlofcreamcheese posted:Seems weird too that people are very angry when space travel is done by a private guy that makes money off it, but also get mad if we socialize space travel and research it collectively. Same with physics or engineering or whatever. Like if something is science related it needs to answer for all the sins of the human race before it can be allowed to exist in a way that no one applies to any other type of industry. No one should make money off science but also no money should be spent collectively on it. It simply should not exist until humanity has already perfected itself. Owlofcreamcheese posted:The Right has been anti-science for a long time but it's getting really obnoxious how much of an anti-science/anti-technology left movement the US is getting. Owlofcreamcheese posted:Go read the automation thread. Technology is anti leftist now in a bunch of people's opinion. Being useful on earth is a bad thing to them.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2017 23:22
|
|
|
Stereotype posted:The self-landing booster rocket is neat and all but NASA didn't do it because they didn't think it would be cost effective or safe. Good thing we have capitalism around to just do wildly unsafe things with huge financial risks that are pushed entirely onto the public sector! How is it unsafe? They both land in the ocean? NASA also didn't have a financial incentive to create a reusable rocket because they never got economies of scale going on satellite launches. I guess they had that in mind with the space shuttle, but it never panned out as their expected space truck.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2017 23:22
|
|
|
Aves Maria! posted:you know what's actually cool and good?
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2017 23:24
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 16:24 |
|
|
Herm, I'm sure NASA never getting funding to do research into cheap and reusable rockets has absolutely nothing to do with Boeing & Lockmart making obscene money on expensive disposable rockets.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2017 23:24
|
|