Sandwiches

Cidu Bill on Feb 25th 2013

cidu-sandwich-carrillo.jpg

Filed in Bill Bickel, CIDU, F-Minus, Tony Carrillo, comic strips, comics, humor | 17 responses so far

17 Responses to “Sandwiches”

  1. Proginoskes Feb 25th 2013 at 01:44 am 1

    With no arms?

  2. Mike Feb 25th 2013 at 02:25 am 2

    The scientist is working on a big robot. The little robot, who does nothing but make sandwiches for the scientist, is worried that the big robot will replace him, so he points out that he is perfectly capable of making bigger sandwiches.

  3. Dan W Feb 25th 2013 at 08:15 am 3

    Mike has it. The little robot is worried about his job security, and also maybe a little jealous.

  4. J-L Feb 25th 2013 at 11:52 am 4

    I just finished reading Asimov’s “I, Robot,” and I always thought it was odd how people assumed that emotions (and a sense of personal identity) would be one of the first characteristics to appear on robots… even before they’d get the ability to speak.

    My father and I disagree on how far computers and robots of the future will be able to think and interact. My dad thinks thinks that someday soon they’ll be able to reason like humans (like around Kurzweil’s “singularity”) whereas I see it much, much farther off, if it even happens (which I confess I have my doubts that it ever will).

    I think our difference in opinions has been greatly influenced by the movie “2001: A Space Odyssey.” When my father saw it as a young adult, it made him believe that thinking/reasoning computers were just around the corner. When I saw it (not long before the year 2001), I saw it as a science fiction story that, like many others, was way off on key predictions.

    Now that we’re considerably past the year 2001, I see it as confirmation of my beliefs that reasoning computers are unlikely to be created anytime soon. As for my dad, he just thinks the prediction was a little off, and that the more time goes by, the sooner we will be to a time when we have true thinking and reasoning machines.

  5. Ian Osmond Feb 25th 2013 at 02:15 pm 5

    J-L @ 4: True artificial intelligence is about thirty years away. It was about thirty years away when they started discussing it in the sixties, it was about thirty years away in the Eighties when they were working on real learning systems, it’s thirty years away now, and it will always be about thirty years away.

  6. Scott Feb 25th 2013 at 05:29 pm 6

    Actually when I studied AI at MIT in 1971, we used a textbook from 1959, so it goes back even further. Almost all the particular applications we studied are now in common use, but we are no closer to true AI.

  7. Mark in Boston Feb 25th 2013 at 05:47 pm 7

    Some of the predictions in 2001 just took longer than expected. The two astronauts have iPads, and Heywood Floyd uses Skype to call home. Actually, PicturePhones were demonstrated at the 1964 World’s Fair, but the phone company never produced them for us. We had to wait for the Internet and Skype.

  8. John in Tronna Feb 25th 2013 at 10:11 pm 8

    Isn’t Al Gore a robot?

  9. Proginoskes Feb 26th 2013 at 02:42 am 9

    @ Ian Osmond: “Artificial Intelligence is whatever we haven’t done yet.”

    Once you program a computer to do something, it isn’t AI; it’s only an algorithm. There will never be true AI.

  10. Winter Wallaby Feb 26th 2013 at 11:24 am 10

    @Proginoskes: Lieutenant Commander Data is a true AI.

  11. Mark in Boston Feb 26th 2013 at 06:26 pm 11

    It was originally thought (by science fiction writers, at least) that computers would be able to listen before they could talk. Listening is easy; taking requires some kind of voice synthesizer.
    But as it turns out, talking is easy. Bell Labs demonstrated a Voder in the 1930’s. Listening to and understanding what is said: Well, Siri is getting there …

  12. Meryl A Feb 27th 2013 at 01:12 am 12

    I thought this was related to the idea of the size of a certain male part being related to the size of other parts hand, foot, etc. ie, the size of the robot has nothing to do with the size of the sandwich it can make.

    Meryl A

  13. J-L Feb 27th 2013 at 11:42 am 13

    Ian Osmond (#5):

    Well said, Ian! Well said!

  14. Proginoskes Feb 28th 2013 at 02:52 am 14

    @ Winter Wallaby: I hate to tell you this … but … Lt. Cmdr. Data isn’t real.

    @ Mark in Boston: You never had an conversation with a Born Again, then? If you had, you’d know that talking is easy and listening is more difficult …

  15. Lost in A**2 Feb 28th 2013 at 03:55 am 15

    By “Born Again,” do you mean a Christian, in general, or did you have something more specific in mind?

    I could interpret your statement, as written, as “Talking to [them] is easy, listening to [them] is more difficult.”

  16. Mark in Boston Mar 1st 2013 at 06:22 pm 16

    What did you say? I wasn’t listening.

  17. Mark in Boston Mar 1st 2013 at 06:23 pm 17

    As I was saying, science fiction writers thought that listening was easy and talking was difficult. But in fact, talking is easy and listening is difficult. That’s why you can always understand Siri but she never quite seems to fully understand you.

Comments RSS

Leave a Reply