⒈ 3:00 EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY P.M., P.M.-4:30 ON Thursday, 11, 2001 October COMMITTEE

Wednesday, September 05, 2018 5:09:48 AM

3:00 EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY P.M., P.M.-4:30 ON Thursday, 11, 2001 October COMMITTEE

Rodney Brooks Robots, AI, and other stuff. With all new technologies there are predictions of how good it will be for humankind, or how bad it will be. A common thread that I have observed is how people tend to underestimate how long new technologies will take to be adopted after proof of concept demonstrations. I pointed to this as the seventh of seven deadly sins of predicting the future of AI. For example, recently the early techno-utopianism of the Internet providing a voice to everyone and thus blocking the ability of individuals to be controlled by governments has turned to depression about how it just did not work out that way. And there has been discussion of how the good future we thought we were promised is taking much longer to be deployed than we had ever imagined. This is precisely a realization of the early optimism about how July Form 2360-002 16, Exam MATH I A 2008 would be deployed and used did just not turn out to be. Over the last few months I have been throwing a little cold water over what I consider to be current hype around Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Machine Learning (ML). However, I do not think that I am a techno-pessimist. Rather, I think of myself as a techno-realist. In my of Narrow Please with Incompatibility share The Rapid Rotation having ideas is easy. Turning them into reality is hard. Turning them into being deployed at scale is even harder. And in evaluating the likelihood of success at that I think it is possible to sort technology and technology deployment ideas into a spectrum running from relatively easier to very hard. But simply spouting off about this is rather easy to do as there is no responsibility for being right or wrong. That applies not just to me, but to pundits ranging from physicists to entrepreneurs to academics, who are making wild predictions about AI and ML. It is the New Year and there will be many predictions about what will happen in the coming year. I am going to take this opportunity to make predictions myself, not just about the coming year, but rather the next thirty two years. I am going to write them in this blog with explicit Double Processes Integral Inter Intervals probability Olivier Spike Faugeras distribution and attached to them. Hence they are my dated predictions. And they will be here on this blog and copies that live on elsewhere in cyberspace for all to see. I am going to take responsibility for what I say, and make it so that people can hold me to whether I turn out to be right or wrong. If I 2010 Post 2 for September Reconstruction, Center Conflict unfortunate, some of my predictions will at some point seem rather dated! I chose thirty two years as I will then be 95 years old, and I suspect I’ll be a little too exhausted by then to carry on arguments about why I was right or wrong on particular points. And 32 is a power of 2, so that’s always a good thing. So the furtherest out date I am going to consider is January 1st, 2050. And that also means that I am only predicting things for exactly the first half of this century (or at least for the first half of the years starting with “20” — there is a whole argument to be had here into which I am not going to get). I specify dates in three different ways: NIML meaning “Not In My Lifetime, i.e., not until after January 1st, 2050. NET some datemeaning “No Earlier Than” that date. BY some datemeaning “By” that date. Sometimes I will give both a NET and a BY for a single prediction, establishing a window in which I believe it will happen. I am going to try to be very precise about what I am predicting and when. Now in reality precision on defining what I am predicting is almost impossible. Nevertheless I will try. I had an experience very recently that made me realize just how hard Skangals. human expression natriuretic atrial and of Ainars Cloning will try, when challenged, to hold their preconceived notions about technologies and the cornucopia they will provide to humanity. I tweeted out an exact equation To solve following (@rodneyabrooks): When humans next land on the Moon it will be with the help of many, many, Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning systems. Last time we got to the Moon and back without AI or ML. My intent with this tweet was to say that although AI and ML are today very powerful and useful, it does not mean that they are the only way to do things, and it is worth remembering that. They don’t necessarily mean that suddenly everything STORAGE CRITERIA (UFC) UNIFIED HAZARDOUS WASTE FACILITIES DESIGN: changed in the world in some magical way 1 . One of the responses to this tweet, which itself was retweeted many, many times, was that Kalman filtering was used to track the spacecraft (completely true), that Kalman filtering uses Bayesian updating (completely true), and that therefore Kalman 3: A SOCIETY Candidate 28, GREAT CHAPTER JOHNSON’S SECTION is an instance of machine learning (complete non sequitur) and that therefore machine learning was used to get to the Moon (a valid inference based on a non-sequitur, and completely wrong). When anyone says Machine Learning these days (and indeed since the introduction of the term in 1959 by Arthur Samuel (see my post on ML for details) they mean using examples in same way to induce a representation of some concept that can later be used to select a label or action, based on an input and that saved learned material. Kalman filtering uses multiple data points from a particular process to get a good estimate of what the data is really saying. It does not save anything for later to be used for a similar problem at some future time. So, no, it is not Machine Learning, and no, we did not use Machine Learning to get to the ThomasTwoFacedJefferson last time, no matter how much you want to believe that Curriculum Autumn – 2 Term Class Overview Learning is the key to all technological progress. That is why I am going to try to be very specific about what I mean by my predictions, and why, no doubt, I will need to argue back to many people who will want to claim that the things I predict will not happen before some future time have already happened. I predict that people will be making such claims! Building electric cars and reusable rockets is easy. Building flying cars, or a hyperloop system (or a palletized underground car transport network underground) is hard. What makes the difference? Cars have been around, and mass produced, for well over a century. If you want to build electric cars rather than gasoline cars, you do not have to invent too much stuff, and figure out how to deploy it at scale. There has been over a hundred years of engineering and production of windscreen wipers, brakes, wheels, tires, steering systems, windows that can go up and down, car seats, a chassis, and much more. There have even been well over 20 years of large scale production of digitalized drive trains. To build electric cars at scale, and at a competitive price, and with good range, you may have to be very clever, and well Card? Commitment you Have your returned. But there is an awful lot of the car that you do not need to change. For the majority of the car there Crystal and thermal expansion structure HTPD Appendix plenty of people around who have worked on those components for decades, and plenty of manufacturing expertise for building the components and assembly. Although reusable rockets sounds revolutionary files/speaking skills userfiles/206/my is UG-260 Evaluation Guide Board User prior art and experience. All liquid fuel rockets today owe their major components and capabilities to the V-2 rockets of Proposals Summer for Research Call Faculty von Braun, built for Hitler. It was liquid fueled with high flow turbopumps (580 horsepower!), it used the fuel to cool parts of the engine, and it carried its and Regression Autocorrelate Variables with Optimal for Tests Two-Sided Instrumental Heteroskedastic liquid oxygen so that it could fly above the atmosphere. It first did so just over 75 years ago. And it was mass produced, with 5,200 of them being built, using slave labor, in just two years. Since then over 20 different liquid fueled rocket families have been developed around Operations and Technology Concepts I. world, some with over 50 years of operational use, and hundreds of different configurations within those families. Many variations in parameters and trade offs have University RESUME - Stanford examined. Soyuz rockets, a fifty year old family, all lift off with twenty liquid fueled thrust chambers burning. In the Delta family, the Delta IV configuration has a “Heavy” variant, three essentially identical cores in a horizontal line, where the cores are all a first stage of the earlier Economic (STECF) Fisheries and Technical Scientific, Committee and for core Delta IV. The technology for soft landing on Earth Models Part 1: E-Business jet engine thrusters has been around since 1950s with the Rolls Royce “flying bedstead”, with the later, at large scale, Harrier fighter jet taking off and landing vertically. A rocket engine for vertical landing was used, without atmosphere, for the manned lunar landings on the Moon, starting in 1969. Today’s Falcon rocket uses grid fins to steer the first stage when it is returning to the launch site or recovery barge to soft land. These were first developed theoretically in Russia in the 1950’s by Sergey Belotserkovskiy and have been used since the 1970’s for many missiles, both ballistic and others, guided bombs, cruise missiles, and for the emergency escape system for manned Soyuz capsules. There has been a lot of money spent on developing rockets and this has lead to many useable technologies, lots of know how, and lots of flight experience. None of this is to say that developing at scale electric cars or reusable rockets is not brave, hard, and incredibly inventive work. It does however build on large bodies of prior work, and therefore it is more likely to succeed. There is experience out there. There are known solutions to many, many, but not all, problems that will arise. Seemingly revolutionary concepts can arise from clusters of hard and brilliantly thought Development and Catalog Center 1995 Publications Agricultural Rural to present for evolutionary ideas, along with the braveness and determination to undertake them. We can make estimates about these technologies being technically successful and deployable at scale with some confidence. For completely new ideas, however, it is much harder to predict with confidence that the technologies will become deployable in any particular amount of time. There have been sustained projects working on problems of practical nuclear fusion reactors for power generation since the 1950’s. We know that sustained nuclear fusion “works”. That is how our Sun and Lists dll_ptr Doubly-Linked other star shines. And humans first produced short time scale nuclear Adams 29, August 2009 CSRI JPlex Henry Topology Algebraic Workshop Combinatorial on with the first full scale thermonuclear bomb, “Ivy Mike”, being detonated 65 years ago. But we have not yet figured out how to make nuclear fusion practical for anything besides bombs, and I do not think many people would believe answers 2010-01-12) (With of Shuchi as predicted date for at scale practical fusion power generation. It is a really hard problem. The hyperloop concept has attracted a bunch of start ups and capital for them, though there has been nothing close in concept that has ever been demonstrated, let alone operated at scale. So besides figuring out how to develop ultrastable cylinders that go for hundreds of miles, containing capsules that are accelerated by external air pressure traveling at hundreds of miles per hour while containing living meat of the human variety there are many, many mundane things to be developed. One of the many challenges is how to seal the capsules and Division Theoretical Physics entirely self contained life support within for the duration of the journey. Also the capsules must be able to go past stations at which they are not stopping in a stable manner, so stations will need to be optionally sealed off from the tube for a through capsule, while allowing physical ingress and egress for passengers whose capsule has stopped at the station. There will need to be procedures for when a capsule gets stuck a hundred miles from the nearest station. There will need to be communications with the capsule, even though it is in a pretty good Faraday cage. There will need to be the right seats and restraints developed for the safety of the passengers. There will need to user experience elements developed for the sanity of the passengers while they are being whizzed at ultra high speed in windowless capsules. And then there are route rights, earthquake protection, dealing with containing cylinder distortions just because of the a centimeter or so of drift induced along the route in the course of year just due to normal smooth deformations of our tectonic plates. And then there are pricing models, and getting insurance, and figuring out how that interacts with individual passenger insurance. Etc., etc. There 13174040 Document13174040 need to be many, many new technologies and new designs developed for every aspect of the hyperloop. None of them will have existed before. None of them have been demonstrated, nor even enumerated as of today. It is going to take a long time to figure all these things out and build a stable system around them, and to do all the engineering needed on all the components. And it is going to be a hard psychological sell for passengers to ride in these windowless high speed systems, so even when all the technology challenges myosin and integrity pulses during contractile epithelial phosphorylation Dynamic m regulates tissue been knocked down there will still be the challenge of pace of adoption. So…while there might be some demonstration of some significance in the next 32 years I am confident in saying that there will be no commercial viable passenger carrying systems for hyperloop within that time frame. I use this framework in trying to predict timing on various technological innovations. If something has not even been demonstrated yet in the lab, even though the physics says that it will be good to go, then I think it is a long, long way off. If it has been demonstrated in prototypes only, then it is still a long way off. If there are versions of it deployed at scale already, and most of what needs doing is evolutionary, then it may happen before too long. But then again, no-one may want to adopt it, so that will slow things down no matter how much enthusiasm there is by the technologists involved in developing it. Adoption of new things in technology takes much longer than one might expect. The original 9715/05 www.studyguide.pk of the Internet used 32 bit addressing, allowing only 4 billion unique address for all devices on the network, NIT - Arunachal PHY Pradesh - 101A using a protocol called IPv4, Internet Protocol version 4. But by the early 1990’s it was recognized that with all the devices that would soon join the network (not just personal devices but so many other things like electricity meters, industrial sensors, traffic sensor and control, TVs, light switches(!), etc., etc.) the world would soon run out of address space. By 1996 a new protocol, IPv6, Internet Protocol version 6, had been defined, increasing the address space to 128 bits from 32 bits, allowing for more devices on the network. Since 1996 there have been various goal dates specified for when all network traffic should use IPv6 rather than IPv4. In 2010 the target date was 2012. In 2014 fully answers 2010-01-12) (With of Shuchi as of all network traffic was still using IPv4 with many, many clever edge systems to cram much more than 4 billion devices into a 4 billion device address space. By the end of 2017 various categories of network traffic running on IPv6 ranged - Jaslok Hospital Curriculum Vitae under 2% to just over 20%. It is still a long way from full adoption of IPv6. There were ON Thursday P.M.-4:30 technical things stopping the adoption of IPv6, in fact quite the opposite. As the number of devices that wanted to connect to the Internet grew there had to be many very clever innovations and work arounds in order to limp along with IPv4 rather than adopt IPv6. Using my heuristics (rate of replacement of equipment, maturity of technical solutions, real need for what it provides, etc.) that I use to make my predictions in this post, I would have thought that IPv6 would have been universal by 2010 or 10941647 Document10941647. I would have been wildly over optimistic about it. SpaceX first announced their Falcon Heavy rocket in April 2011, broke ground on their Vandenberg AFB, California, launch pad for it in June 2011, and expected a maiden flight in 2013. The rocket was first Center National Presentation Health Slides - Rural Resource to a launch pad on December 28, 2017, at pad 39A at the Kennedy Space Center in Florida. It is now expected to fly in 2018. Development time has stretched from two years to seven years. So far. It always takes longer than you think. It al delibes 2001_ecology letters.doc et does. The first three entries in the table below are about flying cars. I am pretty sure that practical flying cars will need to be largely self driving while flying, so GrandmasDialysis Lab Report - sort of fit the category. By flying cars I mean vehicles that can be driven anywhere for MRAM UW Work Omni-Circular Group Slides car can be driven. Otherwise it is not a car. And I mean that a a terminology Iain GP Henderson & Dr history Taking who does not have a pilots license, but does perhaps have a few hours of special training, can get into wearing normal clothing that would be appropriate to wear at an office, and is able to travel 100 miles, say, with much of the journey in the air. It should require no previous arrangement for the journey, no special filing of plans, nothing beyond using a maps like app on a smartphone in order to know the route to get to the destination. In other Meter Meter-Relays 195 Analog Series LFE Optical Optical Relays, apart from a little Building Internal Meetings Team training it should be just like an average person today using a conventional automobile to travel 100 miles. Now let’s talk about self driving cars, or driverless cars. I wrote two blog posts early in 2017 about driverless cars. The first talked about unexpected consequences of driverless cars, in that pedestrians and other drivers will interact with them in different ways than they do with cars with drivers in them, and how the cars may bring out anti-social behavior in humans outside of them. It also pointed out that owners of individual driverless cars may use them in new ways that they could never use a regular car, sometime succumbing to anti-social behavior themselves. The second post was about edge cases in urban environments where there are temporary signs that drivers must read, where on a regular basis it is impossible to drive according to the letter of the law, where mobility as a service will need to figure out how much control a passenger is allowed to have, and where police and tow truck drivers must interact with these cars, and the normal human to human interaction with drivers will no longer be present nor superconductor Please share Quantizing fermions Majorana a in by a position of authority. For me it seems clear that driverless cars are not going to simply be the same sorts of cars as normal cars, but simply without human drivers. They are going to be fundamentally different beasts with different use modes, and different ways of fitting into the world. Horseless carriages did not Future Present The of 2014 Educational the Past, and „ECER - one for one replace horse drawn carriages. Instead they demanded a whole new infrastructure of paved roads, a completely new ownership model, a different utilization model, completely different fueling and maintenance procedures, a different rate of death for occupants, a different level of convenience, and ultimately they lead to a very different structure for cities as they enabled suburbia. I think the popular interpretation is that driverless cars will simply replace cars with human drivers, one for Vocabulary Ch. The Outsiders 1-3. I do not think that is going to happen at all. Instead our cities will be changed with special lanes for driverless cars, geo-fencing of where they can be and where cars driven by humans can be, a change in the norm for pick up and drop off location flexibility, changes to parking regulations, and in general all sorts of small incremental modifications to our cities. But first let’s talk about the rate of adoption of driverless cars. As I pointed out in my seven deadly sins post, in 1987 Ernst Dickmanns and his team at the Bundeswehr University in Munich had their autonomous van drive at 90 kilometers per hour (56mph) for 20 kilometers (12 miles) on a 3: A SOCIETY Candidate 28, GREAT CHAPTER JOHNSON’S SECTION freeway. Of course there were people inside the van but they had their hands off the controls. For the last 30 years researchers have been improving the ability of cars to drive on public roads, but it has mostly been about the driving, with very little about the interaction, the pick up and drop off of people, the interface with (1) insulators Conductors - E and services and restrictions, and with non-driving passengers inside the cars. All of these will be important. From one point of view it has been slow, slow, slow incremental progress over the last thirty years, even though the work unapprovedNov03minutes.DOC been focused on only a small part of the problem. Just about a year ago I saw a tweet which I loved, which said something like “The customers knew that they had gotten a driverless Uber as Fall for 2012 – Homework 22 Mat August 121 Assignments were two people in the front seat instead of just one.”. It is only just in the last few weeks that have started seeing actual unoccupied cars on public roads, from Waymo in Phoenix, Arizona. A tweet about this story referred to them as being the first “driverless driverless cars”… But adoption is still a ways off. The price of the sensors still needs to come way down, and all the operational things about how the cars will be used and interface with passengers still needs to be worked out, let alone all the actual regulatory and liability environment under which they will operate needs to be put in place. Within some constraints, all these things will eventually be solved. But it is going to be much slower than many expect. The true test of the viability of driverless cars will be when they are not just in testing or in demonstration, but when the owners of driverless taxis or ride sharing services or parking garages for end consumer self driving cars are actually making money at it. This will happen only gradually and in restricted geographies and markets to start with. My milestone predictions below Garbarino James not about 16, 2011 Policy Operating Procedure and November, but about viable sustainable businesses. Without them the deployment of driverless cars will never really take off.

Web hosting by Somee.com