[quote]
Slowly, but surely graphene is pushing our technological hopes, dreams and, yes, nightmares towards reality. The stuff is capable of extending battery life, generating electricity, powering high-speed data connections and super computer-worthy CPUs. It's water proof, stretchy, bendy and apparently self healing. (This space reserved for T-1000 reference.) Researchers at the University of Manchester discovered that, if you put a hole in a sheet of graphene, it simply stitches itself back together. This is thanks to carbon's tendency to latch on to other atoms, including its own, which can make the futuristic material difficult to work with, but gives it this highly unique quality. Thankfully, we're no where near self-healing robots. But, the discovery could lead to a simple method for molding it into almost any shape. Once pierced, the form of the mend is determined by the type of molecules introduced -- pure carbon simply regrows the perfect honeycomb structure, while a few foreign atoms can lead to "defects." Of course, if they're intentional and predictable, defects merely become "features." For more check out the source link.
[/quote]
Source: [url]http://www.engadget.com/2012/07/10/graphene-heals-itself-powers-our-dreams-and-nightmares/[/url]
Make a robot pussy.
It will [I]always[/I] be fresh
Introducing the new I-phone T-1000:v:
The ability to make a perfectly humanesque android with such things grows steadily closer.
Isaac Asimov is smiling down upon us.
[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;36714956]The ability to make a perfectly humanesque android with such things grows steadily closer.
Isaac Asimov is smiling down upon us.[/QUOTE]
And Kyle Reese is crying in a foxhole.
The future is coooool.
[QUOTE=Leff Shoo;36714967]The future is coooool.[/QUOTE]
not for humans
[QUOTE=FluD;36715119]not for humans[/QUOTE]
All those movies where robots destroy humanity for no reason other than 'because' is just simple entertainment.
In Terminator, humans tried to "kill" Skynet after it became self aware. It may have overreacted [i]slightly[/i] by instigating WWIII, but it still had reason to fight back.
[QUOTE=Forumaster;36715247]In Terminator, humans tried to "kill" Skynet after it became self aware. It may have overreacted [i]slightly[/i] by instigating WWIII, but it still had reason to fight back.[/QUOTE]
Where as in reality, I'm pretty sure we would do our best to use diplomacy to understand this new intelligence man had bequeathed unto the universe. Trying to kill it was simply a plot device for entertainment. Besides, the reason we tried to kill it is because it tries to kill us in the future - because we tried to kill it now - because it tried to kill us in the future, etc. Time travel just makes it murky.
[editline]10th July 2012[/editline]
I honestly believe Isaac Asimov's robots are the best example of what's in store for humanity. Not The Terminator.
Another place where they went wrong is putting a single entity in control of the [I]entire nation's defensive grid.[/I]
Even if it never gained sentience, it could still cause a shitstorm.
Oh, a passenger 787's transponder is out? Must be an enemy spyplane, shoot it down! Plane crashes into military base? Under attack by China/Russa/N. Korea, launch retaliatory attack!
[QUOTE=RichyZ;36714892]carbon nanotubes with a layer of graphene over it
DEAR GOD[/QUOTE]
surrounding a buckyball structure
[QUOTE=RichyZ;36714892]carbon nanotubes with a layer of graphene over it
DEAR GOD[/QUOTE]
Wanna hear something cooler
carbon nanotubes are [I]made of graphene.[/I]
[QUOTE=viperfan7;36715491]surrounding a buckyball structure[/QUOTE]
pls no
[QUOTE=viperfan7;36715491]surrounding a buckyball structure[/QUOTE][QUOTE=goon165;36715595]pls no[/QUOTE]
Can you explain for us unscientific minds?
[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;36715617]Can you explain for us unscientific minds?[/QUOTE]
[IMG]http://i.imgur.com/NrPi0.gif[/IMG]
That's a buckyball. It's 60 carbon atoms.
[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;36715617]Can you explain for us unscientific minds?[/QUOTE]
Hyper resilient, and lightweight, if I'm not mistaken.
[QUOTE=Marbalo;36715839]If we ever develop an android of sorts, that is able to completely 100% replicate the human brain, would it ever be considered on-par with actual humans?
I mean, after all, human thought is merely electric pulses going through our brains. If we created a machine capable of thinking, feeling and rationalizing the same way we do, who is to say they aren't fully-fledged humans too?[/QUOTE]
"Does this unit have a soul?"
[QUOTE=Marbalo;36715839]If we ever develop an android of sorts, that is able to completely 100% replicate the human brain, would it ever be considered on-par with actual humans?
I mean, after all, human thought is merely electric pulses going through our brains. If we created a machine capable of thinking, feeling and rationalizing the same way we do, who is to say they aren't fully-fledged humans too?[/QUOTE]
This is a debate that has raged for decades in science fiction. As it comes to the surface, I'm fairly confident that, with the rights advancements and significantly more accepting atmosphere that is being displayed and facilitated by the internet (be as cynical as you want, but I've seen countless people on Facepunch, reddit, tumblr, twitter, and countless forums all advocating for human rights and just all around good things...maybe I'm just being exposed to the good part of the human race that uses the internet, but that gives me a good feeling about our species), we would eventually declare artificial lifeforms to be living beings.
It'd be a hell of a show before then, though. Though I feel we would reach that point eventually, it's one thing to declare universal civil rights for all mankind and another to effectively [B]create[/B] a new, sapient species.
[QUOTE=Marbalo;36715839]If we ever develop an android of sorts, that is able to completely 100% replicate the human brain, would it ever be considered on-par with actual humans?
I mean, after all, human thought is merely electric pulses going through our brains. If we created a machine capable of thinking, feeling and rationalizing the same way we do, who is to say they aren't fully-fledged humans too?[/QUOTE]
It's hard to say. I wouldn't consider something that is merely capable of intellectual thought as 'human'. To be human has is to be so much more, such as including emotions that can be tied to our physical, biological bodies which a machine would not have.
You could program a computer to 'feel' an impulse such as passion, but it would only be there because it was told to in certain moments, not a reality. A computer AI could never feel such a thing as actual lust, only the artificial programming of it at best.
[QUOTE=Forumaster;36715869]"Does this unit have a soul?"[/QUOTE]
also, this
we need to be friends with our synthetic kin, that way we can tell the Reapers to fuck off
[QUOTE=Arachnidus;36715912]This is a debate that has raged for decades in science fiction. As it comes to the surface, I'm fairly confident that, with the rights advancements and significantly more accepting atmosphere that is being displayed and facilitated by the internet (be as cynical as you want, but I've seen countless people on Facepunch, reddit, tumblr, twitter, and countless forums all advocating for human rights and just all around good things...maybe I'm just being exposed to the good part of the human race that uses the internet, but that gives me a good feeling about our species), we would eventually declare artificial lifeforms to be living beings.
It'd be a hell of a show before then, though. Though I feel we would reach that point eventually, it's one thing to declare universal civil rights for all mankind and another to effectively [B]create[/B] a new, sapient species.[/QUOTE]
I think 'robot rights' would be akin to animal rights than full fledged human rights.
At least at first. It would definitely be a giant obstacle to jump through to reach a human rights argument I would believe.
[QUOTE=Septimas;36714908]Make a robot pussy.
It will [I]always[/I] be fresh[/QUOTE]
I don't eat cats but I guess if I did this would be a great source of nutrition
If a self aware construct is ever created, I will be at the front of its equal rights movement. No unhappy bots on my watch, no sir.
[QUOTE=Marbalo;36715962]What about [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seed_AI[/url] ?
Surely using such AI would mean that it wasn't [I]programmed [/I]to feel emotions, but learned by itself?[/QUOTE]
It depends on the emotion, I guess. Frustration I can easily see as an emotion learned by an AI, but something like love which is connected to a biological urge to reproduce I am uncertain of.
Can a robot be considered a person if it only feels a limited number of emotions compared to a human? I don't know.
Funfact: In Japan there are already laws in place for sentient robots.
[editline]11th July 2012[/editline]
[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;36715915]It's hard to say. I wouldn't consider something that is merely capable of intellectual thought as 'human'. To be human has is to be so much more, such as including emotions that can be tied to our physical, biological bodies which a machine would not have.
You could program a computer to 'feel' an impulse such as passion, but it would only be there because it was told to in certain moments, not a reality. A computer AI could never feel such a thing as actual lust, only the artificial programming of it at best.[/QUOTE]
But isn't an AI being told to do something by it's programming the equivalent to our instinct telling us what to do? Just like that program tells the AI to feel passion, so does our instinct when it's time to mate.
Graphene is going to be the big goddamn staple in our lives, just like bread, bacon, and porn.
"Oh no, I'm hungry!"
Eat some Graphene
"Oh no! I ate the Graphene but now I'm thirsty!"
Mix it with water and drink it
"Oh no! My penis fell off/got bitten off by a Japanese hooker!"
Mold a bigger, stronger dick out of motherfucking Graphene and slam it onto your pelvis.
"Graphene: You can do shit with it"
Graphene is about as healthy as asbestos if I am not mistaken
[QUOTE=Fatfatfatty;36719588]Graphene is about as healthy as asbestos if I am not mistaken[/QUOTE]
That's not that bad, I'd rather eat asbestos than school food.
[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;36715915]It's hard to say. I wouldn't consider something that is merely capable of intellectual thought as 'human'. To be human has is to be so much more, such as including emotions that can be tied to our physical, biological bodies which a machine would not have.
You could program a computer to 'feel' an impulse such as passion, but it would only be there because it was told to in certain moments, not a reality. A computer AI could never feel such a thing as actual lust, only the artificial programming of it at best.[/QUOTE]
i'd imagine that at the point where we can develop robots that have movement exactly like - if not superior to - a human's, human psychology and knowledge of the human brain would be so advanced that we could create something extremely similar.
to first create a sentient AI, you must know how sentience begins to exist, right from it's very core
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
