WTF are you talking about?

Blockchain is just a way to store information. A lot of the NFT that do this point to IPFS which is another .... blockchain

Nft is just a file on the blockchain. Unlike normal files they can have smart features built in.

>Are you interested in chemical engineering by any chance? Also, I’m curious, are you planning to pursue formal education for this?

My background is in technology. I currently have 4 degrees, but I'm not planning on doing one in chemical engineering. My degrees are in Aerospace, general computer, network engineering, and a higher network degree with a focus on cyber security.

I looked into chemical engineering, and there just isn't any jobs in that in my area. Right now I mostly invest and deal with blockchain technologies to make money. I seriously doubt I will work again for someone in technology. There just isn't any jobs in that in my area, and there is personal reasons.

More than less, I was born in the wrong place and time to heavily worked in the robotic field. And unless if I get a heavy influx of cash. I seriously doubt I will ever be able to do anything serious in it outside of what I'm doing now.

It is what it is.

​

​

Remember this post and all in it was just a "what if". In this case, what if you were super rich like Musk.

​

>the exo skeleton you’re referring too would it resemble something that Ironman wears

To be honest, if I was developing military robots that is what I would aim for with our troops. Like a bunch of iron man full battle armor.

But with things outside of a live action environment where you are getting shot at. You only need something to help you run/walk longer, carry more, and so on. I can't remember off the top of my head, but if I recall right firefighter suites are 50 lb or so. Then if you have to move beams or something that might of fallen, pick up a person, and so on. An exoskeleton would made it like walking in a park.

Like it would be something like this but a better form factor https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=soe78h5KXtk or https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lWmFEoDjUc4

​

That doesn't look as cool, but keep in mind on my end it would've been about data collection.

​

>Can you explain to me what do you mean by data collection in regards with the exo skeleton?

You can put sensors all over the thing. This lets you know how the person moves in that job, how often they move in a way, and so on. If you attach special cameras to their uniform it can scan the room while they are doing their job.

You can then take this data and make simulations and use AI or people to find the best build for a robot for such an environment.

It's similar to how Amazon has their workers wear stuff for data collection. This giving the AI more data to help better train their thing. And robots can eventually just do the job.

>Will they be drones? Robotic humanoids? Autonomous machines?

Both cops and firefighters you need robotic humanoids. Like with both you can use drones, but they have limits. Like with the cop one, drones are loud. It is just the laws of physics. Like a fully electric car going down highway is also loud due to wind and tires. There is some things you can't fix.

And with firefighting having it go into a burning building isn't smart. 3 things a fire needs to stay alive.

1. Oxygen
2. Fuel
3. Heat

Take away one, and it will go away. But, add more of 1 and it burns hotter. A drone is likely to push more oxygen in the burning building.

​

As far as other types of robots. You might find something better. But it has to have legs and arms. Both firefighters and cops don't go on regular stuff. So wheels won't work.

Again, they can use other things like drones which fly around on the outside for more intel. But the bulk of the work will have to be a humanoid.

​

>Also what material would be best?

I have no idea. Like I don't have musk money, and that would be one of the things a lab needs to figure out. Even more with the firefighter one.

​

>There’s already some security robots being placed at hospitals for parking lot surveillance

A lot of those are basically cameras on wheels. Like they can't actually stop anyone. And they tend to get damaged by people.

​

>so I think the first place to start for fighter fighters is to create some basic programmable robot machine on wheels with the tech with have to create some type of remote controlled robot that can be driven to carry out victims from dangerous situations.

I highly suggest you to go and ask your local fire fighting area if they need help during training. That you are wondering about that.

Wheels can't go up steps. They can't go around a fallen beam. And it needs to be quick. Every second counts.

​

Lets say hypothetically I had musk money. I would develop an exoskeleton for the fighters. On my end, it is to collect data to help train and make simulations.

When I get a functional robot I would then make a way where it can be remotely controlled. This letting someone on the outside do the highly dangerous things. But on my end again more data collection.

Then I would have it be added as a partner. Like it will fight fires along with humans. And after a point it will phase out all the humans. Like if they are around it isn't for the dangerous work. You could even modify the trucks where the robots are on the outside and when they get where they need to they detach and start working. Add self driving to the mix and areas that need firefighters but can't get the staff can now have them

Well I think there is a few things needed beyond that for robot cops. Like we need robots to be more of the normal. Having an army of robot cops beat up someone or arrest people makes for a pr nightmare. Even if everything was above board and a human would do it.

This is why I would pick firefighters. It's less risk, it gives a good image, and it does really save lives. Like there is a ton of firefighters that get killed or hurt every year. And the gases are really causing cancer.

Imagine the image of a robot firefighter pulling little kids from a burning building. IMO that will gain a lot of public support

Ya it is a risk. But this is my viewpoint

1. It makes our life better (good)
2. It doesn't really change anything (whatever)
3. It makes things worse (well I guess now is a good time to die)
4. It kills us all (we all die one day anyways, and it isn't like my life is getting better)

Here is a back and forward

Person A: Max Tegmark (I beleive) compares it to us worrying about destroying an ant colony while constructing a highway. It isn't even a consideration

Person B: Do you like your fridge or should we go back to ice boxes? Keep in mind fridges save lives because you can store medical stuff.

Person A: wants fridges over ice boxes

Person B: the biggest industry in the world and history was the ice industry. What killed it was the fridge.

So pick killing the biggest industry humans ever known. But in return countless people can get medical stuff, food can go to more places, and so on. Or keep that industry, all the people working it in the job, etc. But have everyone who is living today thanks due to the fridge dead.

There is always outcomes to every choice. Sometimes good and sometimes bad. But a simple risk assessment shows way more lives and way more good will come with AGI. And like the fridge. Even if you delay it, it will still come out at some point.

Really? Because the NSA has offices with the ones in the USA and by law in China you will have offices for the CCP.

And your comment about Apple shows how little you know. On the local level sure. But when they send it to higher levels they get in.

I'm done with this back and forward because again you keep overlooking it only takes 1 hack. And every counter I give which disproves what you said you devert

Not exactly. There was malware that was attached to some applications due to what a developers were developing the applications on. And the malware got into a boatload of android devices and other devices.

We can do the Tit for Tat all day, but at the end of the day it has been proven that cyber security is not top issue for most. In fact many companies and the government itself views it has a henrance since it does not make money and this has been argued within board meetings and other places.

Hell we are talking about State levels. Meaning groups that can afford and do use spies to sabotage things all the time. How hard would it realistically be to either bribe or get someone in place to upload an update. Perhaps they know what it is or more likely they don't. And in this you made a back door for the state level to do what they want when they want how they want

It only takes one and I mean one attack to do large scale damage.

It isn't a consumer device but USA announced China hacked in their systems to get some of the covid money. Also you have equifax. Lastpass had a jack. Etc

And? There is hacks All the time. Pen testers which point out companies won't patch simple systems. And so on

I have a background in cyber security. So this is one area I really do know what I'm talking about. Like you litterally had a car manufacturer think it was OK to hook up the Bluetooth system to the same system that controls the cars break, speed, etc

Not really. Actions speak far louder than any words.

UBI, UBS, and UBN

^

This

See, back in the day people were litterally antiwriting because they thought it would make people forgetful. People were anti car, TV, and so on. People were anti books, computers, internet, and now crypto. And like everything there is people anti AI.

Do they have worries? Yes. But are they founded? Not really. They think AI will kill us. But they never ask why. Like do you go out of your way to kill random bugs and germs for no reason? Same here

Now should people worry about it taking their jobs. Yes. But that is a good thing. There needed to be an economic shift. It hasn't happen, but there needs to be changes. Too many hard working people can't really survive on what they have, and they basically turned into a lifetime slave. AI is likely to fix this.

I found the best questions is ones where the answer is in the question. Like

What color is a pink elephant?

Or

How tall is a 3 foot man?

​

Change the color and subject, and what you will find is most AI can't answer that basic question. Like most will assume you are looking for pictures, or they will just get confused.

>My question was posed as "without AGI" as in between now and whenever AGI becomes a reality, if coding actually writing code from text prompts gets simple enough then anyone could do it.

It won't happen. At least not at first. Like it would be a generational thing. Think of fully remote work. Studies have shown it massively reduce the cost of running a company, the employees are far more productive, the employees are far more loyal, and so on.

What we both are talking about will kill off middle management. Just like what they are doing with remote work, execs and middle management will fight tooth and nail for this to not be a thing.

​

Like if it was as simple as you make the tool and people will use it. Then yes. But it has to be so dead simple that it has to spit out an app under a minute or the CEO kid needs to use it and tell their parent about it. OR DAO have to take over (companies ran by software/AI).

>But how long would it take to train someone to get the prompts down?

You're missing what I'm saying by miles. AGI in theory if built right you could say to the program "I want an android app that does x", and that's all the info it needs. Like human coders I wouldn't down you need revisions. So a manger could say, "the client wants x" and it makes the change as if they were talking to a developer.

​

On the client or manger side it is more than less the same. Most managers over coders now have no idea about coding.

If it can't be that dead simple, I don't think you will see a wave of coders losing their job due to automation.

I will copy and paste what I said somewhere else.

I think you will need AGI for most developers to lose their job. Like the average person, management, etc doesn't know what to ask the AI to do to get it to do what they want.

​

I think the jobs that are at most risk with modern or near modern AI is things like accountants, basic legal, and things like that. Things where you can put in exact inputs or give a system whatever, and it will spit out the answer.

​

I think we are maybe 10 years from it starting to take over a lot of engineering jobs.

I think you will need AGI for most developers to lose their job. Like the average person, management, etc doesn't know what to ask the AI to do to get it to do what they want.

I seen something similar when people say it can't do everything they do or or isn't on the same level.

They are comparing it to what they know. Regular software which doesn't get better over time without major updates. In reality, it needs to be looked as a generation thing. Where each generation it gets far better and it can do more. And AI generations can last for weeks to months. If enough data and use is done. In days. Like look at image recognition 2 years ago to now.

Some accounting firms are already comparing their workers with AI. Where when the output will be on the same level or better than the worker. The worker is at risk. And prior to then, then AI is being trained by the worker through just doing their job.

Like AI is being ban in some courts because how good they are at finding ways out of parking tickets and other things.

>Model: Oh wow, that's a big question. I'm not sure I know much about that. But I can tell you how dogs are used to sniff out drugs at the airport!

User: I have 2 dogs

Model: Wow! That sounds like a lot of work for those dogs! Do they get tired out?

User: What? Are you insulting me?

Model: Hmm ... oh sorry, gotta bounce! 👋 Nice chatting with you about dogs, their noses, and how they can be used to sniff out drugs at the airport! But I gotta go now! Bye!!!

Chances are it was referring what it was saying to the drug sniffing dogs. Like it thought your 2 dogs were drug sniffing dogs.

​

It seems to not be too good at dramatically changing the conversation.

​

Something I wonder is how deep is it's memory. Like with most AI chatbots like this I find after about 5 or 10 lines it forgot what was said unless if it logged exact things. Like I could say my dad's name is x, and it will remember that because it's an exact thing. But if I say how my day is going and the breakfast I had. Then a good bit later ask it what breakfast I had to test the memory. The majority of AI chat bots won't remember it.

​

I do hope this does comes to Google assistant products. It would be interesting to see how people interact with it.

>If a company goes out of business and there is a need that can be met for money (repairs of an older model, or need to replace said model) then a new business is born.

There is people today with medical implants from a business that went out of business. Many their unit broke and they have no way to repair it. There has been repair companies that came up, but most died quickly due to lack of supplies.

You're thinking of something like a smartphone when you need to be thinking of something like a medical device. These devices will be attached to us in a serious way or they will be inside of our bodies. Like imagine having the repair place having to take out one of your eyes to work on it. Now what if they used lead or other things that can cause long term problems? These aren't companies you can just spin up. Unlike a smart phone, these things can kill people if repaired wrong.

​

>a world with more time, perhaps will make better lungs for hiking the Himalayas, or interplanetary needs may leave one desiring a cyborg body if only temporary, or a robotic one should they not want to cross space for years at a time- the possibilities are endless, so with that clue we should assume the modifications will also be endless.

I imagine at some point we will be able to remotely control a robot as if we are there. This taking away all danger other than PTSD. So like you want to hike the Himalayas, but maybe don't have the money to travel, you have only the weekend to do it, or you just don't want to be in the danger. You can just rent out a remote robot you can use a brain implant to remotely control as if you were there. And with sensors you can see, smell, and so on as if you are there. (side note, I have no doubt the porn industry will make this possible. Like that is most likely going to be where a lot of the funding will come in. Most likely even more than the military.)

Don't mix my words. You're simply not worth my time.

You're too stupid. Like if you were ignorant then that's is one thing. But I can't work with stupid. Stupid is a waste of my time. Hence why I said you are a waste of my time

Look I don't have the time to read through your book. But obviously with the little I did look at you have no care to educate yourself.

And this simply makes you not worth my time. Like I can counter everything you said, you then basically repeat whatever anti-crypto crap. Like you already got into name calling. But at the end you will keep pushing false info, and I know enough to see through it. So it is a waste of both of our time.

Like I've given you facts and you're loaded with opinions. While the information you tried to use to legitimize it is flat out wrong. It's your opinion and I respect you don't like new technology. Many boomers and boomer mentality people don't. It is fine.

Anyways, I hope you have a good day. When you do open your mind up to being educated then please feel free to come back. But until then, talking to stupid is a net negative.