"It got incredibly personal," says one Apple executive who was briefed by Jobs on the meeting. "Jobs said that Rubin was steamed, telling him his position was anti-innovation. And this is where Steve was demeaning to Andy, saying Andy was trying to be like him, look like him, have the same haircut, the same glasses, the same style."
lol. Good article (which is saying something for BI, one of the most annoying popular news sites). Funny for SJ to call someone else an arrogant f**k. All of these guys are on another level, and not just in the good ways.
lol. Good article (which is saying something for BI, one of the most annoying popular news sites). Funny for SJ to call someone else an arrogant f**k. All of these guys are on another level, and not just in the good ways.
So, if machines take over all human activity, including art and science, what will happen to the organic body and its conditioned-to-work-and-think brain? Surely, will it decay? Is mankind-machines coexistence possible while people are fighting for jobs and resources: competition, nations, and so on? Anyway, what is the endeavour in which a robot cannot take part or channel at all? Why won't the future automatons be alive? What is the fundamental difference between a mechanical structure, organic or inorganic, that imitates life and life itself? Is there any, virtual or real? If it said that there is a difference, is it just some kind of authority who defines and differentiates? Perhaps then, someday, will be a powerful automaton the one who will define life, its unique life, truth itself? That is, where it begins and ends life? Along these lines, there is a peculiar book, take a look in a sample in Just another freethinking suggestion, far away from dogmas or axioms
Even though everything in the universe may be cause-and-effect/orderly, not everything is algorithmic, I think Godel proved that. So don't give up on us humans yet! In any event I don't think your future where mankind stands still while robots get better and better, eventually overtaking us, is a realistic one. Humans will continue to improve too, both through genetic engineering and electronic implants.
Apple should buy or at least get involved in Aldebaran Robotics and their NAO project. The focus of NAO is to have a helpful, dialogue-capable intelligent and friendly robot in every home, which is very much Apple's style
Aldebaran makes entertainment robots. I'd rather Apple bought a company like iRobot for their IP (and their company name already fits Apple's naming scheme).
Hold on ... if they sack all the workers in factories in China and India just because of they want to earn more money, how the masses of unemployed people going to afford all these products that Google etc what to sell to them. So much for the global economy's "developing middle class".
Google are like a bunch of spoilt rich boys, playing with technology. They got the search engine right and it just continues to bring in more money than they can spend. Unfortunately, they haven't got much else right. Oh Android. Please. Like they actually "invented and developed" the core technologies in that.
What else? Google Glass? These guys just don't give a rats about anything or anyone.
Aldebaran makes entertainment robots. I'd rather Apple bought a company like iRobot for their IP (and their company name already fits Apple's naming scheme).
That would be much more in direct competition with Boston Dynamics for sure (well it used to be, before Google started to make it look like they're pulling them out of defense). Would Apple consider playing around in defense like that? I did some Android stuff for the Army, and I remember that back then, they couldn't go with iOS because there was no way to secure it since it was closed up, and Apple wouldn't play ball.
Why should Sony be worried about Apple? They have decades of lead experience in the music player field.
Why should Research in Motion be worried about Apple? They have decades of lead experience in the phone field.
<span style="line-height:1.4em;">Why should IBM be worried about Apple? They have decades of lead experience in the tablet field.</span>
You jumped down mdriftmeyer's throat in error. He wasn't referring to Apple.
I’m not going to explain why you’re wrong. You’ve proven that you don’t care about being right in the first place. Please just shut up.
Because you can't explain why I'm wrong. The article has nothing to do with Apple, nor any of the posts except for yours. Digital_Guy said that Honda should be afraid of what Google is doing and mdriftmeyer said why should Honda be afraid since they have so much experience. I'm certain that you were not defending Google, yet that's how it came across.
Because you can't explain why I'm wrong. The article has nothing to do with Apple, nor any of the posts except for yours. Digital_Guy said that Honda should be afraid of what Google is doing and mdriftmeyer said why should Honda be afraid since they have so much experience. I'm certain that you were not defending Google, yet that's how it came across.
Comments
"It got incredibly personal," says one Apple executive who was briefed by Jobs on the meeting. "Jobs said that Rubin was steamed, telling him his position was anti-innovation. And this is where Steve was demeaning to Andy, saying Andy was trying to be like him, look like him, have the same haircut, the same glasses, the same style."
http://www.businessinsider.com/steve-jobs-on-android-founder-andy-rubin-big-arrogant-f-2013-11
lol. Good article (which is saying something for BI, one of the most annoying popular news sites). Funny for SJ to call someone else an arrogant f**k. All of these guys are on another level, and not just in the good ways.
lol. Good article (which is saying something for BI, one of the most annoying popular news sites). Funny for SJ to call someone else an arrogant f**k. All of these guys are on another level, and not just in the good ways.
One of the most annoying popular news sites?
Funny for SJ?
All of these guys?
u funny ma man
ROFLMAO
One of the most annoying popular news sites?
Funny for SJ?
All of these guys?
u funny ma man
ROFLMAO
I was actually getting it mixed up with International Business Times, which drives me crazy.
Future News Headline:
"Foxconn to be investigated for employing suspected outside-warranty workers"
No, this is Google so the robots would still be in beta.
So, if machines take over all human activity, including art and science, what will happen to the organic body and its conditioned-to-work-and-think brain? Surely, will it decay? Is mankind-machines coexistence possible while people are fighting for jobs and resources: competition, nations, and so on? Anyway, what is the endeavour in which a robot cannot take part or channel at all? Why won't the future automatons be alive? What is the fundamental difference between a mechanical structure, organic or inorganic, that imitates life and life itself? Is there any, virtual or real? If it said that there is a difference, is it just some kind of authority who defines and differentiates? Perhaps then, someday, will be a powerful automaton the one who will define life, its unique life, truth itself? That is, where it begins and ends life? Along these lines, there is a peculiar book, take a look in a sample in Just another freethinking suggestion, far away from dogmas or axioms
Even though everything in the universe may be cause-and-effect/orderly, not everything is algorithmic, I think Godel proved that. So don't give up on us humans yet! In any event I don't think your future where mankind stands still while robots get better and better, eventually overtaking us, is a realistic one. Humans will continue to improve too, both through genetic engineering and electronic implants.
Aldebaran makes entertainment robots. I'd rather Apple bought a company like iRobot for their IP (and their company name already fits Apple's naming scheme).
Google are like a bunch of spoilt rich boys, playing with technology. They got the search engine right and it just continues to bring in more money than they can spend. Unfortunately, they haven't got much else right. Oh Android. Please. Like they actually "invented and developed" the core technologies in that.
What else? Google Glass? These guys just don't give a rats about anything or anyone.
Aldebaran makes entertainment robots. I'd rather Apple bought a company like iRobot for their IP (and their company name already fits Apple's naming scheme).
That would be much more in direct competition with Boston Dynamics for sure (well it used to be, before Google started to make it look like they're pulling them out of defense). Would Apple consider playing around in defense like that? I did some Android stuff for the Army, and I remember that back then, they couldn't go with iOS because there was no way to secure it since it was closed up, and Apple wouldn't play ball.
Future News Headline:
"Foxconn to be investigated for employing suspected outside-warranty workers"
Well done.
[post]
It’s a spambot. Just report.
You jumped down mdriftmeyer's throat in error. He wasn't referring to Apple.
Please just shut up.
Try reading comprehension before attacking someone.
Take your own advice, troll.
You're the one being inciting, so who's the troll?
1. Read posts before replying.
2. Reply to the content of the post, not some magical fantasy land you’ve made up.
3. Read and follow the first two.
That's what I did and you obviously didn't.
I’m not going to explain why you’re wrong. You’ve proven that you don’t care about being right in the first place. Please just shut up.
Because you can't explain why I'm wrong. The article has nothing to do with Apple, nor any of the posts except for yours. Digital_Guy said that Honda should be afraid of what Google is doing and mdriftmeyer said why should Honda be afraid since they have so much experience. I'm certain that you were not defending Google, yet that's how it came across.
Please just shut up.