History Fragments: The Beginning of an Agricultural Revolution

Morikawa says his engineers had their breakthrough idea right there in the orange grove. They realized that the task could be divided between two robots: One would locate all the oranges, and the second would pick them. “Once you know where all the fruit is, then it becomes an easy job to calculate the most efficient way to pick it all,” says Morikawa.

[...]

The farmers are willing to pay up because they’ve been rattled by a labor shortage over the past few years — California growers tell horror stories of watching their fruit rot on the trees as they waited for the picking crews to arrive. Last fall, growers rallied in front of the U.S. Capitol, frustrated that Congress still hadn’t created a program to ease the passage of foreign guest workers across the Mexico border.

With the supply-and-demand equation uncertain, growers see the robots as a better option. “You can predict what it’s going to cost to buy a machine and maintain it,” says Baskin. “You can’t predict the bargaining that we go through with contract labor,” he says.

Farms Fund Robots to Replace Migrant Fruit Pickers, from Wired Magazine, 21st June 2007

Comments

There are no comments for this fragment. Why not leave a message?

Leave a comment






Please note: Comment moderation is enabled and may delay your comment. There is no need to resubmit your comment.

June 26, 2007

History Fragments: Fitted Out For The Future

Written by on June 25, 2007 | History Fragments

No need to worry about that family history of heart disease, because gene therapy will clear that up. You have a few friends with artificial limbs – some arms, some legs – but you’re still weighing up the pros and cons of elective replacement for yourself. Perhaps you’ll go for that exoskeleton instead? It would be fun to run, jump and lift like an Olympian

Fitted out for the future, Seamus Byrne, Sydney Morning Herald, 25th June 2007

History Fragments: Homo Cyberneticus

Written by on June 25, 2007 | History Fragments

Thanks to Moore’s Law, the computer will soon think faster than the human brain, argues Hans Moravec, Research Professor at the Robotics Institute of Carnegie Mellon University in Pittsburgh, and author of several books on the evolution of robot intelligence. He’s calculated that the human brain’s current processing capacity of 100-trillion instructions per second is likely to be surpassed by computers by the year 2030. Increasingly, computers will take over more and more of the functions of the human brain, he says. They’ll replicate many of our brain pathways, perhaps evolving and learning themselves, maybe eventually even becoming self aware and conscious like Hal in ’2001 A Space Odyssey’ and Viki in ‘I Robot’.

They’ll soon leave Homo Optimus far behind. With advances in robot technology, they’ll be fully mobile, relatively crude at first, but quickly evolving into sophisticated androids. Like the androids in ‘I Robot’, they’ll assume more and more of our daily functions. They’ll take over production of goods and services, they’ll run our corporations in a fully automated economy. They’ll reduce the value of human brain power to zero, just as the industrial revolution reduced the value of muscle power to zero centuries earlier. We humans will be left to our own devices, creatures of leisure, with no need to work. What a terrific arrangement – as long as the machines believe it’s worthwhile keeping us on. If they don’t, there could be serious trouble. They might decide they’re better off without us. If we’re both competing for the earth’s diminishing resources, it could get ugly.

If we don’t want to cede control of the planet to them, we’ll have no choice but to team up with machines and integrate with them. Not being able to beat them, we’ll be forced to join them.

In fact we’re already going down that path, argues Pearson. We’ve made artificial limbs, eyes and ears that interface directly with our nervous systems. We’ve built computers that can detect our thoughts without any connection between brain and machine. It won’t be long before a computer and a human brain can share consciousness, he says. This new species too will have a name – Homo Cyberneticus. A union of silicon on which computing power is based, and of carbon, from which organic life forms are built.

What a glorious future. Or is it? To present day humans, it sounds not so much an advance but more like a takeover of the human race by machines. So in the beginning at least, there’ll be resistance by some homo sapiens. Some will resist on the grounds of religion and ethics. Others will fear the loss of human rituals, like the Saturday night with the mates, a few beers and a shag.

But eventually we’ll have no choice. We’ll fall so far behind, we’ll be unfit for anything but an unreliable form of domestic servant, or worse, as pets. But if we don’t go along with the machines, we’ll risk dying out, just as Neanderthals died out to make way for our human ancestors, the Cro Magnons. After a couple of centuries, we’d come to our senses, and join with the machines, making homo sapiens the first species on the planet to become voluntarily extinct.

Dr. Peter Lavell, Ockham’s Razor, Human Brain: Future Upgrades, 17th June 2007

Interview with a Human: The Freedom Club

Written by on June 24, 2007 | Interview Fragments

What is The Freedom Club?

We are an organisation dedicated to bringing about personal human freedom by opposing the restrictions and order that we believe are being imposed by technology upon us as individuals, and society as a whole.

We believe it is an intrinsic, basic right of every human to have a level of privacy that does not simply mean information security, as well as the right of every biological human being to not be discriminated against because they refuse to take part in cyberization or implantation, or because they simply can’t afford it.

Furthermore, we are wholly opposed to technological progress simply for the sake of profit, which benefits a wealthy few and increases the digital divide, but rather support technological progress for the benefit of mankind, rich or poor.

Since it is the existence of technology itself that is important, and not how it is used, we believe that all scientific research should not be done under the auspices of the military-industrial complex, nor under private, corporate direction, but rather through open source and transparent mechanisms that are wholly owned by the public, because we fund a large part of this research through taxes already. In other words, we believe in a democratic form of scientific research.

Read the rest of this entry »

History Fragments: The Nature of Technology

Written by on June 23, 2007 | History Fragments

“[Technology] creates new possibilities for human choice and action but leaves their disposition uncertain. What its effects will be and what ends it will serve are not inherent in the technology, but depend on what man will do with technology. Technology thus makes possible a future of open-ended options … New technology creates new opportunities for men and societies and it also generates new problems for them. It has both positive and negative effects, and it usually has the two at the same time and in virtue of each other.”

– Emmanuel G. Mesthene, Program on Technology and Society, Fourth Annual Report, Harvard University, 1969

“Our conventional response to all media, namely that it is how they are used that counts, is the numb stance of the technological idiot … The effects of technology do not occur at the level of opinions or concepts, but alter sense ratios or patterns of perception steadily and without any resistance … Subliminal and docile acceptance of media impact has made them prisons without walls for their human users.”

Marshall McLuhan, Understanding Media, 1964

Be the first to write a comment.

There are no tags for this fragment.