The Future Of Artificial Intelligence
07-27-2017, 08:12 AM
#71
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2008
Posts: 864
Everyone ignores this. It has been through advances in ADM, CRM, VVM, and other interpersonal skills and techniques that we have reduced errors and made airline travel as safe as it is. Eliminate the second pilot and you eliminate half of that formula.
07-27-2017, 08:27 AM
#72
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2012
Posts: 128
The HUGE problem here is what about CRM?
How many times has the other guys caught a small mistake of yours, how often have you caught his or hers-in just one trip. I bet that number is a lot higher than all these automation advocates would ever imagine.
My main issue with any sort of automation of our jobs deals with improvisation. The best "AI" on earth can't figure out a capcha which any 3rd grader can easily solve.
Situations no one has ever anticipated don't happen often. DC10s don't lose all hydraulics every day. Planes don't land in rivers often, or fly through volcanic ash every day. But when they do, humans solve these problems with novel solutions. Programs would not. Those are called "low probability/high consequence" events. I can think of several more which automation would fail at.
I have become even more opposed to the idea of automation since I started flying the Airbus. I have had to jump in and fix stuff way, way more often on the AB than any of the previous generation planes which didn't "just fly themselves."
How many times has the other guys caught a small mistake of yours, how often have you caught his or hers-in just one trip. I bet that number is a lot higher than all these automation advocates would ever imagine.
My main issue with any sort of automation of our jobs deals with improvisation. The best "AI" on earth can't figure out a capcha which any 3rd grader can easily solve.
Situations no one has ever anticipated don't happen often. DC10s don't lose all hydraulics every day. Planes don't land in rivers often, or fly through volcanic ash every day. But when they do, humans solve these problems with novel solutions. Programs would not. Those are called "low probability/high consequence" events. I can think of several more which automation would fail at.
I have become even more opposed to the idea of automation since I started flying the Airbus. I have had to jump in and fix stuff way, way more often on the AB than any of the previous generation planes which didn't "just fly themselves."
Very insightful post!
07-27-2017, 08:51 AM
#73
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2013
Posts: 539
In time I think that alot of our piloting jobs may become obsolete. Not necessarily because technology will become so advanced, but by the time it does, what will we use for fuel?
Maybe its just me, but I would think investment into alternative energy is a more worth while investment than AI. I suspect it will take a very long time before we have computer systems that are capable of processing information like a human does. Until that point I think we're going to run out of fuel.
These problems are very complex. what will the future hold?
Maybe its just me, but I would think investment into alternative energy is a more worth while investment than AI. I suspect it will take a very long time before we have computer systems that are capable of processing information like a human does. Until that point I think we're going to run out of fuel.
These problems are very complex. what will the future hold?
07-27-2017, 09:32 AM
#74
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2010
Position: seated - facing forward
Posts: 1,098
In time I think that alot of our piloting jobs may become obsolete. Not necessarily because technology will become so advanced, but by the time it does, what will we use for fuel?
Maybe its just me, but I would think investment into alternative energy is a more worth while investment than AI. I suspect it will take a very long time before we have computer systems that are capable of processing information like a human does. Until that point I think we're going to run out of fuel.
These problems are very complex. what will the future hold?
Maybe its just me, but I would think investment into alternative energy is a more worth while investment than AI. I suspect it will take a very long time before we have computer systems that are capable of processing information like a human does. Until that point I think we're going to run out of fuel.
These problems are very complex. what will the future hold?
Google NASA electric planes
07-27-2017, 10:21 AM
#75
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2014
Posts: 1,681
There have been more recent "climb anomalies" which no one has been able to figure out.
Aviation has 30 years of experience with this "highly-automated" airliner, and it regularly ****s the bed. Better know what you are doing when it does-and better be two humans involved.
07-27-2017, 12:09 PM
#76
Line Holder
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Apr 2017
Position: CFI
Posts: 88
Ellon musk literally landed an unmanned rocket in the middle of the fu***** ocean.
07-27-2017, 05:58 PM
#77
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2011
Position: Cockpit speaker volume knob set to eleven.
Posts: 1,410
Just watched a guy try to buy some Brillo pads in a hardware store with his smart phone. After 5 minutes of waving his phone over the device, they gave up. I paid cash for my purchase and the Brillo guy tried again. Not sure if he ever got his purchase to go through. I know it ain't AI, but I don't think we have much to worry about in the near term. 😜
07-27-2017, 08:19 PM
#78
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2014
Posts: 1,681
07-28-2017, 12:33 AM
#79
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2013
Posts: 539
Most likely electric motors. NASA is testing / building one now . It will start with hybrid - a big APU that provides power to generators and batteries which turn the electric motors. Similar to a Diesel electric locomotive. There's usually an article in every other issue of AV week about it.
Google NASA electric planes
Google NASA electric planes
Consider that 1 gallon of gasoline has approximately 115000 BTU of energy. We have absolutely Nothing that can even come close in energy! Solar energy via panels doesn't even come close, plus there is a time factor involved (think time derivative). So how are we going to power those fancy nasa electronic motors?
This I feel is the real problem! Add to that the overall efficiency of a system. What we desperately need is an alternative fuel source that can at least come close to fossil fuels in both BTU output, and time derivative. The other part is improving the efficiency of engines that utilize this fuel.
Yes if we could find an engine that operates on technology other than thermal energy, that would be good. But short of a nuclear reactor, we do not have this technology (or at least a mobile version).
All is not lost, I think there is real potential in bioengineering of fuels. My vote also goes to oilshale. Neither oil nor shale, but has enormous potential!
My point is this. Before AI comes of age, fossil fuel dependence will be a show stopper. So in the meantime that is a wonderful area to invst in.
My .02
07-28-2017, 09:05 AM
#80
Line Holder
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Apr 2017
Position: CFI
Posts: 88
Not quite where I was going. Yes electric motors, sure, but where are they going to draw their power from? I know batteries! But where will the batteries draw their power?
Consider that 1 gallon of gasoline has approximately 115000 BTU of energy. We have absolutely Nothing that can even come close in energy! Solar energy via panels doesn't even come close, plus there is a time factor involved (think time derivative). So how are we going to power those fancy nasa electronic motors?
This I feel is the real problem! Add to that the overall efficiency of a system. What we desperately need is an alternative fuel source that can at least come close to fossil fuels in both BTU output, and time derivative. The other part is improving the efficiency of engines that utilize this fuel.
Yes if we could find an engine that operates on technology other than thermal energy, that would be good. But short of a nuclear reactor, we do not have this technology (or at least a mobile version).
All is not lost, I think there is real potential in bioengineering of fuels. My vote also goes to oilshale. Neither oil nor shale, but has enormous potential!
My point is this. Before AI comes of age, fossil fuel dependence will be a show stopper. So in the meantime that is a wonderful area to invst in.
My .02
Consider that 1 gallon of gasoline has approximately 115000 BTU of energy. We have absolutely Nothing that can even come close in energy! Solar energy via panels doesn't even come close, plus there is a time factor involved (think time derivative). So how are we going to power those fancy nasa electronic motors?
This I feel is the real problem! Add to that the overall efficiency of a system. What we desperately need is an alternative fuel source that can at least come close to fossil fuels in both BTU output, and time derivative. The other part is improving the efficiency of engines that utilize this fuel.
Yes if we could find an engine that operates on technology other than thermal energy, that would be good. But short of a nuclear reactor, we do not have this technology (or at least a mobile version).
All is not lost, I think there is real potential in bioengineering of fuels. My vote also goes to oilshale. Neither oil nor shale, but has enormous potential!
My point is this. Before AI comes of age, fossil fuel dependence will be a show stopper. So in the meantime that is a wonderful area to invst in.
My .02
I think the real technology advancements that will come is in batteries.
We have several players working hard to develop this technology, one of them being Tesla. Obviously for the automotive industry, but they are still working hard in advancing how to store energy long term in battery packs as well as how much energy these batteries could store.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
