On Thu, 04 Jan 2007 07:12:02 -0800, Larry Qualig wrote:
>
> Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>> A Robot in Every Home
>>
>> ,----[ Quote ]
>> | Although a few of the domestic robots of tomorrow may resemble
>> | the anthropomorphic machines of science fiction, a greater number
>> | are likely to be mobile peripheral devices that perform
>> | ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>> | specific household tasks.
>> | ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>> `----
>>
>> http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?articleID=9312A198-E7F2-99DF-31DA639D6C4BA567&ref=sciam
>>
>
>
> Let's see... this robotics article is a 'feature article' in Scientific
> American magazine. Maybe some people here aren't familiar with
> Scientific American. It's been around since 1845 (about 162 years) and
> guys like Roger Penrose, Steven Hawking have written numberous articles
> for the magazine. This thing called the "Unified Field Theory" by some
> guy named Einstein was first published in this magazine as well. So
> obviously this magazine is a corporate mouthpiece and some sort of paid
> Microsoft shill.
>
> Jeeez. Simply put, Roy Schestowitz is a fucking idiot. Instead of
> actually reading the (excellent) article the moron decided to judge a
> book by its cover and bash it based on the author, instead of the
> actual content.
>
> The name of the article is "A robot in every home." Roy Schestowitz
> should contact Scientific American (or Digg.com if he gets turned down)
> and write an article about himself. He could call it "A moron in every
> newsgroup."
Not only that, but Roy writes this as well:
"Only in a 6-bedroom house in Seattle. How is that kettle with Wi-Fi that
delivers people the weather coming along? Are people in rural India buying
it like cupcakes yet? The man remains out of touch with the world's needs
and dangers."
And dropping crank operated Linux laptops into places where the people
don't even have enough food, water and protection from harm isn't lunacy?
Once again Roy's double standard gets the best of him.
|
|
