Feedback learning and generalization in robotics takes a step forward.

Well, let's see. As I recall the folks that packaged the whale oil from whaling ships when fossil fuels took over moved on to making buggy whips. And when the automobile killed the buggy they moved on to making Edsels and then on to packaging 5.25" floppies. I'm sure those displaced by androids will move on to the next soon-to-be-defunct employment.

So what did they do, up and die?Remember the displacement of literally millions of factory/foundry workers from the "rust belt" in the 80's and 90's? I don't recall hearing of mass deaths involving millions of people in the region. They found something to do. No doubt it wasn't into jobs as well paying as they had but they didn't just disappear.Displacement has always taken place and always will. People are financially and emotionally scarred by such events, but people always adapted and always will. Yes, the vast majority made the transition.

Then there will be serious consequences.There will be hunger, strife, riots, class warfare, revolution,ORSociety will adapt to avoid as many of those consequences as it wants to avoid.What did you think would happen? Dr. A's leisure society, instant nirvana for the masses?As always, hard as it is to accept, you adapt or die.

With enough bleeding hearts like you, ok ... and me, in the electorate, maybe. Maybe not.Androids are a pretty nifty way to bring the ills and evils of this society to their inevitable peak of abuse and spark a revolution. But if not androids then maybe oil/power or food shortages from overpopulation or global warming or another deeper economic depression or some other less nifty abuse will set off the oppressed and depressed populous to violent action.Unless we more evenly level the resources of the society it is going to happen. How we level those resources, how much we level those resources, if we level those resources ... well that is the $10,000 question, isn't it.And I like Jon's question above. The $64,000 question.Edited by AZPaul3, : No reason given.

Of course, in the short term (think 200 years).Now, assuming we don't decide to poison, war or warm our species into extinction (yeah, skeptical), then, hey! A quart of Hagen-Dazs chocolate ice cream three times a day without the weight gain or nutrition deficiency! Nirvana. Edited by AZPaul3, : spelin

You are both correct.A lot of waitstaff are, if not actually grumpy, quite aloof, inattentive and unconcerned. A lot are friendly, smiling and polite.A lot of people (and so there is no confusion we are talking about real human people here, the flesh and blood kind rather than the servo-circuit and hydraulic-fluid kind) take their cue from the customer. If you walk in with attitude, especially that uppity superior one, then, from experience, the waitress is most probably thinking that you're going to stiff her tip if you even bother to give one at all. Not worth her effort. Then there are the grumps and the inattentive who ring your sale, take the money, give you change and bag your purchase without ever looking up from their cell phone no matter how cordial you are.I'm thinking some perceive a growing wave of poor service because there is more service being performed so more opportunity to be poor. Add to that the growing pool of poor customers in absolute number if not in percentage. Together with the instant communications of bad things (considerably less often will people disseminate videos/text about good service) and perceptions form.So you are both right in a way, which means that nothing has changed in the last century. Poor Customer ServiceAnd, ringo, you may be seeing a improvement in the level of service you receive because you're old and servers feel sorry for you because you're going to die soon.

This could only be said by someone who hasn't been there.Yes, Jon, service personnel do indeed live on their tips. The minimum wage laws set much lower minimums (about 1/3 of the minimum for labor) for tip eligible positions (as declared by the employer). Without a good level of tips you cannot pay the rent or buy food. The pay check you get every week doesn’t even cover your utilities and insurance let alone anything left for food and rent.Cooks and dish washers are not in tip eligible positions and are thus covered by the higher minimum wage for labor.And 15% is minimal. Anything less is not just cheep it’s a slap in the face to the server.Try it for a couple years. I assure you that if you do not have a second job to supplement your server job you will not make it.

Just to make sure there is a clear understanding, under federal law if an employees wage+tips do not equal the minimum wage ($7.25) then the employer has to kick in to make the minimum. So, tipped employees do make at least the minimum wage, and the hope is, maybe a bit more to help feed the baby. Your attitudes toward tipping would be different if you had to work in such a job.And, just to rub it in (cuz I'm an ass) I note that Minnesota's minimum wage is less than the federal standard.What a wonderful set of attitudes your region has.

If they are available and their management allows, I do.Grocery clerks and store clerks are not tip eligible and their management will not allow them to accept tips, but if someone serving me is tip eligible I tip and I generally tip well.In another life I lived on my tips. I have seen plenty of people who, through no fault of their own, are stuck in situations where they only have service positions open to them. This last recession where we had CPA’s, programmers and executives waiting on tables is such a situation.If someone is as financially comfortable as I am and the server has not really screwed up bad, then I tell you to your face, if you do not tip AT LEAST 15% then you are a lousy excuse for a human being. You should be ashamed.

I was going to crack a joke about robots being too logical therefor it takes the twisted logic of a human to give proper religious training/programming, then I remembered the robot preacher on Futurama. Well byte my matte fleshy ass.

I want to laugh at that, I really do. It is witty, humorous and appropriately pointed. Just the kind of intellectual humor that deserves a "ROFL."However, you have hit a big red pulsating hot button.Loebner has single-handedly destroyed the very concept of the Turing Test. He has made himself, his prize and, by association, the goal of the Turing Test a laughing stock in the Intelligent Systems discipline.Not to detract from the brilliance of your post, as most of your quips indeed are, but at this one I can only cry for the tarnishment of one of Turing's most genius insights.Edited by AZPaul3, : No reason given.Edited by AZPaul3, : Late proofread? Non-existent proofread.