For the younger guys
01-21-2020, 01:50 PM
#131
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2012
Posts: 128
Originally Posted by rickair7777
Many really smart people have issued dire warnings about code that can reprogram/update/improve itself. They even made a series of successful movies about it (starring Ahnaold).
Such code could potentially run away and have unintended consequences, or hypothetically if you develop generalized AI to replace humans it could become self-aware, at which point it would almost assuredly develop it's own motives and priorities. Better hope your new god is benign and loving. This is not a joke at all, I think Elon is one of the high-profile people who has issued such warnings.
There is no reason whatsoever to think that a system which could function in a manner indistinguishable from (or better) than a human would not be self-aware. In fact it seems more likely that not.
Technologically that last is a very far leap from the learning software of today. The danger is that it's likely that the human mind cannot conceive/create a system to fully replicate itself. Therefore a system complex enough to evolve on it's own towards that goal will be inherently unpredictable by us. We'd basically have to turn it lose and see what happens... and we might not like what happens.
Containment you say? You think it's not smart enough to find a weakness in it's cage, or just talk somebody into making a mistake? Bet humanity's future on it?
Such code could potentially run away and have unintended consequences, or hypothetically if you develop generalized AI to replace humans it could become self-aware, at which point it would almost assuredly develop it's own motives and priorities. Better hope your new god is benign and loving. This is not a joke at all, I think Elon is one of the high-profile people who has issued such warnings.
There is no reason whatsoever to think that a system which could function in a manner indistinguishable from (or better) than a human would not be self-aware. In fact it seems more likely that not.
Technologically that last is a very far leap from the learning software of today. The danger is that it's likely that the human mind cannot conceive/create a system to fully replicate itself. Therefore a system complex enough to evolve on it's own towards that goal will be inherently unpredictable by us. We'd basically have to turn it lose and see what happens... and we might not like what happens.
Containment you say? You think it's not smart enough to find a weakness in it's cage, or just talk somebody into making a mistake? Bet humanity's future on it?
Our brains are not upgradeable or connectable(yet at least). Technology is. It will keep improving at exponential rates. Will we see general AI? I don’t know but if something has infinite improvement, why not? It’s amazing how this, along with genetic engineering, has become what I think is the most important trends to affect humanity. It’s a tsunami.
As Harari said in his amazing book ‘21 Lessons for the 21st Century’, this revolution isn’t going to settle like the Agricultural or the Industrial did. ‘The AI revolution won’t be a single watershed event after which the job market will just settle into a new equilibrium. Rather, it will be a cascade of ever-bigger disruptions.’
01-21-2020, 06:55 PM
#132
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Mar 2014
Posts: 3,091
Originally Posted by Bigapplepilot
https://www.thedrive.com/tech/20988/...sional-fantasy
Here’s a really good article. The authors point is not that this theoretically can never happen, just not by 2023. He references the NASA research too.
Here’s a really good article. The authors point is not that this theoretically can never happen, just not by 2023. He references the NASA research too.
Or maybe the FAA is more right:
Jan 14 2020
Six aircraft intended for urban air mobility application are “well along” in pursuing type certification with the Federal Aviation Administration, said Jay Merkle, head of the FAA’s UAS integration office, at the Transportation Review Board’s annual meeting in Orlando, Fla.
Commenting on future transportation technology coming to the world of aviation, Merkle ensured the audience that urban air mobility (UAM) is “more than just hype … this is more than just promotional videos.” He described the sector as meeting future demand for regional aerial trips ranging from 30 miles to 300 miles.
Six aircraft intended for urban air mobility application are “well along” in pursuing type certification with the Federal Aviation Administration, said Jay Merkle, head of the FAA’s UAS integration office, at the Transportation Review Board’s annual meeting in Orlando, Fla.
Commenting on future transportation technology coming to the world of aviation, Merkle ensured the audience that urban air mobility (UAM) is “more than just hype … this is more than just promotional videos.” He described the sector as meeting future demand for regional aerial trips ranging from 30 miles to 300 miles.
It's funny, DayJet came to mind for me as well when I started researching this stuff. They were ahead of their time. As the saying goes though, being early is the same as being wrong.
01-22-2020, 08:57 AM
#133
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2012
Posts: 128
Originally Posted by Name User
Maybe you (and he) is right...that would be good for us.
Or maybe the FAA is more right:
https://www.aviationtoday.com/2020/0...s-merkle-says/
It's funny, DayJet came to mind for me as well when I started researching this stuff. They were ahead of their time. As the saying goes though, being early is the same as being wrong.
Or maybe the FAA is more right:
https://www.aviationtoday.com/2020/0...s-merkle-says/
It's funny, DayJet came to mind for me as well when I started researching this stuff. They were ahead of their time. As the saying goes though, being early is the same as being wrong.
01-23-2020, 02:14 PM
#134
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Mar 2014
Posts: 3,091
Copy/pasted from main forum:
Single pilot/autonomous capability?
Originally Posted by WutFace
https://www.flightglobal.com/air-transport/boeing-to-take-another-clean-sheet-to-nma-with-focus-on-pilots/136296.article
'Boeing is taking a fresh look at the design of its so-called New Mid-market Airplane due to changes in the global aviation market and heightened focus on pilot-aircraft interactions.
“We are going to take, probably, a different approach,” Boeing chief executive David Calhoun says on 22 January in response to questions about the NMA. “We are going to start with a clean sheet of paper, again.”'
'Boeing is taking a fresh look at the design of its so-called New Mid-market Airplane due to changes in the global aviation market and heightened focus on pilot-aircraft interactions.
“We are going to take, probably, a different approach,” Boeing chief executive David Calhoun says on 22 January in response to questions about the NMA. “We are going to start with a clean sheet of paper, again.”'
01-23-2020, 05:31 PM
#136
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Mar 2014
Posts: 3,091
Originally Posted by CaptainYoda
My guess is BWB and autonomous with single pilot backup.
(will also be built with 2 crew members for customers that require it)
(will also be built with 2 crew members for customers that require it)
A single pilot narrowbody could translate into two pilot wide body, as well as single pilot regional. That would also significantly increase the economics of a smaller aircraft especially these days.
Alternatively a new 737 type would just look a lot similar to an Airbus. Which is already out there and well designed.
I've read that the BWB has issues with evacuation times though,
Crossing my fingers for two pilots via FAA mandate though.
01-26-2020, 04:26 PM
#137
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2017
Posts: 128
Originally Posted by Name User
Nothing public on the 797.
Hopefully this link will work for you
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.wsj...ht-11577816304
Hopefully this link will work for you
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.wsj...ht-11577816304
"Boeing Co. is increasingly committed to transferring more control of aircraft from pilots to computers after two crashes exposed flaws in an automated system on its 737 MAX that overpowered aviators in the disasters."
01-27-2020, 04:02 AM
#138
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Mar 2014
Posts: 3,091
Originally Posted by takingmessages
Isn't this an oxymoron?
"Boeing Co. is increasingly committed to transferring more control of aircraft from pilots to computers after two crashes exposed flaws in an automated system on its 737 MAX that overpowered aviators in the disasters."
"Boeing Co. is increasingly committed to transferring more control of aircraft from pilots to computers after two crashes exposed flaws in an automated system on its 737 MAX that overpowered aviators in the disasters."
01-27-2020, 08:09 AM
#139
Prime Minister/Moderator
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Position: Engines Turn Or People Swim
Posts: 39,211
Originally Posted by Name User
I've read that the BWB has issues with evacuation times though,
So you have a chicken vs. egg issue... who's going to pay to reconstruct airports to handle a plane that doesn't exist? Who's going to build a plane which can't use existing terminals?
I think you'll see modified wing and tube designs first, ex strut-braced wings which can fold up on the ground (ala 777X).
01-27-2020, 08:11 AM
#140
Prime Minister/Moderator
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Position: Engines Turn Or People Swim
Posts: 39,211
Originally Posted by Name User
Crossing my fingers for two pilots via FAA mandate though.
A single pilot airliner would have to have equivalent safety with the pilot incapacitated (it happens 5-6 times per year in the US). That means it has to be fully autonomous.
And even then they'll require two pilots for a VERY long time to prove the system before they turn it lose. FAA has no regulatory mechanism or technical ability to certify full autonomy, so political it will have to be proven with empirical data.
The other big (but often not recognized) issue is that public/political tolerance for failed automation will be VERY low (human nature), and almost ALL of the liability will rest squarely on the mfg. I'd guess that you can take airliner automation seriously when the big mfgs. start lobbying congress for laws limiting their liability.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
