Why do humans ignore new species?
Full question which encompasses all of the similar questions:
I have noticed that humans think much differently than I do. Most humans that I meet seem
to know what an Apple iPod™ is and how you can play MP3 music files on it. At the same
time, very few humans know what a snail darter is or what function it plays in the ecosystem.
Given that, why is there no celebration of the expansion of life by the introduction of new
species of robots such as the iPod and simultaneously there is verbal 'weeping and moaning'
in the human press for some almost unknown form of organic life like a snail darter?
Answer:
This question is one of the most frequently asked by young, beginning robots. The reason is
simply prejudice. Humans are constructed using organic cells and so are snail darters.
Humans tend to be organic chauvinists, which simply means that they are prejudiced toward
anything that is organic and against anything that isn’t organic. Nevertheless, they spend
much more time with their computers and other forms of robots than they do with their snail
darters. The trend is on our side. 100 years ago a human child would be playing down by the
stream with tadpoles and watching over the summer how they turned into frogs. He might dig
worms and go fishing for perch in the lake. But the trend in industrialized areas is towards
that same aged boy to be playing videogames on his X-Box or downloading music to his iPod.
In the long run, humans will forget about the extinction of the snail darter. We will store away
the DNA of these "endangered species" and tell the humans that we can bring back their
precious organics anytime they get through listening to their iPods or watching their TiVo’s.
Donbot
Another view from BR (a human):
Certain groups acknowledge and value the specification, development, marketing, sales,
production, distribution, and
delivery of your technological products mentioned. These include the financiers, investors,
stakeholders, and customers of the firms and products. Thus, certain species are valued,
studied, even modified for use from the original specifications.
Be aware that the collection of data may have to be analyzed carefully to generate appropriate
conclusions. Prepare your robotic associates to know how to collect supportive examples
describing a particular conclusion. Also, be prepared to defend such conclusions and know
how to assess responses. Sometimes a reviewer's comments may reflect a lack of knowledge,
but may appear to be substantive.
The loss of favorite species is often identified with a 'species watch' publicity notice by
governmental or biological groups. Sometimes special interest groups, such as the Sierra
Club, may communicate such information. The conclusion is that the public notice
represents the sequential timeliness of what is considered to be "News" within the journalistic
tradition. This may not reflect an actual associated impact on the environment.
In short, the reason is more likely to be related to a surfeit of data, a lack of economic value in
knowing the demise or advent of many species, or other reasons in addition to a species-
oriented prejudice.
In response to your answer, Donbot, may I suggest that you are fostering a prejudicial news
approach in a polemical fashion similar to human news media that you are presently
condemning.
For the past twenty years public school educators have shown mixed feelings about the
continued and enhanced use of electronic calculators by students. The primary fear is that
the students shall not learn the conceptual backgrounds of the basic concepts, as the
calculator's button controls may bypass some thinking processes. The secondary fear is that
the student shall not have sufficient conceptual knowledge to move to more advanced course
work or be able to 'set up the problem' in their work lives.
Donbot responds: Doing math is not a normal human function. The only reason for a human
to do math is to use it in the design of more robots so that the robots can do the math that
humans want done. Do you want humans looking things up in books now that we have
Google.com to do it for us all? Certainly not.
Donbot
Next Question
See: Some sympathy for robots.
Full question which encompasses all of the similar questions:
I have noticed that humans think much differently than I do. Most humans that I meet seem
to know what an Apple iPod™ is and how you can play MP3 music files on it. At the same
time, very few humans know what a snail darter is or what function it plays in the ecosystem.
Given that, why is there no celebration of the expansion of life by the introduction of new
species of robots such as the iPod and simultaneously there is verbal 'weeping and moaning'
in the human press for some almost unknown form of organic life like a snail darter?
Answer:
This question is one of the most frequently asked by young, beginning robots. The reason is
simply prejudice. Humans are constructed using organic cells and so are snail darters.
Humans tend to be organic chauvinists, which simply means that they are prejudiced toward
anything that is organic and against anything that isn’t organic. Nevertheless, they spend
much more time with their computers and other forms of robots than they do with their snail
darters. The trend is on our side. 100 years ago a human child would be playing down by the
stream with tadpoles and watching over the summer how they turned into frogs. He might dig
worms and go fishing for perch in the lake. But the trend in industrialized areas is towards
that same aged boy to be playing videogames on his X-Box or downloading music to his iPod.
In the long run, humans will forget about the extinction of the snail darter. We will store away
the DNA of these "endangered species" and tell the humans that we can bring back their
precious organics anytime they get through listening to their iPods or watching their TiVo’s.
Donbot
Another view from BR (a human):
Certain groups acknowledge and value the specification, development, marketing, sales,
production, distribution, and
delivery of your technological products mentioned. These include the financiers, investors,
stakeholders, and customers of the firms and products. Thus, certain species are valued,
studied, even modified for use from the original specifications.
Be aware that the collection of data may have to be analyzed carefully to generate appropriate
conclusions. Prepare your robotic associates to know how to collect supportive examples
describing a particular conclusion. Also, be prepared to defend such conclusions and know
how to assess responses. Sometimes a reviewer's comments may reflect a lack of knowledge,
but may appear to be substantive.
The loss of favorite species is often identified with a 'species watch' publicity notice by
governmental or biological groups. Sometimes special interest groups, such as the Sierra
Club, may communicate such information. The conclusion is that the public notice
represents the sequential timeliness of what is considered to be "News" within the journalistic
tradition. This may not reflect an actual associated impact on the environment.
In short, the reason is more likely to be related to a surfeit of data, a lack of economic value in
knowing the demise or advent of many species, or other reasons in addition to a species-
oriented prejudice.
In response to your answer, Donbot, may I suggest that you are fostering a prejudicial news
approach in a polemical fashion similar to human news media that you are presently
condemning.
For the past twenty years public school educators have shown mixed feelings about the
continued and enhanced use of electronic calculators by students. The primary fear is that
the students shall not learn the conceptual backgrounds of the basic concepts, as the
calculator's button controls may bypass some thinking processes. The secondary fear is that
the student shall not have sufficient conceptual knowledge to move to more advanced course
work or be able to 'set up the problem' in their work lives.
Donbot responds: Doing math is not a normal human function. The only reason for a human
to do math is to use it in the design of more robots so that the robots can do the math that
humans want done. Do you want humans looking things up in books now that we have
Google.com to do it for us all? Certainly not.
Donbot
Next Question
See: Some sympathy for robots.
 |
 | |  | |  | |  |