[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math

View post   
File: 109 KB, 292x293, 1277312140260.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1740378 No.1740378 [Reply] [Original]

hey engineers, how does it feel knowing that your occupation will be replaced by robots in the next 50 years?

inb4 immense engineer butthurt

>> No.1740456

>>1740378
is that pic from command and conquer?

>> No.1740474

>>1740378
>makes completley idiotic claim, pretending to be able to predict 50 years into the future
>doesnt realize that engineering takes almost as much intelligence as physics or math

I hope you're not a scientist.

>> No.1740491

>>1740474

>implying computers cannot do math?

>> No.1740498

If engineers create the robots, but the engineers are all replaced by robots, making it robots creating robots, it would just become a huge chain of robots creating robots creating robots creating robots

>> No.1740504

>>1740491
>>1740378
There no way computers will be powerful enough to replace humans in the next 50 years.

>> No.1740530

>>1740504
quantum computers and neural networks will do the trick

>> No.1740532

Yeah, but in 50 years only humans will be able to do math and physics. Good thinking there, good luck with your first semester.

>> No.1740536

>>1740498
I lol'd

>> No.1740540

Well actually.

A robot scientist have already been built and made discoveries. I haven't heard about any robotic engineers though.

>> No.1740551

Engineers? No. Cashiers? Perhaps.

>> No.1740567

Well actually.

A robot scientist have already been built and made discoveries. I haven't heard about any robotic engineers though.

http://scienceblogs.com/notrocketscience/2009/04/enter_adam_the_robot_scientist.php

>> No.1740575

>>1740551
>implying cashiers aren't robots already.

>> No.1740588

So basically engineers are working on building robots to make sure their profession is useless.
lol

>> No.1740623

wtf do we even have any 4 star generals?

i thought we only had one in times of war, which hasn't happened since world war 2.

>> No.1740641

>>1740623

You're thinking of five stars.

>> No.1740669
File: 44 KB, 351x440, 5star.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1740669

>>1740641

lol just as planned. pic related.

>> No.1740711

> times of war, which hasn't happened since world war 2.
Implying iraq was a training scenario/picnic with tanks.

>> No.1740741

>>1740711

well, technically it was. iraq is/was a "military engagement", not a war.

>> No.1740752

Engineer here. To answer OP's question, feels fine man, I'm not planning on working for 50 more years anyway.

>> No.1740807

>>1740741
WW2 was a series of military engagements involving most of the world, not a war.

DURRR

>> No.1740878

>>1740807

the us never formally declared war on iraq.

if we had done so and initiated a draft and all that other fun war stuff the the pure rape dealt to the region would have been impalpable. iraq couldn't handle a legit war.

>> No.1740925

Actually evolutionary design AI does in fact perform most of what an engineer would've done in 2010. Volunteers (mostly hobbyists) are still needed to make corrections to what the AI spits out as evolutionary algorithms sometimes arrive at needlessly elaborate solutions. It takes a human to spot those sorts of mistakes.

>> No.1741088

>>1740925
Actually evolutionary design AI does in fact perform most of what an engineer would've done in 2010. Volunteers (mostly hobbyists) are still needed to make corrections to what the AI spits out as evolutionary algorithms sometimes arrive at needlessly elaborate solutions. It takes a human to spot those sorts of mistakes.

>> No.1741098

>>1740925
Congrats, you just said the stupidest thing I've read on /sci/.