It's possible right now, to put together a medical robot that would enable doctors to once again perform house calls. The robot would be equipped with a standard set of 'lab-on-a-chip' modules, and have the ability to take the patient's temperature, blood pressure, and pulse rate. Via a connection to the doc's office, the robot can be instructed to dispense medication right then and there, in many situations.
It's possible right now, to make a robot for the kitchen that will follow the printed instructions of any recipe. A robot that's more challenging to engineer, but also possible right now, is a robot that observes and duplicates the motions of any chef (or hot dog vendor :-)), regarding the ingredients, amounts, and use of utensils, while preparing the dish. In this example, it shows how easy it is for any displaced worker to do the 'programming' of well-engineered robots.
Here's one way showing how it's possible right now, to build a house in a day: Contour Crafting
It's possible right now, to make a robot that could paint the Mona Lisa, pigment for pigment, brush stroke for brush stroke (using data from a scan of the original).
The biggest obstacle I can think of, is the 'inflationary mentality' that believes consumers won't make purchases if they know prices will drop. This kind of thinking is very narrow and short-term: consumers make purchases because they perceive a need for the items, and I think they will buy more (instead of waiting for prices to drop further) if they're confident of having money leftover in their pockets, knowing prices won't keep spiraling ever hopelessly upwards. The best way to stimulate any economy is to make things affordable by lowering prices, rather than giving credit to fuel debts that our children won't be able to afford to pay. One way (prices dropping) is good for everyone, and the other way (contrived inflation) is good for the 5% of the population that seeks to retain 95% of the wealth.
Don't get me wrong: every good thing humanity enjoys today is the result of hard working, enterprising, and innovative businesses, and I don't propose that anyone should loose one penny of what they've worked so hard to achieve. Rather, I propose using robots efficiently, expeditiously, and effortlessly, to create more wealth for the rest of us, and more importantly to provide the means to sustain real growth (that is, human growth, not necessarily measured economically), hence providing real opportunity for the future generations, instead of a polluted world and other oppressive 'bills' for our debts and deficits.
Here's my attempt at scifi to illustrate an extreme example:
The year is 2047, and John, a writer, is always certain he knows what's best. He thinks, “the virtual reality experience of movies these days is unbelievable, but there's still no substitute for the book.� Seated next to a desk, across from a young lady, John announces aloud, “I want to live where the eagles live, and I don't want to be disturbed.� A nearby wall that had what appeared to be windows and some paintings suddenly appeared blank and flat, as panoramic images of various locations were displayed. “There! That one,� he says, nodding. The direction of his gaze is sufficient to discern his choice, which was a cave, three-quarters of the way up the vertical face of a mountain.
The entire room disappears, and John feels as though he's been physically transported to the location. He stands up and takes a look around the cave with the lady still seated at her desk, then walks to the edge of the opening and soaks in the view of the valley far below, and marvels at the tree, not too far away, growing sideways out of the vertical ground, supporting a giant nest.
He hears the soft voice of the lady describing his options, “The site you selected is a robotic science outpost that is not currently safe for human habitation. Approximately one day will be required to assemble a dwelling meeting governmental regulations. Your travel time is about 7 hours, using a skycar to LAX, airline to Denver, and another skycar to Golden. Secluded dwellings are currently available in the meantime, at the base of North Table in Golden, and also at various other locations on and around the mountain. Would you like to depart now?�
“In about an hour, you're a doll,� says John. He hears her voice saying, “You're the man, John,� as he removes the headgear, and hands it back to the robot. He squints, his eyes readjusting to the bright midday sun. He sees the palm trees, and the beach, and the boardwalk winding around the grassy knolls, and notices just at the last instant, the basketball that's speeding towards his chest, an errant ricochet from his mates shooting hoops on the court nearby. And he caught the ball, impressing himself with his reaction and reflexes, but the recognition he expected from his mates came only in the form of demands for him to get back in the game. “I'm going to Colorado for a couple weeks, maybe a month,� says John, as he tosses the ball back on to the court.
“What, and miss more holidays? What about your civic duty to attend?� came a quick retort.
“You know this project is important to me, and it has to be perfect.� . . .
- - -
Quote:
(PS. Chipper come to the TFFE board sometime. We miss you.)
Thanks jlass, I will!
- - -
Quote:
Well.... I got a list of things I can do to exact change in this world. I will do my small part.:-) We are what we do
I've been checking out microcontrollers again, giving serious thought to putting something together that can operate the various tools in my shop (drill press, table saw, router, etc.). Looks like things are getting a lot easier compared to just a couple years ago, lots of off-the-shelf options and solutions. :)
It's possible right now, to make a robot for the kitchen that will follow the printed instructions of any recipe. A robot that's more challenging to engineer, but also possible right now, is a robot that observes and duplicates the motions of any chef (or hot dog vendor :-)), regarding the ingredients, amounts, and use of utensils, while preparing the dish. In this example, it shows how easy it is for any displaced worker to do the 'programming' of well-engineered robots.
It's possible right now, to make a robot that could paint the Mona Lisa, pigment for pigment, brush stroke for brush stroke (using data from a scan of the original).
I realize this example is to illustrate the potential. Recreating the Mona Lisa or my favorite hot dog vendor's links is not a really a feat for any intelligence either natural or artifical. Creating it the first time; Now that's the feat. What makes my hot dog vendor's product unique is that it is not the same each time. Each Hot dog on a different day is 'different' probably depending on his mood and still a pleasurable dining experience:-)
I think there will be plenty of ingenuity and creativity that can be carried on in this future for all intelligences both natural and artifical.:-)
- - -
Quote:
Well.... I got a list of things I can do to exact change in this world. I will do my small part.:-) We are what we do
Quote:
I've been checking out microcontrollers again, giving serious thought to putting something together that can operate the various tools in my shop (drill press, table saw, router, etc.). Looks like things are getting a lot easier compared to just a couple years ago, lots of off-the-shelf options and solutions. :)
Me... I am planning on reducing my enviornmental footprint to do my small part in giving this world a chance. I have the ability (Luxury:-)) to purchase wind energy from my utility. There is a slight premium for this. I believe this one way a citizen like myself can try and exact change how my utility does business. As a matter of fact my province's government has set a goal for the entire province's electrical energy consumption to 15 percent from renewable energy sources by 2010. I believe this is one of the purpose of government, to accept risk for venutres that business refuse by offering incentives.
I am planning on doing some other things like trying to buy more fair trade products. among other things
Who knows I might just resort to my hippy days those days were comfortable:-)
A networked Hippy of course:-)
There are some who can live without wild things and some who cannot. - Aldo Leopold
What makes my hot dog vendor's product unique is that it is not the same each time. Each Hot dog on a different day is 'different' probably depending on his mood and still a pleasurable dining experience:-)
I know just what you mean. On my sandwich, I like the tomato to be somewhere between a wedge and a slice. And the top slice that's mostly skin with a hole in the middle where the stem was, is right out. These top slices invariably end up on the sandwiches I get from the fast-food restaurants. Sure doesn't look like the one in the giant picture on the menu board; and so I'm wondering: if these places are owned by the public (their shares of stock publicly traded), don't any of the shareholders patronize their investments? It appears that they have at least approved of the mechanical slicer that produces the slices, and why not? The ability to save labor and precisely portion ingredients makes perfect business sense.
I don't fault the employees, or anyone, really. After all, who really wants to pour their heart and soul into making one hamburger after another, day after day after day?
And so I would just point out how ironic it is that a simple robot, having neither heart nor soul, could be instructed to produce perfectly imperfect slices all day long, day after day, returning the utensils it used to their proper places in a condition as clean and sharp as the day they were made. And if it were my robot, I would additionally instruct it that it's pronounced, “toe-MAH-toe� :))
That's the biggest complaint I can think of about business. Well, that and oligopolies tend to spring up when monopolies are prohibited, but I think robots will level the playing field and help all the little guys/gals. Businesses are automating: check out these machines that make windows and doors: New Products (WindowandDoor.net) Looks like all that's needed now, is a robot to do my job, which has been on occasion, installing windows and doors. :)
I know just what you mean. On my sandwich, I like the tomato to be somewhere between a wedge and a slice. And the top slice that's mostly skin with a hole in the middle where the stem was, is right out. These top slices invariably end up on the sandwiches I get from the fast-food restaurants. Sure doesn't look like the one in the giant picture on the menu board; and so I'm wondering: if these places are owned by the public (their shares of stock publicly traded), don't any of the shareholders patronize their investments? It appears that they have at least approved of the mechanical slicer that produces the slices, and why not? The ability to save labor and precisely portion ingredients makes perfect business sense.
Probably the reason you get that top slice, is that some bean counter told management they could save x number of dollars per year by using it or not removing it. Quality Control probably objected and were overiden. This only represents a small porition of bad sandwiches and they are willing to risk it. I suggest everytime you get the top slice, faithfully fill in your customer comment card and if enough people do, This gives quality assurance some ammunition to go to managemnt to get things possibly changed.
That is the problem with big business today. They would risk putting a defective or potentialy unsafe product because they calculated that its least expensive for them to face potential liability on the product then to fix it. (I know I sat in on some risk management meetings). Some project managers need a refresher on ethics.(Chipper can you think of a possible scenerio that aleveate this problem.
through automation.) For as long as there are tight bottom lines the problem will remain.
That's why after retiring I decided to do most of my shopping locally. (Especially food I am blessed). Take my hot dog vendor. He is really a farmer who raises is own organic pork, makes his own links and sausages. The family also run a small butcher shop, They get their buns especially made from a local bakery that actally fit the sausages and I can get them in white, whole wheat or whole grain. His family makes the chopped onions and sourkraut. He is acually happy outside grilling is links at the farmers market for the lunch crowd even when it is twenty below:-).
Quote:
I don't fault the employees, or anyone, really. After all, who really wants to pour their heart and soul into making one hamburger after another, day after day after day?
And so I would just point out how ironic it is that a simple robot, having neither heart nor soul, could be instructed to produce perfectly imperfect slices all day long, day after day, returning the utensils it used to their proper places in a condition as clean and sharp as the day they were made. And if it were my robot, I would additionally instruct it that it's pronounced, “toe-MAH-toe� :))
That's the biggest complaint I can think of about business. Well, that and oligopolies tend to spring up when monopolies are prohibited, but I think robots will level the playing field and help all the little guys/gals.
I would like to see robotics level the playing field the little guys. But as long as the big boys can undercut them and drive them out of business or acquire them and force them to produce the same bland stuff. (I am little spooked.)
Thats why I try to support the small local business even if they cost a little more.
There are some who can live without wild things and some who cannot. - Aldo Leopold
That is the problem with big business today. They would risk putting a defective or potentialy unsafe product because they calculated that its least expensive for them to face potential liability on the product then to fix it.
Alas it's older than that ... :-(
Ralph Nader found in the sixties that the Ford Motor Co had done just such a calculation on poorly placed and designed fuel tanks in the rear end of one of it's cars. They worked out that it was indeed cheaper to face, and payout, on lawsuits from the relatives of people that had burned to death following a rear end shunt, rather than to recall and fix the cars thus far sold to the public.
Cheers, Mike.
( edit ) I think the figures were $53M one way versus $34M the other, or some such figures, but it was seen as a legitimate business decision with a 'profit' of ~$20M for the desired direction. Ralph's expose probably saved many lives...
That is the problem with big business today. They would risk putting a defective or potentialy unsafe product because they calculated that its least expensive for them to face potential liability on the product then to fix it. (I know I sat in on some risk management meetings). Some project managers need a refresher on ethics.(Chipper can you think of a possible scenerio that aleveate this problem.
through automation.) For as long as there are tight bottom lines the problem will remain.
No, I can't, because it's a problem for our governments to solve. Maybe I'm using the phrase too loosely, but it's my understanding that the government has an obligation to 'provide for the common defense'. Despite the gruesome nature of what could happen with the old Pintos, the fact remains that for every vehicle on the road today, I can think of an impact that would cause sparks and an explosion. How can the folks at Ford possibly have any control over what everyone agrees is an 'accident'? Why should they bear the brunt of the liability, and the risk that is still inherent to this day, with every automobile? More scary (providing a false sense of security) is the well intentioned marketing slogan, “Safe happens�: just a couple days ago, in the local news, was the report of a crash where half the car ended up in a liquor store (driver dead) and the other half of the car was some distance away (passenger survived with minor injuries).
Besides, there's a terrible downside to “Autopilot happens�: a great many insurance companies, trauma centers, law firms, and auto body shops, would be forced to contribute phenomenally to the number of displaced workers. And who wants to give up that all that extra leisure time we get to spend in traffic jams and at traffic lights?
No, I can't, because it's a problem for our governments to solve. Maybe I'm using the phrase too loosely, but it's my understanding that the government has an obligation to 'provide for the common defense'. Despite the gruesome nature of what could happen with the old Pintos, the fact remains that for every vehicle on the road today, I can think of an impact that would cause sparks and an explosion. How can the folks at Ford possibly have any control over what everyone agrees is an 'accident'? Why should they bear the brunt of the liability, and the risk that is still inherent to this day, with every automobile? More scary (providing a false sense of security) is the well intentioned marketing slogan, “Safe happens�: just a couple days ago, in the local news, was the report of a crash where half the car ended up in a liquor store (driver dead) and the other half of the car was some distance away (passenger survived with minor injuries).
In my humble opinion Ford failed to minimize acceptable risk. Rear end accidents are all to common and the result was exploding pintos. From the fallout of the leaked minutes Ford realized they failed to minimize acceptable risk. The Crux of the problem what constitutes acceptable risk for the comman defence. I am out of my league in answering that question, but business peers are not. I believe on most occasions most people are generally good most of the time.
I propose that a system come into force licensing CEO's of companies of a certain size (maybe even go further down the food chain). They have to meet certain standards to obtain a license. I believe these CEO's should be subject to independent peer review. If a incident happens an independent review borad is established. The incident is reviewed from detailed records kept (Memo's and minutes from the project, just like a doctor patient's file or lawyer client's file). If the board finds that the CEO (Manager) was unethical and did not hold up to the standards in obtaining his license, then is license is revoked and he can't practice business again for a period of time or for life depending how agregious the incident was. Liability remains with the corporation. Stealing trade secerts is also unethical and subject to review.
To take it futher maybe establish a new discipline call Business science or business engineering. Money could flow for basic research into what is the proper thought process to determine what is acceptable risk for the comman good
I would defenitely be a lot more comfortable with this system in place then the present state of affairs.
There are some who can live without wild things and some who cannot. - Aldo Leopold
In time I think technology will help level the playing field.
From an employer's point of view, I like it. If it were me, I'd be anxiously looking forward to the results of the DARPA Urban Challenge. The smart lady mentioned in the article should have no trouble upgrading and retrofitting her fleet of vehicles.
From an employee's point of view, I love it. Especially come evaluation time: I'd have a digital record of performance, including all the little, above-and-beyond-the-call, things that I don't normally keep account of. And it would be a double-edged sword for the employer if I were a free-agent. :)
Back a few posts, when I said I had a theory on the prices of everything eventually dropping to nil, I was using a model based on good faith of the people, one not having any flies in the ointment. It seems there may be one, which might explain the rationale I questioned in a subsequent post, about inflation and credit.
It's possible right now, to
)
It's possible right now, to put together a medical robot that would enable doctors to once again perform house calls. The robot would be equipped with a standard set of 'lab-on-a-chip' modules, and have the ability to take the patient's temperature, blood pressure, and pulse rate. Via a connection to the doc's office, the robot can be instructed to dispense medication right then and there, in many situations.
It's possible right now, to make a robot for the kitchen that will follow the printed instructions of any recipe. A robot that's more challenging to engineer, but also possible right now, is a robot that observes and duplicates the motions of any chef (or hot dog vendor :-)), regarding the ingredients, amounts, and use of utensils, while preparing the dish. In this example, it shows how easy it is for any displaced worker to do the 'programming' of well-engineered robots.
Here's one way showing how it's possible right now, to build a house in a day: Contour Crafting
It's possible right now, to make a robot that could paint the Mona Lisa, pigment for pigment, brush stroke for brush stroke (using data from a scan of the original).
The biggest obstacle I can think of, is the 'inflationary mentality' that believes consumers won't make purchases if they know prices will drop. This kind of thinking is very narrow and short-term: consumers make purchases because they perceive a need for the items, and I think they will buy more (instead of waiting for prices to drop further) if they're confident of having money leftover in their pockets, knowing prices won't keep spiraling ever hopelessly upwards. The best way to stimulate any economy is to make things affordable by lowering prices, rather than giving credit to fuel debts that our children won't be able to afford to pay. One way (prices dropping) is good for everyone, and the other way (contrived inflation) is good for the 5% of the population that seeks to retain 95% of the wealth.
Don't get me wrong: every good thing humanity enjoys today is the result of hard working, enterprising, and innovative businesses, and I don't propose that anyone should loose one penny of what they've worked so hard to achieve. Rather, I propose using robots efficiently, expeditiously, and effortlessly, to create more wealth for the rest of us, and more importantly to provide the means to sustain real growth (that is, human growth, not necessarily measured economically), hence providing real opportunity for the future generations, instead of a polluted world and other oppressive 'bills' for our debts and deficits.
Here's my attempt at scifi to illustrate an extreme example:
The year is 2047, and John, a writer, is always certain he knows what's best. He thinks, “the virtual reality experience of movies these days is unbelievable, but there's still no substitute for the book.� Seated next to a desk, across from a young lady, John announces aloud, “I want to live where the eagles live, and I don't want to be disturbed.� A nearby wall that had what appeared to be windows and some paintings suddenly appeared blank and flat, as panoramic images of various locations were displayed. “There! That one,� he says, nodding. The direction of his gaze is sufficient to discern his choice, which was a cave, three-quarters of the way up the vertical face of a mountain.
The entire room disappears, and John feels as though he's been physically transported to the location. He stands up and takes a look around the cave with the lady still seated at her desk, then walks to the edge of the opening and soaks in the view of the valley far below, and marvels at the tree, not too far away, growing sideways out of the vertical ground, supporting a giant nest.
He hears the soft voice of the lady describing his options, “The site you selected is a robotic science outpost that is not currently safe for human habitation. Approximately one day will be required to assemble a dwelling meeting governmental regulations. Your travel time is about 7 hours, using a skycar to LAX, airline to Denver, and another skycar to Golden. Secluded dwellings are currently available in the meantime, at the base of North Table in Golden, and also at various other locations on and around the mountain. Would you like to depart now?�
“In about an hour, you're a doll,� says John. He hears her voice saying, “You're the man, John,� as he removes the headgear, and hands it back to the robot. He squints, his eyes readjusting to the bright midday sun. He sees the palm trees, and the beach, and the boardwalk winding around the grassy knolls, and notices just at the last instant, the basketball that's speeding towards his chest, an errant ricochet from his mates shooting hoops on the court nearby. And he caught the ball, impressing himself with his reaction and reflexes, but the recognition he expected from his mates came only in the form of demands for him to get back in the game. “I'm going to Colorado for a couple weeks, maybe a month,� says John, as he tosses the ball back on to the court.
“What, and miss more holidays? What about your civic duty to attend?� came a quick retort.
“You know this project is important to me, and it has to be perfect.� . . .
- - -
Thanks jlass, I will!
- - -
I've been checking out microcontrollers again, giving serious thought to putting something together that can operate the various tools in my shop (drill press, table saw, router, etc.). Looks like things are getting a lot easier compared to just a couple years ago, lots of off-the-shelf options and solutions. :)
RE: It's possible right
)
I realize this example is to illustrate the potential. Recreating the Mona Lisa or my favorite hot dog vendor's links is not a really a feat for any intelligence either natural or artifical. Creating it the first time; Now that's the feat. What makes my hot dog vendor's product unique is that it is not the same each time. Each Hot dog on a different day is 'different' probably depending on his mood and still a pleasurable dining experience:-)
I think there will be plenty of ingenuity and creativity that can be carried on in this future for all intelligences both natural and artifical.:-)
- - -
Me... I am planning on reducing my enviornmental footprint to do my small part in giving this world a chance. I have the ability (Luxury:-)) to purchase wind energy from my utility. There is a slight premium for this. I believe this one way a citizen like myself can try and exact change how my utility does business. As a matter of fact my province's government has set a goal for the entire province's electrical energy consumption to 15 percent from renewable energy sources by 2010. I believe this is one of the purpose of government, to accept risk for venutres that business refuse by offering incentives.
I am planning on doing some other things like trying to buy more fair trade products. among other things
Who knows I might just resort to my hippy days those days were comfortable:-)
A networked Hippy of course:-)
There are some who can live without wild things and some who cannot. - Aldo Leopold
RE: What makes my hot dog
)
I know just what you mean. On my sandwich, I like the tomato to be somewhere between a wedge and a slice. And the top slice that's mostly skin with a hole in the middle where the stem was, is right out. These top slices invariably end up on the sandwiches I get from the fast-food restaurants. Sure doesn't look like the one in the giant picture on the menu board; and so I'm wondering: if these places are owned by the public (their shares of stock publicly traded), don't any of the shareholders patronize their investments? It appears that they have at least approved of the mechanical slicer that produces the slices, and why not? The ability to save labor and precisely portion ingredients makes perfect business sense.
I don't fault the employees, or anyone, really. After all, who really wants to pour their heart and soul into making one hamburger after another, day after day after day?
And so I would just point out how ironic it is that a simple robot, having neither heart nor soul, could be instructed to produce perfectly imperfect slices all day long, day after day, returning the utensils it used to their proper places in a condition as clean and sharp as the day they were made. And if it were my robot, I would additionally instruct it that it's pronounced, “toe-MAH-toe� :))
That's the biggest complaint I can think of about business. Well, that and oligopolies tend to spring up when monopolies are prohibited, but I think robots will level the playing field and help all the little guys/gals. Businesses are automating: check out these machines that make windows and doors: New Products (WindowandDoor.net) Looks like all that's needed now, is a robot to do my job, which has been on occasion, installing windows and doors. :)
RE: I know just what you
)
Probably the reason you get that top slice, is that some bean counter told management they could save x number of dollars per year by using it or not removing it. Quality Control probably objected and were overiden. This only represents a small porition of bad sandwiches and they are willing to risk it. I suggest everytime you get the top slice, faithfully fill in your customer comment card and if enough people do, This gives quality assurance some ammunition to go to managemnt to get things possibly changed.
That is the problem with big business today. They would risk putting a defective or potentialy unsafe product because they calculated that its least expensive for them to face potential liability on the product then to fix it. (I know I sat in on some risk management meetings). Some project managers need a refresher on ethics.(Chipper can you think of a possible scenerio that aleveate this problem.
through automation.) For as long as there are tight bottom lines the problem will remain.
That's why after retiring I decided to do most of my shopping locally. (Especially food I am blessed). Take my hot dog vendor. He is really a farmer who raises is own organic pork, makes his own links and sausages. The family also run a small butcher shop, They get their buns especially made from a local bakery that actally fit the sausages and I can get them in white, whole wheat or whole grain. His family makes the chopped onions and sourkraut. He is acually happy outside grilling is links at the farmers market for the lunch crowd even when it is twenty below:-).
I would like to see robotics level the playing field the little guys. But as long as the big boys can undercut them and drive them out of business or acquire them and force them to produce the same bland stuff. (I am little spooked.)
Thats why I try to support the small local business even if they cost a little more.
There are some who can live without wild things and some who cannot. - Aldo Leopold
RE: That is the problem
)
Alas it's older than that ... :-(
Ralph Nader found in the sixties that the Ford Motor Co had done just such a calculation on poorly placed and designed fuel tanks in the rear end of one of it's cars. They worked out that it was indeed cheaper to face, and payout, on lawsuits from the relatives of people that had burned to death following a rear end shunt, rather than to recall and fix the cars thus far sold to the public.
Cheers, Mike.
( edit ) I think the figures were $53M one way versus $34M the other, or some such figures, but it was seen as a legitimate business decision with a 'profit' of ~$20M for the desired direction. Ralph's expose probably saved many lives...
( edit ) Sorry, wrong figures, see here.
I have made this letter longer than usual because I lack the time to make it shorter ...
... and my other CPU is a Ryzen 5950X :-) Blaise Pascal
RE: That is the problem
)
No, I can't, because it's a problem for our governments to solve. Maybe I'm using the phrase too loosely, but it's my understanding that the government has an obligation to 'provide for the common defense'. Despite the gruesome nature of what could happen with the old Pintos, the fact remains that for every vehicle on the road today, I can think of an impact that would cause sparks and an explosion. How can the folks at Ford possibly have any control over what everyone agrees is an 'accident'? Why should they bear the brunt of the liability, and the risk that is still inherent to this day, with every automobile? More scary (providing a false sense of security) is the well intentioned marketing slogan, “Safe happens�: just a couple days ago, in the local news, was the report of a crash where half the car ended up in a liquor store (driver dead) and the other half of the car was some distance away (passenger survived with minor injuries).
Besides, there's a terrible downside to “Autopilot happens�: a great many insurance companies, trauma centers, law firms, and auto body shops, would be forced to contribute phenomenally to the number of displaced workers. And who wants to give up that all that extra leisure time we get to spend in traffic jams and at traffic lights?
RE: No, I can't, because
)
In my humble opinion Ford failed to minimize acceptable risk. Rear end accidents are all to common and the result was exploding pintos. From the fallout of the leaked minutes Ford realized they failed to minimize acceptable risk. The Crux of the problem what constitutes acceptable risk for the comman defence. I am out of my league in answering that question, but business peers are not. I believe on most occasions most people are generally good most of the time.
I propose that a system come into force licensing CEO's of companies of a certain size (maybe even go further down the food chain). They have to meet certain standards to obtain a license. I believe these CEO's should be subject to independent peer review. If a incident happens an independent review borad is established. The incident is reviewed from detailed records kept (Memo's and minutes from the project, just like a doctor patient's file or lawyer client's file). If the board finds that the CEO (Manager) was unethical and did not hold up to the standards in obtaining his license, then is license is revoked and he can't practice business again for a period of time or for life depending how agregious the incident was. Liability remains with the corporation. Stealing trade secerts is also unethical and subject to review.
To take it futher maybe establish a new discipline call Business science or business engineering. Money could flow for basic research into what is the proper thought process to determine what is acceptable risk for the comman good
I would defenitely be a lot more comfortable with this system in place then the present state of affairs.
There are some who can live without wild things and some who cannot. - Aldo Leopold
An Interesting Article
)
An Interesting Article
Nowhere to hide in Digital Africa
In time I think technology will help level the playing field.
There are some who can live without wild things and some who cannot. - Aldo Leopold
RE: An Interesting
)
From an employer's point of view, I like it. If it were me, I'd be anxiously looking forward to the results of the DARPA Urban Challenge. The smart lady mentioned in the article should have no trouble upgrading and retrofitting her fleet of vehicles.
From an employee's point of view, I love it. Especially come evaluation time: I'd have a digital record of performance, including all the little, above-and-beyond-the-call, things that I don't normally keep account of. And it would be a double-edged sword for the employer if I were a free-agent. :)
Back a few posts, when I said
)
Back a few posts, when I said I had a theory on the prices of everything eventually dropping to nil, I was using a model based on good faith of the people, one not having any flies in the ointment. It seems there may be one, which might explain the rationale I questioned in a subsequent post, about inflation and credit.
America Freedom to Fascism Authorized version, Google video, 1 hr 49 min (5 star rating, 13098 ratings, 1985566 views, at the time of this post)
Any thoughts, comments?