Escape Artists
Escape Pod => Science Fiction Discussion => Topic started by: lowky on August 02, 2007, 12:24:37 PM
-
http://entertainment.timesonline.co.uk/tol/arts_and_entertainment/film/article2133609.ece (http://entertainment.timesonline.co.uk/tol/arts_and_entertainment/film/article2133609.ece)
I don't agree with them all in my opinion Robbie from Forbidden Planet should be ranked higher, and Bender from Futurama (I know it's not a movie) belongs on this list too.
-
I found many of the plausibility ratings highly implausible.
-
The Top 5 Reasons This List is Flawed:
1) C3P0 is not in the top 20
2) Optimus Prime at 38, are they NUTS?????
3) MecaGodzilla is even on the list.
4) HAL 9000 is not #1
5) That HAL 9000 is even on the list. He's an AI not a robot!
-
is Marvin on it? I have not had the time to look at it yet but ya just wanted to know
-
is Marvin on it? I have not had the time to look at it yet but ya just wanted to know
Yes, at number 18... at least he made the list, but their rankings are pretty ridiculous, imho. The Fembots from Austin Powers even made the top 25. ??? Kitt outranks both C3PO and R2D2. That's just heinous.
-
is Marvin on it? I have not had the time to look at it yet but ya just wanted to know
Yes, at number 18... at least he made the list, but their rankings are pretty ridiculous, imho. The Fembots from Austin Powers even made the top 25. ??? Kitt outranks both C3PO and R2D2. That's just heinous.
I can't believe the stupid battle droids outranked C3-PO. He's waaaaaaaaaaaay tougher than those crap battle droids.
Yeah, kind of a funny list.
-
I rarely find myself in agreement with most of the contents of this sort of list.
-
I rarely find myself in agreement with most of the contents of this sort of list.
True. Arguing about the list's content is usually the best part of this kind of list. ;)
-
is Marvin on it? I have not had the time to look at it yet but ya just wanted to know
Yes, at number 18... at least he made the list, but their rankings are pretty ridiculous, imho. Kitt outranks both C3PO and R2D2. That's just heinous.
glad he made it he was my favorite character in the books and was one of the only redeeming qualities of the latest movie
Kitt was on it???? Kitt was an AI last I checked not a robot
there is a difference right? or am I just making that up?
dont get me wrong Kitt is a sweet car but not really a robot as I understand it
but I could be wrong about that
-
Kitt was on it???? Kitt was an AI last I checked not a robot
there is a difference right? or am I just making that up?
dont get me wrong Kitt is a sweet car but not really a robot as I understand it
but I could be wrong about that
From the American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language:
robot |ˈrōˌbät; ˈrōbət|
noun
a machine capable of carrying out a complex series of actions automatically, esp. one programmable by a computer.
• (esp. in science fiction) a machine resembling a human being and able to replicate certain human movements and functions automatically.
I'd say Kitt fits the overall definition.
-
No Tom Servo. No Crow T. Robot.
No Doraemon.
-
As for AI vs. robots, isn't every intelligent robot essentially an AI? Seems like the differences are largely cosmetic.
When I saw Data on that list, I got to wondering... at any point, during the 7 seasons of ST:TNG, does anyone use the word "robot" to describe him? He's always an "android". Interesting that the show made such a choice of terminology.
-
As for AI vs. robots, isn't every intelligent robot essentially an AI? Seems like the differences are largely cosmetic.
When I saw Data on that list, I got to wondering... at any point, during the 7 seasons of ST:TNG, does anyone use the word "robot" to describe him? He's always an "android". Interesting that the show made such a choice of terminology.
An android is a robot in human shape (like Data and Lore). A robot is not necessarily so.
-
Would Robocop count? He's more of a cyborg?
I would have to say my #1 robot of all time is Data from TNG. He's stronger than Worf and smarter than any Vulcan. Something to which we can all aspire.
-
Would Robocop count? He's more of a cyborg?
I would have to say my #1 robot of all time is Data from TNG. He's stronger than Worf and smarter than any Vulcan. Something to which we can all aspire.
Robocop would be a cyborg, not a robot. ED-whatever from the same movie is a robot.
-
OK, my geeky question for Star Trek geeks: Does the Doctor from ST: Voyager count as a robot?
You could say "no, he's just an AI that projects a human form". But the line gets murky in later seasons when he acquires a "mobile emitter" that permits him to be fully ambulatory.
-
OK, my geeky question for Star Trek geeks: Does the Doctor from ST: Voyager count as a robot?
You could say "no, he's just an AI that projects a human form". But the line gets murky in later seasons when he acquires a "mobile emitter" that permits him to be fully ambulatory.
It was my impression that they murkified the line intentionally... they wanted to continue exploring the Velveteen Rabbit themes that started with Data in TNG, and carried forward in the story lines about the Borg (Hugh and Seven) re-acquiring their humanity, as well as the stories about purely holographic people.
Basically, if you have an AI, and it can control matter... isn't that still within that definition?
a machine capable of carrying out a complex series of actions automatically, esp. one programmable by a computer.
And if it is using intelligence to decide what series of actions need to be taken... how is that indistiguishable from a human? (Other than the fact that a human needs a lot of really inefficient "middlemen" between hir intelligence and the completion of the actions.)
-
As for AI vs. robots, isn't every intelligent robot essentially an AI? Seems like the differences are largely cosmetic.
When I saw Data on that list, I got to wondering... at any point, during the 7 seasons of ST:TNG, does anyone use the word "robot" to describe him? He's always an "android". Interesting that the show made such a choice of terminology.
An android is a robot in human shape (like Data and Lore). A robot is not necessarily so.
Looking back, I phrased the above rather clumsily. I believe I can modify it to clarify:
"Androids" are a subset of "robots", being the type of robot designed to resemble humans.
-
OK, my geeky question for Star Trek geeks: Does the Doctor from ST: Voyager count as a robot?
You could say "no, he's just an AI that projects a human form". But the line gets murky in later seasons when he acquires a "mobile emitter" that permits him to be fully ambulatory.
This Star Trek Geek's opinion: Voyager sucks!
YMMV
-
This Star Trek Geek's opinion: Voyager sucks!
YMMV
Ahem.
Early seasons of TNG?
And I'm not saying Warp 10 wasn't Warp 10, but there were redeeming episodes, especially with the Doctor.
-
The redeeming factor for Voyager for me was Seven of Nine. Aside from the eye candy bonus, I found the Borg vs. humanity plotline very interesting. I wasn't an avid watcher, though. I caught probably 60% of the run through syndication.
-
This Star Trek Geek's opinion: Voyager sucks!
YMMV
Ahem.
Early seasons of TNG?
And I'm not saying Warp 10 wasn't Warp 10, but there were redeeming episodes, especially with the Doctor.
Hey, I liked TNG all the way through. It had that campy TOS vibe at first, but then it matured into my favorite series.
Voyager was so far removed from everything (by design). The fact that it was on the other side of the galaxy made it lose a lot of the draw I had from TNG. Some of the best episodes of TNG had to do with the federation and how the crew fell into the overall plan, most importantly the prime directive.
The Doctor bugged me more than any of it, actually. He was way too "human" to be an AI program. I mean, Data was supposedly the most advance AI ever, and allegedly nobody could replicate his technology. He still struggled with all kinds of relatively simple human interactions, and that was cool. This AI doctor was more human than Data from day one and he was some standard holographic doctor program installed on every new ship. All he was missing was a real, physical body. Then they fixed that by making a remote holo-projector, so he was pretty much just a member of the crew.
-
8: Evil Bill & Ted (Bill & Ted's Bogus Journey )
#8? Puh-lease. ::)
-
Looking back, I phrased the above rather clumsily. I believe I can modify it to clarify:
"Androids" are a subset of "robots", being the type of robot designed to resemble humans.
Hum, I thought the idea of an "android" was an artificial being that's constructed using organic (or organic like) parts. As opposed to robots, who are generally portrayed as metal or plastic.
The replicants in Blade Runner are androids. They have cells. Whereas Terminator was a robot, because under the human looking face there's a manufactured metal structure.
-
Hum, I thought the idea of an "android" was an artificial being that's constructed using organic (or organic like) parts. As opposed to robots, who are generally portrayed as metal or plastic.
The replicants in Blade Runner are androids. They have cells. Whereas Terminator was a robot, because under the human looking face there's a manufactured metal structure.
It's just having a human appearance. The degree to which is debatable, though I would say C3P0 qualifies as an android.
-
Looking back, I phrased the above rather clumsily. I believe I can modify it to clarify:
"Androids" are a subset of "robots", being the type of robot designed to resemble humans.
Hum, I thought the idea of an "android" was an artificial being that's constructed using organic (or organic like) parts. As opposed to robots, who are generally portrayed as metal or plastic.
The replicants in Blade Runner are androids. They have cells. Whereas Terminator was a robot, because under the human looking face there's a manufactured metal structure.
A being composed of both mechanical and organic parts would be a "cyborg". I think the Terminator (the original Schwarzenegger model) is technically a cyborg since it has metal skeleton and musculature with an organic flesh "chassis".
The Blade Runner replicants appear to be completely organic, not robots at all -- as do the new-model Cylons in Battlestar Glactica. In each case, they are virtually indistinguishable from born-humans down to the cellular level, necessitating complicated tests to know for sure.
The Terminator, replicants, and Cylons really blur the lines between robot, cyborg, and android. It's hard to say definitively what they are.
-
I gotta throw I Robot out there and ask what they qualify as
-
I gotta throw I Robot out there and ask what they qualify as
If you mean the movie, then it seems pretty clear that they're androids. Definitely mechanical, definitely humanoid.
-
As for AI vs. robots, isn't every intelligent robot essentially an AI? Seems like the differences are largely cosmetic.
When I saw Data on that list, I got to wondering... at any point, during the 7 seasons of ST:TNG, does anyone use the word "robot" to describe him? He's always an "android". Interesting that the show made such a choice of terminology.
An android is a robot in human shape (like Data and Lore). A robot is not necessarily so.
Technically, and android is a robot in male human shape. Female-looking robots should be referred to as gynoids (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gynoid).
-
An android is a robot in human shape (like Data and Lore). A robot is not necessarily so.
Technically, and android is a robot in male human shape. Female-looking robots should be referred to as gynoids (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gynoid).
Point taken.
-
Technically, and android is a robot in male human shape. Female-looking robots should be referred to as gynoids (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gynoid).
But following the rules of English, wouldn't we refer to robots of human appearance of both sexes by Androids? It's the Right of Man, the Children of Men, the race of Man, Mankind, and while we can have a long, long, long argument about the misogyny of using Man to cover for both sexes in a group, it is the standard usage.