'Inspirational' robots to begin replacing teachers within 10 years

Thorin wrote:

Lord Foul wrote:

Thorin wrote:

Ever heard of backup systems?

Contingency plans?

pffft, you have no idea

a flare of sufficient strength would destroy ALL tech not stored in "hardened" storage facilities..it doesnt need to be plugged in or connected.

Really and companies all stop do they when we have solar flares?
Maybe is it because they have backups and contingencies?
Considering there is constantly many solar flares, plus the fact we deal with many, and more so how technology with have advanced further within a decade. You are simple using a brexiter and remainer fear argument.

Syl wrote:

Thorin wrote:

To add to this, I have posted this before.

Human beings evolve depending on their surroundings.
If everything  is available, like you say  "All at the touch of a button" of course their behaviour will adapt to that.
We see it now in social situations, fewer people give eye contact when they talk, fewer people actually talk....they prefer to be communicating with others via technology.

Its not being overly dramatic to point out that if human contact and touch, one of the most basic needs in humans, is being diminished gradually....it will change human beings for the worse not the better.

Robotic teachers....robotic girlfriends, robotic cars.... what next??

Eilzel wrote:Right didge. And should we ask kids if they want to go to school at all?

Lord Foul wrote:

Thorin wrote:
Really and companies all stop do they when we have solar flares?
Maybe is it because they have backups and contingencies?
Considering there is constantly many solar flares, plus the fact we deal with many, and more so how technology with have advanced further within a decade. You are simple using a brexiter and remainer fear argument.

nah didge...what we have had recently have been "nothings" mere little love taps from her majesty the sun

wait till we get a slap....

if anything technology is MORE vulnerable now than it was when the last real biggie hit (which wrecked the power distribution and telegraph system of vast tracts of america)
were one of that magnitude to hit today all non military (and even some military) tech would fail, computers, radios, phones...the works.... all rendered into useless irrecoverable junk

Thorin wrote:

Syl wrote:

Human beings evolve depending on their surroundings.
If everything  is available, like you say  "All at the touch of a button" of course their behaviour will adapt to that.
We see it now in social situations, fewer people give eye contact when they talk, fewer people actually talk....they prefer to be communicating with others via technology.

Its not being overly dramatic to point out that if human contact and touch, one of the most basic needs in humans, is being diminished gradually....it will change human beings for the worse not the better.

Robotic teachers....robotic girlfriends, robotic cars.... what next??

1) I do not find that at all when talking with people that they do not give eye contact. Maybe they went to Oxford University?

Well look around when you are out, so many people are interacting with hand held gadgets now rather than their fellow human beings face to face.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-oxfordshire-39742670

2) If people are communicating another way, they are still communicating. The question to ask is whether people will lose the ability to read expressions? Of course not as this is part and parcel of what they learn growing up around their family and friends. What they see on TV or on the internet. 

Yes they will gradually over time, lose the art of showing and understanding emotions if the main thing they are communicating with is a robot or a machine. Machines don't have feelings.

3) So its completely being over dramatic and it proves my point on the fact you are just one in a long line of cultural pessimists.

Syl wrote:Well look around when you are out, so many people are interacting with hand held gadgets now rather than their fellow human beings face to face.

Thorin wrote: So the whole bases for your argument is based off some people?
Is that it?
What about all the other people you are clearly not doing so?
Unless you of course claim you are complicit to this doing the same?
Is that the case?
So really, your whole premise is based on what I have exactly said already that some people are distracted and that you seem to think you hold the ability to now claim to know how 8 billion humans communicate.
You will forgive me if I simple just laugh at that.

Yes they will gradually over time, lose the art of showing and understanding emotions if the main thing they are communicating with is a robot or a machine. Machines don't have feelings.

Thorin wrote: Will they?
Based on what?
The fact we see more and more people give to charities?
More and more people go out off their way to help others?
Do you not see the mass of threads I actually post on this happening daily?
Let alone the mass of times this is not even reported?
So even with the advancement of technology, we see more and more people today actually help far more ever than they ever did in the past. As the internet is able to help us reach out to more and more people than ever before.
How is that based on your poor assumptions Syl?
Why is it for right or wrong we see more and more people protest against what they do not agree with?
Is that holding feelings by any chance?
If anything people are becoming more and more emotive and not able to keep those emotions in check

Nope...not a pessimist, possibly a far sighted realist.

Eilzel wrote:Ed's son could put a face and personality to that text, didge, so not really comparable.

Thorin wrote:

Syl wrote:Well look around when you are out, so many people are interacting with hand held gadgets now rather than their fellow human beings face to face.


Yes they will gradually over time, lose the art of showing and understanding emotions if the main thing they are communicating with is a robot or a machine. Machines don't have feelings.


Nope...not a pessimist, possibly a far sighted realist.

As seen a pessimist.
The question to ask yourself is would you be saying as you do now, if you were a Teen?
Highly unlikely
Case in point
Eddie's son felt a connection and found humour with a teacher, both emotions simply through text.
How is that possible based on your claims?

Syl wrote:

Thorin wrote:

As seen a pessimist.
The question to ask yourself is would you be saying as you do now, if you were a Teen?
Highly unlikely
Case in point
Eddie's son felt a connection and found humour with a teacher, both emotions simply through text.
How is that possible based on your claims?

Eddies son knows who he is texting...he isn't communicating with a bloody robot. 

My opinion is based on what I see when out and about, mixing with friends and family, and just being observant of life in general.
You can laugh all you want, open your eyes when you are out and you will see how society is changing re the way people interact with each other.

I'm not saying people will stop giving to charities....they will press a button and hey presto, done.
One more instance of no human contact needed.

nicko wrote:I had a Maths Teacher who looked like Bridgett Bardo,   No Robot could compare !

Thorin wrote:

Syl wrote:
Eddies son knows who he is texting...he isn't communicating with a bloody robot. 

My opinion is based on what I see when out and about, mixing with friends and family, and just being observant of life in general.
You can laugh all you want, open your eyes when you are out and you will see how society is changing re the way people interact with each other.

I'm not saying people will stop giving to charities....they will press a button and hey presto, done.
One more instance of no human contact needed.

So how does your view and Eilzels for that matter, hold for someone blind, who cannot see?

If they use braille?

You see the pair of you are doing what has been done countless times in history. You have formed a prejudice and a discrimination. Not on what the robots can do, but on a view based off irrational fear.

People can even believe they speak to Gods or angels or anything. They can have a sense of love and being at ease. I may disagree with this, but it does not mean what you are communicating with has to be viewed as cold. I may not agree with said views, but its not for me to deny them this connection or love is it?

As which you are both claiming

So your opinion is based on something a minuscule amount of people, is embarrassing to even argue off over. When you are not in a million places at once around the world.

To say you cannot get a connection with something, shows none of you have even played computer chess.

Now why would I say that, lets see if either of you can figure out why?

Syl wrote:

Thorin wrote:


So how does your view and Eilzels for that matter, hold for someone blind, who cannot see?

If they use braille?

You see the pair of you are doing what has been done countless times in history. You have formed a prejudice and a discrimination. Not on what the robots can do, but on a view based off irrational fear.

People can even believe they speak to Gods or angels or anything. They can have a sense of love and being at ease. I may disagree with this, but it does not mean what you are communicating with has to be viewed as cold. I may not agree with said views, but its not for me to deny them this connection or love is it?

As which you are both claiming

So your opinion is based on something a minuscule amount of people, is embarrassing to even argue off over. When you are not in a million places at once around the world.

To say you cannot get a connection with something, shows none of you have even played computer chess.

Now why would I say that, lets see if either of you can figure out why?

I should think a blind person would more than most need human contact....I think you are drastically under emphasising the need for human interaction in this world.

I don't think anyone is decrying the need for machines, just that they cant replace humans in certain areas.

No I have never played online chess Thor...I have played online scrabble, I found it about the most unrewarding, frustrating  game I have ever played tbh....and not just because I lost every time either.

Thorin wrote:

Syl wrote:
I should think a blind person would more than most need human contact....I think you are drastically under emphasising the need for human interaction in this world.

I don't think anyone is decrying the need for machines, just that they cant replace humans in certain areas.

No I have never played online chess Thor...I have played online scrabble, I found it about the most unrewarding, frustrating  game I have ever played tbh....and not just because I lost every time either.

Am I underestimating anything?

I think that is you Sly and if you think you need contact to make you happy, then that person is never happy with in themselves. That means they require attention. Sorry that is a very poor argument and why people become unhappy. Finding your inner self is the key

The point you so badly miss on those who are blind, is they have to imagine what something looks like, but they do not have to see something to make a connection. Yourself and Eilzel are under the poor impression that this is not possible with something that much more intelligence. Robots.

That is baloney and again is born from a prejudice

The worst point is you, Eilzel, Eddie, think that machines are going to all replace humans. Which really is dumb to say the least and is not even the case here. I would guess you have watched to many Terminator films.

I love your last sentence. So you felt frustrated did you not?
Did you also not try harder to beat the machine?

Syl wrote:

Thorin wrote:


Am I underestimating anything?

I think that is you Sly and if you think you need contact to make you happy, then that person is never happy with in themselves. That means they require attention. Sorry that is a very poor argument and why people become unhappy. Finding your inner self is the key

The point you so badly miss on those who are blind, is they have to imagine what something looks like, but they do not have to see something to make a connection. Yourself and Eilzel are under the poor impression that this is not possible with something that much more intelligence. Robots.

That is baloney and again is born from a prejudice

The worst point is you, Eilzel, Eddie, think that machines are going to all replace humans. Which really is dumb to say the least and is not even the case here. I would guess you have watched to many Terminator films.

I love your last sentence. So you felt frustrated did you not?
Did you also not try harder to beat the machine?

No ...I was bored playing with a machine, it was no fun.
Even in something as simple as  a board game, unless you are so competitive  your only motive is to improve your game and win,  sharing the experience is what makes it interesting...to me at least.

Why do you think blind people will often ask to touch your face Thor? its because they want to 'see' who you are....they want to communicate with flesh and blood not steel.

Do you really think people need human and social contact with others because they are unhappy within themselves ?
That is, to use your own word is...baloney.

Syl wrote:Kids respond to humans ...especially young kids who want to please...you cant please or anger a piece of machinery.
They also learn better when they are enjoying being taught...good teachers make a subject interesting and fun.

Of course humans need contact with one another....that's my whole argument.

I added to my above post that isolation is one of the main causes of depression, especially in the old and vulnerable.
Keep replacing humans with machines and isolation will just flourish over time.

Thorin wrote:

Syl wrote:Kids respond to humans ...especially young kids who want to please...you cant please or anger a piece of machinery.
They also learn better when they are enjoying being taught...good teachers make a subject interesting and fun.

Of course humans need contact with one another....that's my whole argument.

I added to my above post that isolation is one of the main causes of depression, especially in the old and vulnerable.
Keep replacing humans with machines and isolation will just flourish over time.

So kids do not respond to animals, insects, the sea, the sky etc, now only humans?

Really?

Of course kids respond to all of the above, and what do all of the above have in common? They are NOT robots.

As already explain a Robot is going to captivate a child one to one far better than any teacher. As its programmed to make everything interesting. In order that they learn. Even more so its far smarter than any human.

So why do people who do not have contact with humans, not need human contact?

You see you actually make my point how people have not been able to find their inner self, that they are inherently selfish for the needs of others. Shame really, but at least many do care

And you end with yet more drivel when robots are not going to replace all teachers.

So if the robots speak kindly and are always kind to the child and never angry, of which teachers certainly will get at times. Who is going to be the better teacher?

Its not rocket science is it Syl

You see, you think learning requires emotions all the time. No it does not when studying things that do not require emotions like maths for example and it is emotions that often cloud any rational thinking. Its how a bias constantly forms and how kids can be brainwashed. Yet sadly you wish for this poor process to continue.

With something completely neutral that allows people to think for themselves and yet you have no argument in your arsenal to counter me.

Do you know why?

Your whole arguments have been built around emotions.

People who have made the wisest choices were not clouded by emotions, but rational reason.

Syl wrote:

Thorin wrote:


So kids do not respond to animals, insects, the sea, the sky etc, now only humans?

Really?

Of course kids respond to all of the above, and what do all of the above have in common? They are NOT robots.

As already explain a Robot is going to captivate a child one to one far better than any teacher. As its programmed to make everything interesting. In order that they learn. Even more so its far smarter than any human.

So why do people who do not have contact with humans, not need human contact?

You see you actually make my point how people have not been able to find their inner self, that they are inherently selfish for the needs of others. Shame really, but at least many do care

And you end with yet more drivel when robots are not going to replace all teachers.

So if the robots speak kindly and are always kind to the child and never angry, of which teachers certainly will get at times. Who is going to be the better teacher?

Its not rocket science is it Syl

You see, you think learning requires emotions all the time. No it does not when studying things that do not require emotions like maths for example and it is emotions that often cloud any rational thinking. Its how a bias constantly forms and how kids can be brainwashed. Yet sadly you wish for this poor process to continue.

With something completely neutral that allows people to think for themselves and yet you have no argument in your arsenal to counter me.

Do you know why?

Your whole arguments have been built around emotions.

People who have made the wisest choices were not clouded by emotions, but rational reason.

The rest of your post we have already covered in one form or another....once more we will have to agree to disagree. 

Syl wrote:No...I have answered all the points , you are just asking the same ones with different words. 

Thorin wrote:

Syl wrote:No...I have answered all the points , you are just asking the same ones with different words. 

Copout Syl and you know it.

Syl wrote:

Thorin wrote:


Copout Syl and you know it.

No, I have nothing to add, I feel I am going round in circles.
Others will have fresh opinions no doubt.

Syl wrote:Whatever.

Thorin wrote:

Syl wrote:Whatever.

Of course I do Nicko

Why is it when posters views are reasoned against, that they suddenly invoke that its only a joke? When they cannot offer anything back to counter with reason?

Syl wrote:

Thorin wrote:

Of course I do Nicko

Why is it when posters views are reasoned against, that they suddenly invoke that its only a joke? When they cannot offer anything back to counter with reason?

That's not the case here because I have argued all the points and we wont ever agree.
That's fine, we are all allowed to disagree, I just don't see the point of going over the same old arguments, its boring for all concerned.

Thorin wrote:

Syl wrote:

That's not the case here because I have argued all the points and we wont ever agree.
That's fine, we are all allowed to disagree, I just don't see the point of going over the same old arguments, its boring for all concerned.

Still a copout.

I found that happens, when the other person simple cannot answer points raised to them.

Still, happy for you to agree to disagree.

Syl wrote:

Thorin wrote:

Still a copout.

I found that happens, when the other person simple cannot answer points raised to them.

Still, happy for you to agree to disagree.

We will also have to agree to disagree that its a cop out on this occasion. 

eddie wrote:You know what small children do? They mimic and mold themselves on their favourite adult - which can be a teacher.

Need I say more?

A world full of emotionless people who were raised by a robot.

eddie wrote:Ah so what you really want Veya, is "perfection".
I don't. I like the fact that different people (teachers) will have different traits and flaws and you now something else? I've worked for years in classrooms and there are just some things a human can know or sense in a child, that a robot/machine/soulless thing, simply will not.