Skip to main content

A skyfull of drones: Expect it.



The main gripes I've heard and neutralized are:

1) "Oh but it's so dangerous!! what of drones falling out the sky! what of accidents??"

2) "Oh the government will never allow it, too many laws..too many regulations."

3) Doubts about scale but these are coming from a fear place not a technical place, as an Engineer I can tell you *now* they are moot.

4) Doubts like my brothers which was that people would fear their adoption, that one was easy. We've got a 150 years of new technology being feared and yet still being adopted eventually once all the paranoia was neutralized.

We can start with the hilarious madness of the current wars during the late 1870's, we can move up to the late 19th century in the 1890's to see the same hilarious paranoia said about the automobile....fast forward yet again just 10 to 15 years and see the same hysteria go up about airplanes.  The same data devoid and fear based arguments were put up then....all absolutely moot today.

Also it must be kept in mind that because of the power of industry lobby pressure eventually the government will see the value proposition being made by the companies (Fedex/Amazon/Google/Tesla/UPS ...etc. It will soon be a flood after all those guys R&D programs come back with their hard data) bringing these numbers to the table. A clear explanation of how costs can be reduced and commerce increased by deploying such systems is all a senator or congressman needs to see to ask for his cut for the next election should he give his support.

Finally, the fact that these technologies need to be evaluated for future markets by a global competitive landscape puts the pressure on their implementation at costs to be even higher. What will the US economy do when super efficient drone and car and truck fleets flow across the globe from Chinese makers? Asserting dominance for producing and shipping EVERYTHING unseen (they are already dominant but mostly because the average Chinese standard of living is still far below that of a US citizen). They are surely chopping at the bit to get such research in place, funded and the US and western countries can't afford to sit on the side lines.

It has happened before and it will happen again.

On this issue I am ambivalent, as such myopia has directly impacted my ability to evangelize the analogous efficiency extraction revolution that I've been trying to explain to people in the form of Action Oriented Workflow technology that I invented 10 years ago, I'd have an easier chance squeezing a neutron star!!

Ultimately AOW and ADA is about enabling the same point to point fulfillment of a good need for a consumer but using the virtual currency of "action" and a secure system for flowing it from agent to agent in order that it be committed to serve business needs.

I've said that as more and more people find themselves jobless they'll open their eyes more and more to solutions like it that allow them to "maximize their inherent value". Already freelancer.com/ elance.com (which just swallowed oDesk) and a few other marketplace services are out there and servicing one side of the coin. (Allowing people to easily freelance within a niche marketplace) but AOW addresses that side of the coin and THE other side *for all possible businesses*, allowing businesses to emancipate their *existing* employees as well as reaching out to free lancers in any desired marketplace and to add in machine learning to handle the internal expertise finding and fulfillment process ( the virtual octo/quadrocoptors for "action").

Now here barely in 2014, with such companies JUST coming out...I can say without hyperbole that when I had AOW working in 2004 it was 15 years ahead of every one else as even that is not seen in the wild *today* other than with the only system that implements AOW, my AgilEntity framework and ADA (the work routing algorithm I wrote in 2011/12) is also about 10 years ahead of every one else. So it's no doubt that it has taken a while for people to wake mostly thanks to the unfortunate circumstance of a job less "recovery" from the last recession.

I understand why people have been blind to revolutionary technology, lack of historical context, lack of technical context, lack of governmental context...but that doesn't make it any easier...the pains people are suffering now have them dancing to find other solutions and AOW/ADA is ready to feed that need.

Links:

http://sent2null.blogspot.com/2009/04/agilentity-architecture-action-oriented.html

http://sent2null.blogspot.com/2011/09/action-oriented-workflow-maximize-your.html

http://sent2null.blogspot.com/search?q=AOW

Comments

Debi R said…
You seem well educated and very well written. I'm enjoying reading your posts! I sent you a Friend Request on Facebook. I hope you accept it. Debi R.

Popular posts from this blog

On the idea of "world wide mush" resulting from "open" development models

A recent article posted in the Wall Street Journal posits that the collectivization of various types of goods or services created by the internet is long term a damaging trend for human societies.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703481004574646402192953052.html

I think that the author misses truths that have been in place that show that collectivization is not a process that started with the internet but has been with us since we started inventing things.

It seems that Mr. Lanier is not properly defining the contexts under which different problems can benefit or suffer from collectivization. He speaks in general terms of the loss of the potential for creators to extract profit from their work but misses that this is and was true of human civilization since we first picked up a rock to use as a crude hammer. New things make old things obsolete and people MUST adapt to what is displaced (be it a former human performance of that task or use of an older product) so as to main…

Engineers versus Programmers

I have found as more non formally trained people enter the coding space, the quality of code that results varies in an interesting way.

The formalities of learning to code in a structured course at University involve often strong focus on "correctness" and efficiency in the form of big O representations for the algorithms created.

Much less focus tends to be placed on what I'll call practical programming, which is the type of code that engineers (note I didn't use "programmers" on purpose) must learn to write.

Programmers are what Universities create, students that can take a defined development environment and within in write an algorithm for computing some sequence or traversing a tree or encoding and decoding a string. Efficiency and invariant rules are guiding development missions. Execution time for creating the solution is often a week or more depending on the professor and their style of teaching code and giving out problems. This type of coding is devo…

Waking Out: A proposal to emerging ethical super intelligence safely.

The zeitgeist of Science fiction is filled with stories that paint a dystopian tale of how human desires to build artificial intelligence can go wrong. From the programmed pathology of HAL in 2001 a space odyssey, to the immediately malevolent emergence of Skynet in The Terminator and later to the humans as energy stores for the advanced AI of the Matrix and today , to the rampage of "hosts" in the new HBO series Westworld.

These stories all have a common theme of probing what happens when our autonomous systems get a mind of their own to some degree and no longer obey their creators but how can we avoid these types of scenarios but still emerge generalized intelligence that will leverage their super intelligence with empathy and consideration the same that we expect from one another? This question is being answered in a way that is mostly hopeful that current methods used in machine learning and specifically deep learning will not emerge skynet or HAL.

I think this is the …