Ninety miles from the South Eastern tip of the United States, Liberty has no stead. In order for Liberty to exist and thrive, Tyranny must be identified, recognized, confronted and extinguished.
infinite scrolling
Sunday, June 3, 2018
The robot revolution is just beginning
Every year, Time magazine gets swamped with pitches from thousands of companies, all convinced their product deserves to be included in Time’s “25 Best Inventions” list. This past December, the magazine reserved its cover for a Pixar-like, 11-inch armless robot named Jibo.
Jibo — a so-called “social robot” — is just the latest example of a clear phenomenon: A new generation of exponentially more intelligent and capable robots is on the way. In fact, they’re already everywhere we look: over our heads, in our cars and operating rooms, next to us on the assembly lines, in our military, and on the last mile.
And the prospect of exponentially more robots, crunching exponentially more data, necessitates not just a lot more computing power but also an entirely new product architecture.
An article written in 2015 by a former Pentagon robotics researcher looks more prescient by the day.
That summer, Gill Pratt, who oversaw robotics technology as a manager of the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), said robot capabilities had crossed a key threshold. Improvements in electric energy storage and the exponential growth of computation power and data storage, he argued, had enabled robots to learn and make decisions informed by the experiences of other robots.
His expectation back then? Robots would multiply like rabbits because they were no longer simple-minded, single-purposed machines. And as robots learn more and more, Pratt argued, more people will have uses for them.
Today, that’s exactly what we’re seeing. Demand for robotics is increasingly broad-based. Everybody seems to want them.
To get a sense of this growth, consider: In 2014, the Boston Consulting Group forecast the global market for robotics would reach $67 billion over the coming decade. Just three years later, BCG last June revised that dollar figure upward – by another $20 billion.
Industry has for decades been a core consumer of robotics. Today, the majority of the world’s robots are still used in factories.
What’s different is that those robots are a lot smaller, more perceptive and more collaborative than their predecessors. And the flood of venture capital into the space ensures we’ll be seeing a lot more of them in our distribution centers and warehouses in coming years.
Consider that between 2016 and 2017, venture capital investments in industrial robots more than tripled, from $402 million to $1.2 billion. Five years ago, startups in this same space raised just $195 million.
Also interesting about this current robotics explosion is that companies from a wide swath of other industries, from retailers to hotels, are embracing the benefits of smarter machines. The insurance industry, for example, has begun using artificial intelligence tools like machine vision and natural language processing to handle claims.
These expanding use cases help explain why Boston Consulting Group now expects the commercial robotics market to grow to $23 billion by 2025—34 percent higher than originally predicted.
It’s consumers, though, who account for the biggest spike in demand. BCG’s projections of the consumer market’s size rose by 156 percent. Many prominent firms, including...
Jibo — a so-called “social robot” — is just the latest example of a clear phenomenon: A new generation of exponentially more intelligent and capable robots is on the way. In fact, they’re already everywhere we look: over our heads, in our cars and operating rooms, next to us on the assembly lines, in our military, and on the last mile.
And the prospect of exponentially more robots, crunching exponentially more data, necessitates not just a lot more computing power but also an entirely new product architecture.
An article written in 2015 by a former Pentagon robotics researcher looks more prescient by the day.
That summer, Gill Pratt, who oversaw robotics technology as a manager of the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), said robot capabilities had crossed a key threshold. Improvements in electric energy storage and the exponential growth of computation power and data storage, he argued, had enabled robots to learn and make decisions informed by the experiences of other robots.
His expectation back then? Robots would multiply like rabbits because they were no longer simple-minded, single-purposed machines. And as robots learn more and more, Pratt argued, more people will have uses for them.
Today, that’s exactly what we’re seeing. Demand for robotics is increasingly broad-based. Everybody seems to want them.
To get a sense of this growth, consider: In 2014, the Boston Consulting Group forecast the global market for robotics would reach $67 billion over the coming decade. Just three years later, BCG last June revised that dollar figure upward – by another $20 billion.
Industry has for decades been a core consumer of robotics. Today, the majority of the world’s robots are still used in factories.
What’s different is that those robots are a lot smaller, more perceptive and more collaborative than their predecessors. And the flood of venture capital into the space ensures we’ll be seeing a lot more of them in our distribution centers and warehouses in coming years.
Consider that between 2016 and 2017, venture capital investments in industrial robots more than tripled, from $402 million to $1.2 billion. Five years ago, startups in this same space raised just $195 million.
Also interesting about this current robotics explosion is that companies from a wide swath of other industries, from retailers to hotels, are embracing the benefits of smarter machines. The insurance industry, for example, has begun using artificial intelligence tools like machine vision and natural language processing to handle claims.
These expanding use cases help explain why Boston Consulting Group now expects the commercial robotics market to grow to $23 billion by 2025—34 percent higher than originally predicted.
It’s consumers, though, who account for the biggest spike in demand. BCG’s projections of the consumer market’s size rose by 156 percent. Many prominent firms, including...
North Korea gets relief only when it gives up nuclear weapons, Mattis Says
North Korea will get relief from international sanctions only when it has shown irreversible moves toward denuclearization, U.S. Secretary of Defense James Mattis said ahead of a summit next week between President Donald Trump and North Korean leader Kim Jong Un.
Speaking Sunday in Singapore at the start of a meeting with the defense ministers of South Korea and Japan, Mattis warned that “we can anticipate at best a bumpy road to the negotiations.”
“As defense ministers we must maintain a strong, collaborative defensive stance so we enable our diplomats to negotiate from a calm position of strength in this critical time,” Mattis said. The ministers were in Singapore for the annual IISS Shangri-La Dialogue, which brings together global defense officials.
He added that all United Nations Security Council resolutions on the regime must stay in place. “North Korea will receive relief only when it demonstrates verifiable and irreversible steps to denuclearization,” Mattis said.
His comments came after Trump conceded that North Korea won’t agree immediately to give up its nuclear arsenal, and seemingly walked back expectations for a quick deal from his planned June 12 Singapore meeting with Kim.
Asked Friday about the vaunted “maximum pressure” campaign of sanctions enacted to rein in North Korea, Trump said, “I don’t want to use that term. Because we’re getting along.”
The U.S. has previously insisted that North Korea give up all its weapons before it can shed its pariah status or get any relief from sanctions. North Korea has bristled at the idea, and it’s unclear if the two sides will be able to bridge their differences enough for the meeting to be deemed a success.
Meanwhile, North Korea moved to replace its defense minister ahead of the pivotal negotiations, Japan’s Asahi newspaper reported Sunday, citing people that it didn’t identify. No Kwang Chol, the head of the ruling Workers’ Party’s second economic committee, was chosen to replace Pak Yong Sik, who served as defense chief since May 2015.
Japanese Defense Minister Itsunori Onodera told the Singapore forum Saturday he was aware of reports Trump no longer planned “maximum pressure” on North Korea.
“I know that President Trump has said he won’t lift sanctions until North Korea agrees to denuclearization,” Onodera said. “I understand that the pressure will remain in place.”
Japan has taken a cautious stance on the North Korea summit, concerned about easing pressure on a regime that only months ago was firing missiles over Japanese territory. Onodera warned against rewarding North Korea for “solely agreeing” to talks, and said Japan sought the removal of ballistic missiles of “all flight ranges” from North Korea.
The summit was resurrected after Trump called it off in a letter to Kim on May 24, complaining of “the tremendous anger and open hostility” in comments from North Korea. But he had also left...
Speaking Sunday in Singapore at the start of a meeting with the defense ministers of South Korea and Japan, Mattis warned that “we can anticipate at best a bumpy road to the negotiations.”
“As defense ministers we must maintain a strong, collaborative defensive stance so we enable our diplomats to negotiate from a calm position of strength in this critical time,” Mattis said. The ministers were in Singapore for the annual IISS Shangri-La Dialogue, which brings together global defense officials.
He added that all United Nations Security Council resolutions on the regime must stay in place. “North Korea will receive relief only when it demonstrates verifiable and irreversible steps to denuclearization,” Mattis said.
His comments came after Trump conceded that North Korea won’t agree immediately to give up its nuclear arsenal, and seemingly walked back expectations for a quick deal from his planned June 12 Singapore meeting with Kim.
Asked Friday about the vaunted “maximum pressure” campaign of sanctions enacted to rein in North Korea, Trump said, “I don’t want to use that term. Because we’re getting along.”
The U.S. has previously insisted that North Korea give up all its weapons before it can shed its pariah status or get any relief from sanctions. North Korea has bristled at the idea, and it’s unclear if the two sides will be able to bridge their differences enough for the meeting to be deemed a success.
Meanwhile, North Korea moved to replace its defense minister ahead of the pivotal negotiations, Japan’s Asahi newspaper reported Sunday, citing people that it didn’t identify. No Kwang Chol, the head of the ruling Workers’ Party’s second economic committee, was chosen to replace Pak Yong Sik, who served as defense chief since May 2015.
Japanese Defense Minister Itsunori Onodera told the Singapore forum Saturday he was aware of reports Trump no longer planned “maximum pressure” on North Korea.
“I know that President Trump has said he won’t lift sanctions until North Korea agrees to denuclearization,” Onodera said. “I understand that the pressure will remain in place.”
Japan has taken a cautious stance on the North Korea summit, concerned about easing pressure on a regime that only months ago was firing missiles over Japanese territory. Onodera warned against rewarding North Korea for “solely agreeing” to talks, and said Japan sought the removal of ballistic missiles of “all flight ranges” from North Korea.
The summit was resurrected after Trump called it off in a letter to Kim on May 24, complaining of “the tremendous anger and open hostility” in comments from North Korea. But he had also left...
BOOM! Rep. Devin Nunes: Aussie Ambassador Downer Lied About Launch of Deep State Spying on Trump Campaign (VIDEO)
Rep. Devin Nunes (R-CA) joined Maria Bartiromo on Sunday Morning Futures this morning.
The interview was full of interesting nuggets including the fact that Aussie Ambassador Alexander Downer lied about the launch of the Spygate scandal. Nunes says Donwer lied about giving the Papadopoulos information to the Australian ambassador in the US to launch the spying on the Trump campaign.
The interview was full of interesting nuggets including the fact that Aussie Ambassador Alexander Downer lied about the launch of the Spygate scandal. Nunes says Donwer lied about giving the Papadopoulos information to the Australian ambassador in the US to launch the spying on the Trump campaign.
Rep. Devin Nunes: We know that the counter intelligence investigation was opened in July. Well that’s fine so if that’s all the information you have then why are there all of these strange activities leading up to late July, particularly in the spring?
Maria Bartiromo: I’m trying to understand this because you broke the news on this program more than a month ago that you’ve looked for reasons and catalysts to understand how an investigation was opened and launched into the Trump campaign. And you said to us, based on the Five Eyes Intelligence of all of our partners across the world, that there was NO intelligence that you could find that launched that investigation…
Rep. Devin Nunes: … There’s new information this week that the media is ignoring. So The New York Times has reported in the past that the Australian ambassador, the Australian High Commissioner, is the one that brought this to the attention of the United States government. Now typically that would have gone through FBI channels, it would have gone through the embassy in London, it would have come across officially. It would have come across the pond officially. And it didn’t. And that’s what we would like to have seen. Now this week we now know that Mr. Downer, the former Australian ambassador, high commissioner in London, said that he had given the information to the Australian ambassador in the US. Well, now we know that that’s not true. So, Mr. Downer now has claimed that...
Mother of 16-Year-Old Girl Butchered by MS-13 Says Trump Didn’t Go Far Enough with ‘Animals’ Comment
President Donald Trump was absolutely skewered in the media for calling MS-13 gang members “animals”… but the mother of a teenage girl who was murdered by that group believes he didn’t go far enough.
During a meeting that discussed the border problem and illegal immigration, Trump was asked a question about Mara Salvatrucha or MS-13, one of the most ruthless Hispanic gangs operating today.
“You wouldn’t believe how bad these people are,” the president said, clearly referring to the gang members. “These aren’t people, these are animals, and we’re taking them out of the country at a level and at a rate that’s never happened before.”
That quote was quickly reported out of context by almost every mainstream media source, and Trump was slammed as being insensitive and racist toward all immigrants.
When the full video of the discussion emerged, however, outlets like The Associated Press were forced to sheepishly correct the story and admitted that the president was referring to MS-13.
Now, the grieving mother of one of that gang’s victims is pushing back against the liberal media, and siding with Trump’s tough words.
“The way my daughter was murdered was indescribable,” Evelyn Rodriguez, herself Hispanic, told Fox Business host Neil Cavuto. “To imagine what they did to her — there’s no words that can even (describe) it.”
Rodriguez’s 16-year-old daughter Kayla Cuevas was brutally beaten to death by MS-13 gang members in New York two years ago. Another girl was also killed at the same time, and authorities found that three of the four Mara Salvatrucha suspects were illegal aliens.
“(MS-13 is) the demon itself,” Rodriguez said. “When you look at these individuals, it’s just seeing darkness. There’s...
During a meeting that discussed the border problem and illegal immigration, Trump was asked a question about Mara Salvatrucha or MS-13, one of the most ruthless Hispanic gangs operating today.
“You wouldn’t believe how bad these people are,” the president said, clearly referring to the gang members. “These aren’t people, these are animals, and we’re taking them out of the country at a level and at a rate that’s never happened before.”
That quote was quickly reported out of context by almost every mainstream media source, and Trump was slammed as being insensitive and racist toward all immigrants.
When the full video of the discussion emerged, however, outlets like The Associated Press were forced to sheepishly correct the story and admitted that the president was referring to MS-13.
Now, the grieving mother of one of that gang’s victims is pushing back against the liberal media, and siding with Trump’s tough words.
“The way my daughter was murdered was indescribable,” Evelyn Rodriguez, herself Hispanic, told Fox Business host Neil Cavuto. “To imagine what they did to her — there’s no words that can even (describe) it.”
Rodriguez’s 16-year-old daughter Kayla Cuevas was brutally beaten to death by MS-13 gang members in New York two years ago. Another girl was also killed at the same time, and authorities found that three of the four Mara Salvatrucha suspects were illegal aliens.
“(MS-13 is) the demon itself,” Rodriguez said. “When you look at these individuals, it’s just seeing darkness. There’s...
Legal expert: Obama facing jail time over Trump spy
A series of political insiders and legal experts say former President Barack Obama knew his administration spied on Donald Trump’s presidential campaign — he could even go to jail over it.
An investigative specialist, a former federal prosecutor, and one leading experts on the US intelligence community agree Obama may have leveraged the most powerful position in the world to rig the 2016 election.
The New York Times admitted the Obama administration had planted an “informant” – the paper refused to admit he was a “spy” – in the Trump campaign in the summer and fall of 2016.
The spy effort, known as “Operation Crossfire Hurricane,” began July 31, 2016 – just 10 days after Trump accepted the Republican presidential nomination.
The revelation turned Washington’s political establishment upside down – and threatens to put some of its members in the slammer.
“You can bet [Obama] was briefed on this operation against the campaign, especially given its sensitive nature,” Tom Fitton of Judicial Watch told Fox Business this week. “President Obama should disclose what he knew.”
Trump has demanded an investigation into whether the feds infiltrated his campaign for political purposes – and if Obama was behind it.
“Obama knew all about this and the notion that he didn’t is ludicrous,” said former federal prosecutor Joe diGenova.
The smoking gun came during a meeting on January 5, 2017, he said.
Barack Obama, Joe Biden, NSA advisor Susan Rice, and acting Attorney General Sally Yates huddled together “to figure out a way to explain” the investigation and spy embed, diGenova said. “They knew since Hillary didn’t win, now it was going to come out and they needed a story.”
He called former administration officials’ denials nothing more than “gaslighting.”
Andrew McCarthy, a former terror prosecutor, agrees.
“The White House had to know about this from the start,” McCarthy, who writes for National Review, told Washington’s WMAL radio. “The Susan Rice…‘CYA’ memo she wrote going out the door makes that clear.”
That’s the whole point of this kind of investigation, he said.
“Counterintelligence is done for the president,” McCarthy explained. “The purpose of it is…to enable the president to…(protect) the country from foreign threats to national security.”
But what if Obama abused that constitutional authority in order to carry out his own top priority: Keeping Democrats in power?
It’s not like Obama hasn’t been guilty of this before: the IRS harassment of the Tea Party, covering up...
An investigative specialist, a former federal prosecutor, and one leading experts on the US intelligence community agree Obama may have leveraged the most powerful position in the world to rig the 2016 election.
The New York Times admitted the Obama administration had planted an “informant” – the paper refused to admit he was a “spy” – in the Trump campaign in the summer and fall of 2016.
The spy effort, known as “Operation Crossfire Hurricane,” began July 31, 2016 – just 10 days after Trump accepted the Republican presidential nomination.
The revelation turned Washington’s political establishment upside down – and threatens to put some of its members in the slammer.
“You can bet [Obama] was briefed on this operation against the campaign, especially given its sensitive nature,” Tom Fitton of Judicial Watch told Fox Business this week. “President Obama should disclose what he knew.”
Trump has demanded an investigation into whether the feds infiltrated his campaign for political purposes – and if Obama was behind it.
“Obama knew all about this and the notion that he didn’t is ludicrous,” said former federal prosecutor Joe diGenova.
The smoking gun came during a meeting on January 5, 2017, he said.
Barack Obama, Joe Biden, NSA advisor Susan Rice, and acting Attorney General Sally Yates huddled together “to figure out a way to explain” the investigation and spy embed, diGenova said. “They knew since Hillary didn’t win, now it was going to come out and they needed a story.”
He called former administration officials’ denials nothing more than “gaslighting.”
Andrew McCarthy, a former terror prosecutor, agrees.
“The White House had to know about this from the start,” McCarthy, who writes for National Review, told Washington’s WMAL radio. “The Susan Rice…‘CYA’ memo she wrote going out the door makes that clear.”
That’s the whole point of this kind of investigation, he said.
“Counterintelligence is done for the president,” McCarthy explained. “The purpose of it is…to enable the president to…(protect) the country from foreign threats to national security.”
But what if Obama abused that constitutional authority in order to carry out his own top priority: Keeping Democrats in power?
It’s not like Obama hasn’t been guilty of this before: the IRS harassment of the Tea Party, covering up...
The 90 Miles Mystery Box: Episode #276
You have come across a mystery box. But what is inside?
It could be literally anything from the serene to the horrific,
from the beautiful to the repugnant,
from the mysterious to the familiar.
If you decide to open it, you could be disappointed,
you could be inspired, you could be appalled.
This is not for the faint of heart or the easily offended.
You have been warned.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)