Website review: Robots without a cause | Media | Th...
Someone discovered this in Science/Tech
•11 reviews since Jun 17, 2003
science, technology
•guardian.co.uk/g2/story/0,3604,978873,00.html
People who like this website
- yojimb0jin
Los Angeles
- SamirPatel
Fontana
- Moe14
Hotel
- groovybear
California
- toekneekei
California
- igliashon
Half Moon Bay
- kelphaedrus
Carmichael
- azkitchen
Gilbert
- skratneem
480
- kristjin
Seattle
StumbleUpon is the best way to discover great web sites, videos, photos, blogs and more - based on your interests.
Everything is submitted and rated by the community. Discover, share and review the best of the web!
Reviews of this website
rarrzero rated 2 months ago- This article dismisses the long, long history of frivolous technology use and acts like it's something brand new. The inventors of the 1800s profited primarily on frivolous technology, just like today. Also, it advocates remaining in the past rather than trying to improve our quality of life further; had this writer written during the Industrial Revolution, the title sentence surely would have been: "Thanks to the newest Wonders of Technology, we can use machines to weave fabrics, light houses without candles, and create mechanical conveyances which do not require horses. In the face of this wizardry, Stuart Jeffries, Esq., has but a single question: why?"
- msaleem-stumbl rated 7 months ago
- From the page: "Thanks to the newest wonders of technology we can get robots to do our vacuuming, transmit pictures on our mobile phones and unlock our cars (and adjust their seats) merely by touching them. In the face of this wizardry, Stuart Jeffries has only one question: why? "
- M-104 rated 7 months ago
- The basic assumption here is that all of these "unnecessary" consumer gadgets are really unnecessary. Yes, slippers with headlights may look stupid both on the drawing board and on the shelf, but the concept behind the inane consumer product (using compact LEDs for more personal convenience and better awareness of darkened surroundings) shouldn't be waved off as some pure luxury concern.
- toekneekei rated 30 months ago
- best thing since sliced toast: toast that slices itself.
- Riboflavin rated 36 months ago
- To summarize: "people buy lots of expensive crap, much of which they won't need, or will be insufficient to producing a happy life in and of themselves." Gee, a deficient physical, intellectual, and/or social life isn't fun; astounding hypothesis. It is a good reminder though: not everything good or fulfilling to be found in life is purchased. I don't like how it nocked the auto-vaccume cleaner though, it could help physically disabled folk; there are many better ways to spend your time than vaccuming anyways!
- webvira rated 37 months ago
- From the page: "We are rich and bored, and have plenty of disposable income to spend on things that mildly titillate us."
- B-in-the-woods rated 40 months ago
- More complaining that the "inventors" are not saving the world. We don't need matches either, you can make fire by rubbing some sticks together.
- slappyton rated 49 months ago
- He's a twit who states the obvious but fails to associate its clear relation to capitalism. The american capitalist market relies on what advertisers and popular culture feeds them, and, as such, pop culture dictates what we feel we need. Shiny, new cell phones, a necessity, flat screen tv's (the /same/ f'in size as tv's we used to have), a sign of the high class, and robotic whatevers? Well that's just neat, and if it's neat, the first person to get one is the /winner/. That's the way we work. Innovation for the benefit of mankind is /not/ profitable. To survive, you need to invent something the retarded bastards of the world will buy ten times over.
