Subject:
|
Re: Why is cockfighting bad? (was: Pokemon (was: Harry Potter Lego Line))
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Fri, 21 Jul 2000 12:24:53 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1593 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Todd Lehman writes:
> What timing -- just stumbled onto this from a robotics site:
>
>
http://www.ananova.com/news/story/technology_world-us-amazing-science_914122.ht
ml
>
> It's an article entitled "Scientists plan meat-eating robot."
Dude! That is so cool. I wanna go to Hawaii to see it ('course I'd hate to
see the rest of that particular tropical paradise while there :-). I mean,
this is like the next big break if they can make it smart enough to feed
itself. I hope this works out faster than nano-assemblers because I bet it
will progress slowly enough for us to watch. The first self-replicating
nano-assembler will rock before we know what happened. That will be cool too,
but not as much fun.
That said, I think it's evil as hell and a bit intimidating since we won't be
able to effectively tell them not to eat us, but we'll cross that bridge when
we come to it.
From the article:
> Mr Wilkinson said the ideal fuel in terms of energy gain
> was meat. "Vegetation is not nearly as nutritious," he told
> New Scientist.
The general understanding that I have is that meat is a denser concentration of
calories and nutrients (and toxins), but I would expect the specific "enslaved"
bacteria to determine what makes the best energy source. And I understand that
each calorie from vegetation requires less total energy so if the population of
lawnmowers wishes to maximize itself (as all species thus far do) they'll end
up settling for grass (except the evil ones ;-).
Chris
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
149 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
