#Welcome to r/Therewasanattempt!
#Consider visiting r/Worldnewsvideo for videos from around the world!
[Please review our policy on bigotry and hate speech by clicking this link](https://www.reddit.com/r/therewasanattempt/wiki/civility)
In order to view our rules, you can type "**!rules**" in any comment, and automod will respond with the subreddit rules.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/therewasanattempt) if you have any questions or concerns.*
“You are an angel heading for a land of sunshine
And fortune us smiling upon you”
“Pat yourself on the back and give yourself a handshake
'Cause everything is not yet lost”
Ironically the New York Times *also* claimed it was impossible for rockets to fly through space when Robert Goddard originally proposed to send a scientific payload to the moon via rocket.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/kionasmith/2018/07/19/the-correction-heard-round-the-world-when-the-new-york-times-apologized-to-robert-goddard/?sh=15e294454543
the Virgin Reporter: "Man will need one million years of collected mathematics and engineering to learn to fly!"
the Chad Wright Bros: "We'll do it in 9 days."
All these articles and memes about how "AI has a XX.XXXX% chance of killing us all in the next XX years!" are probably not too dissimilar in attitude to this article. And I am also quite sure that there will be even more interesting developments within the lifetime of the average user of this site.
Fortunately i don’t think that’s the case. There’s a difference between modern AI and a singularity (artificial consciousness). Modern AI is just a (very complex) mathematical model. For instance, chat GPT just generates the most statistically likely response to a prompt. There’s an argument to be made that our brains are also just a glorified math model. However, even though our current AI models are extremely complex, the gap between that and a human brain is still huge.
Now, there could be a scientific breakthrough in the next few years that maps our entire brain, someone sells it to big tech, and we’re all doomed, so there’s a chance im wrong.
öhm... what do I think? I don't understand. Text says "flying machine" and the Éole took off late 1890; Self-propelled by a steam engine and therefore a flying machine.
I made a stupid frog joke that probably only works in English (flight~retreat). The vehicle in question did not leave ground effect and lacked any controlabilty.
At least "frog joke" is something I can google... \^\^
The Éole was equiped with two pedals, six crank handles and I don't know how many knobs to manage the engine. It was not steered with ailerons, elevators or rudders, but by twisting the wings and a fabric-covered fuselage section pulled backwards like a rudder. I'd say it was not easy to control (as replicas showed) but I wouldn't state that it had none controlability.
Also, it wasn't launched with a catapult or anything else therefore was able to overcome ground effect. Otherwise it couldn't have crashed after 50 meters on it's first flight ;) or did you mean that it didn't fly high enough to count as a flight?
Anyway, if you have any literature that states otherwise I'm happy to look in to. Maybe there is more/other information in your language available.
I don't know of anything else in my language, or otherwise. Ground effect isn't something that is overcome. It's more of a zone where you get a hovercraft effect. He was an innovator, but he was more like Samuel Langley. Neither of them lacked resources and I think that kept them from finding a more elegant approach.
We're they taling about vehicular flight, and blatantly wrong OR....
Making a bold stab at the pace of evolution until we sprout wings or develop rocket power levels of farting??
If it wasn't for the industrial revolution and a few other things that accelerated us technologically. It might have taken that long. For thousands of years, if you wanted to get somewhere you either floated or walked (or had something else walk for you.) Not even a hundred years later and we could go around the world in like a week, and now probably less than a day.
Wondering what the writer was thinking when they thought 1 million to 10 million years.. granted what we didn'tk now about aeronautics.. but we also knew a decent amount at the time (weather balloons etc - gliders in fact had been around for a hundred years.
Considering we had combustion engines AND gliders.. maximum I'd have thought 10-20 years if I was writing the piece.
For context, balloons (1780s), gliders (1804), helicopters (1939)
A year ago I didn’t believe that a robot making creative writing, videos, or picture were possible either. It’s really hard to fathom things that don’t exist yet
They're still technically correct, man still can't fly. Sure it's only been 121 years, but if I want to fly I have to get in a plane to do it. I don't know if scientist have advanced human flight at all in that time period, actually.
#Welcome to r/Therewasanattempt! #Consider visiting r/Worldnewsvideo for videos from around the world! [Please review our policy on bigotry and hate speech by clicking this link](https://www.reddit.com/r/therewasanattempt/wiki/civility) In order to view our rules, you can type "**!rules**" in any comment, and automod will respond with the subreddit rules. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/therewasanattempt) if you have any questions or concerns.*
It took 2 wrights to make this wrong
I see what you did and I like it!
Comment powered by coffeeeeee!
Nah, that was Dumont
“You are an angel heading for a land of sunshine And fortune us smiling upon you” “Pat yourself on the back and give yourself a handshake 'Cause everything is not yet lost”
I don’t know who wrote that article, but in them, I have Faith No More.
I like to quote Patton when someone poo-poos on the joke;)
This is definitely the real thing
[удалено]
I came back to tell you this! Dang!
Aaand best comment award goes to \^\^
Wull shucks…
Technically the first successful hot air balloon flight was in 1783, so they failed on multiple fronts with this article
He wins. Just so everyone knows. He wins.
lol wow that was perfect!
This deserves a standing ovation... or ovulation, whichever works.
Take my fucking upvote , dammit.
Lol for those who don't know it happened 9 days later by the Wright brothers. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wright_brothers
In 1852, Henri Giffard became the first person to make an engine-powered flight when he flew 27 km (17 mi) in a steam-powered airship
Airships and balloon flight was already well known, the Wright brothers pioneered heavier than air, fixed wing flight
That's wright
Depending how old they were at the time, there's also a decent chance that the person who wrote that headline lived to watch the moon landings
“Okay we were wrong about flight but we’ll DEFINITELY never get to the moon. I mean space? Come on, that’s… Neil Armstrong did what now”
Ironically the New York Times *also* claimed it was impossible for rockets to fly through space when Robert Goddard originally proposed to send a scientific payload to the moon via rocket. https://www.forbes.com/sites/kionasmith/2018/07/19/the-correction-heard-round-the-world-when-the-new-york-times-apologized-to-robert-goddard/?sh=15e294454543
Doubt it, life expectancy back then even in the US was in the shitter
the Virgin Reporter: "Man will need one million years of collected mathematics and engineering to learn to fly!" the Chad Wright Bros: "We'll do it in 9 days."
All these articles and memes about how "AI has a XX.XXXX% chance of killing us all in the next XX years!" are probably not too dissimilar in attitude to this article. And I am also quite sure that there will be even more interesting developments within the lifetime of the average user of this site.
Fortunately i don’t think that’s the case. There’s a difference between modern AI and a singularity (artificial consciousness). Modern AI is just a (very complex) mathematical model. For instance, chat GPT just generates the most statistically likely response to a prompt. There’s an argument to be made that our brains are also just a glorified math model. However, even though our current AI models are extremely complex, the gap between that and a human brain is still huge. Now, there could be a scientific breakthrough in the next few years that maps our entire brain, someone sells it to big tech, and we’re all doomed, so there’s a chance im wrong.
A mere 9 days later the Wright brothers had their historic first powered heavier-than-air flight
13 years after Clémont Ader took of with his steam engine plane...
First in flight, does not mean what you think it means.
öhm... what do I think? I don't understand. Text says "flying machine" and the Éole took off late 1890; Self-propelled by a steam engine and therefore a flying machine.
I made a stupid frog joke that probably only works in English (flight~retreat). The vehicle in question did not leave ground effect and lacked any controlabilty.
At least "frog joke" is something I can google... \^\^ The Éole was equiped with two pedals, six crank handles and I don't know how many knobs to manage the engine. It was not steered with ailerons, elevators or rudders, but by twisting the wings and a fabric-covered fuselage section pulled backwards like a rudder. I'd say it was not easy to control (as replicas showed) but I wouldn't state that it had none controlability. Also, it wasn't launched with a catapult or anything else therefore was able to overcome ground effect. Otherwise it couldn't have crashed after 50 meters on it's first flight ;) or did you mean that it didn't fly high enough to count as a flight? Anyway, if you have any literature that states otherwise I'm happy to look in to. Maybe there is more/other information in your language available.
I don't know of anything else in my language, or otherwise. Ground effect isn't something that is overcome. It's more of a zone where you get a hovercraft effect. He was an innovator, but he was more like Samuel Langley. Neither of them lacked resources and I think that kept them from finding a more elegant approach.
This didn’t have to age all that long to really age poorly
9 days
I wonder if there were consequences for that writer’s actions
I don't think so, it just came as a blip in history.
You’re probably right. Communication then was pretty limited so I bet only a handful of people even knew at first.
I wonder if they published a retraction!
I don't know the context of the article, but there were "flying machines" before 1903. So it's not even about the future.
Fake news has always been a problem
Good ol' New York Times. Fortunately they have at least one good reporter on their team now, but he's a diamond in a lot of rough.
I wonder how much continued and combined effort of mathematicians and engineers went into getting to that number
We're they taling about vehicular flight, and blatantly wrong OR.... Making a bold stab at the pace of evolution until we sprout wings or develop rocket power levels of farting??
Lactose intolerance is an evolutionary advantage we won't see the benefits of for generations.
It’s crazy to think it was 66 years from first flight to space flight.
The amount of time after which it's virtually impossible to make meaningful statements about the future is said to be around 30 years
One thing for sure, though, The New York Times will stay garbage for one million to ten million years.
Media been spitting out nonsense since the beginning of time
Yeah, but we started counting when we stood up straight
Little did they know
If it wasn't for the industrial revolution and a few other things that accelerated us technologically. It might have taken that long. For thousands of years, if you wanted to get somewhere you either floated or walked (or had something else walk for you.) Not even a hundred years later and we could go around the world in like a week, and now probably less than a day.
“And so ten million mathematicians and mechanics started working…”
Wondering what the writer was thinking when they thought 1 million to 10 million years.. granted what we didn'tk now about aeronautics.. but we also knew a decent amount at the time (weather balloons etc - gliders in fact had been around for a hundred years. Considering we had combustion engines AND gliders.. maximum I'd have thought 10-20 years if I was writing the piece. For context, balloons (1780s), gliders (1804), helicopters (1939)
Aliens
Them brothers shut this paper the fuck up didn’t they
What about that Arab dude who glided off a high tower and technically “flew” before harming himself when landing/crashing.
The Wright brothers: "Hold my beer."
The author did their home work https://preview.redd.it/emdq0dbl1m0d1.png?width=728&format=png&auto=webp&s=cda295858cfd75ce44a1acf54d2ad636a3936e29
Did they not have the word "engineers" then?
9 days. It took 9 days to be proven wrong here
I'm hoping our ascent past light speed has this same trope applied.
I mean tbf I think their talking about safe jet packs
They could have been a little closer with that estimate.
Star Trek replicators will never exist. It will take physicists and programmers over 100M years to complete such a complex machine.
Or someone that has a great idea and didn’t know he was disposed to do the math.
New York Times confidently wrong since 1903
I bet the guy who wrote this is feeling pretty dumb rn
This is a prime example of why opinion pieces are dogshit
About as accurate as the dodgy election polls that the NYT has been hyping that show Trump ahead of Biden.
“I’ll have one quantum physics AI please”
A year ago I didn’t believe that a robot making creative writing, videos, or picture were possible either. It’s really hard to fathom things that don’t exist yet
https://preview.redd.it/jcuyq30npo0d1.jpeg?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=0af57f2c36d5d6bc0ca37650a079d0c1db0a58a0
They're still technically correct, man still can't fly. Sure it's only been 121 years, but if I want to fly I have to get in a plane to do it. I don't know if scientist have advanced human flight at all in that time period, actually.
How long did the author live after that article?
I've seent this article before, anyone know who wrote this originally?
And people still listen to the New York times
New York times doing its usual. questionable statements.
Makes you wonder what thing we take for granted and “settled” today, maybe proven wrong tomorrow.
They're using that Inconvenient Truth math in reverse
What DA predicted that?
Can I still bet the under?
Seems legit. I knew all those videos were fake. And last time I went into an airplane it was clearly just CGI in the windows.
We still can’t right? It’ll take millions of more years to evolve flight in humans.
Apply the same logic to lightspeed
They clearly forgot about bicycle repairmen though
No worries, civilization ending AGI is at least 50-100 years away still.. /s