Poll of the Day > It's 2018, why don't we have the robots from Rocky 4 yet?

(+) Yeah! (+)

It doesn't seem THAT advanced
---

We don't have them? I thought Drago just trained on like punching machines or something.
---

Zeus posted...

We don't have them? I thought Drago just trained on like punching machines or something.

They're talking about Paulie's robot.
---

Seems like something that exist in Japan.
---

Our robots are way more advanced than that
---

That robot actually was real. It was just never mass-produced, probably because it would have been too expensive to mass-produce especially at that time in the 80s. It was a one-of-a-kind robot that was custom made to help out with Stallone's autistic son. Here's the story:

https://www.cbr.com/movie-legends-revealed-why-the-heck-was-there-a-talking-robot-in-rocky-iv/

https://triviahappy.com/articles/the-rocky-iv-robots-secret-connection-to-autism-treatment

I had a mini robot from rocky 4 back in the 80s. I bought it from radio shack

http://www.jeffbots.com/robiejr.html

it was pretty much a romba with a carrying tray.
---

Why dont we have food rehydraters or flying cars from BttF?
---

Ogurisama posted...

Why dont we have food rehydraters or flying cars from BttF?

Flying cars is easy to answer why.

We definitely have the technology to make flying cars. We have had it a long time honestly. If we can make a helicopter, we can easily make a flying car using the same tech.

The reason why we don't make flying cars is because the cons of flying cars greatly outweigh the pros.

Just think about it logically for a minute. People are fucking dangerous on the road. Think about how much more dangerous they would be flying in the air. There would literally be drunk flyers flying into houses/buildings.

Think about Jeff Goldblum's quote from Jurassic Park. "Just because we can do something doesn't mean that we actually should do it." That not only applies to bringing dinosaurs back to life, but it also applies to making flying cars. Flying cars would just be way too dangerous in the real world.

Not only the safety issue, but it would also require a completely different license to fly. You would need a pilot's license to fly. Getting a pilot's license isn't like getting a driver's license. You wouldn't be able to just walk into the BMV and get a pilot's license.

Flying cars are nice in theory, but in reality they just wouldn't work out at all.

I'm more afraid of flying car crashing into each other then falling to the ground killing everyone on the ground.
---

Actually we have "flying cars" just not mass produced. But they have cars that can convert into a small aircraft. I think they even have them that can go under the water as well.

Won't be something we see used commonly anytime soon, though cars that self drive are fairly common (for the rich, and especially elderly) not that most people even know about them.

My grandfather has one. It was a total trip to see it driving us back to his house.
---

There are sex robots far more sophisticated than the one Paulie was using. He was probably fucking the port for the AC adaptor, which isnt too safe.
---

wolfy42 posted...

Actually we have "flying cars" just not mass produced.

This.
The Aerocar was first produced in 1949.
The military wanted a flying jeep and three prototypes were made, Piasecki VZ-8 Airgeep, Chrysler VZ-6 and the Curtiss-Wright VZ-7. The VZ-8 was the most successful, but the military decided to cancel it anyway.
An ex-Boeing engineef built the Sky Commuter in the 80s.
Etc, etc.
---

Foppe posted...

The military wanted a flying jeep and three prototypes were made, Piasecki VZ-8 Airgeep, Chrysler VZ-6 and the Curtiss-Wright VZ-7. The VZ-8 was the most successful, but the military decided to cancel it anyway.

The Soviets had flying tanks.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antonov_A-40

rogerskg1979 posted...

We definitely have the technology to make flying cars. We have had it a long time honestly. If we can make a helicopter, we can easily make a flying car using the same tech.

Helicopter tech wouldn't get us to flying cars. You'd just have differently-shaped helicopters that don't fly as well.

rogerskg1979 posted...

The reason why we don't make flying cars is because the cons of flying cars greatly outweigh the pros.

Well, no, the reason right now is that there's no way of doing it functionally let alone affordably.

rogerskg1979 posted...

Just think about it logically for a minute. People are fucking dangerous on the road. Think about how much more dangerous they would be flying in the air. There would literally be drunk flyers flying into houses/buildings.

The same thing was said about cars, but we eventually got a handle on those.
---

Questionmarktarius posted...

Foppe posted...

The military wanted a flying jeep and three prototypes were made, Piasecki VZ-8 Airgeep, Chrysler VZ-6 and the Curtiss-Wright VZ-7. The VZ-8 was the most successful, but the military decided to cancel it anyway.

The Soviets had flying tanks.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antonov_A-40

My favorite is the flying platforms, like the Hiller VZ-1 Pawnee and Williams X-Jet.
---

Zeus posted...

Helicopter tech wouldn't get us to flying cars. You'd just have differently-shaped helicopters that don't fly as well.

By helicopter tech, I didn't literally mean the car would look like a helicopter. I just meant that you could slap the spinning rotors on a car to make it fly. Also, unlike airplanes which require a long runaway to take off and land, rotors allow helicopters to take off and land on a very space space. That would be needed with flying cars.

Zeus posted...

The same thing was said about cars, but we eventually got a handle on those.

LOL Anyone who thinks flying in the air is going to be as easy as driving on the ground has no fucking clue what he is talking about. There is a reason that pilots go to pilot school for specialized training on how to fly. It is fucking difficult to fly and nothing at all like driving on the ground. It is not at all feasible to send the average citizen to pilot school just so they can fly a car.

Like I said before, flying cars are nice in theory, but they would be a nightmare in reality. You can't teach the average citizen to fly, and flying is just too dangerous. Real life isn't like the fucking movies. Just because everyone flies cars in perfect harmony in the movies doesn't mean that shit will ever happen in real life. In real life you would have idiots who drink alcohol and fly, idiots who text and fly, slow elderly people with slow reflexes, assholes with fly/road rage, etc. That shit is dangerous enough on the road, but in the air the danger increases exponentially.

rogerskg1979 posted...

It is fucking difficult to fly

Not really actually, a light aircraft like a cessna is pretty easy to fly. Landing is more tricky but certainly not overly difficult to learn. Besides, by the time we have cars that can actually fly and available for consumers? I imagine auto pilot will be used for the most part and capable of take off and landing.
---

Enclave posted...

rogerskg1979 posted...

It is fucking difficult to fly

Not really actually, a light aircraft like a cessna is pretty easy to fly. Landing is more tricky but certainly not overly difficult to learn. Besides, by the time we have cars that can actually fly and available for consumers? I imagine auto pilot will be used for the most part and capable of take off and landing.

You would still need to know how to fly manually in cases where auto-pilot can't or won't work.

Aircraft may seem easy to fly, but also consider that the skies are pretty empty now since the only flying man-made craft are airplanes and helicopters. That won't be the case with flying cars when you have traffic jams in mid-air. Flying through the empty skies isn't going to be like flying through traffic.

Why do we even need flying cars anyway? There isn't any real need for them. People just want them because they look cool. Flying cars will never exist because there is no real practical need for them and they're just too dangerous in the hands of the average citizen. I don't want Jim Bob flying into my roof because he was reading a text on his phone instead of paying attention to where he was going. Keep the traffic accidents on the road where they belong.

rogerskg1979 posted...

Enclave posted...

rogerskg1979 posted...

It is fucking difficult to fly

Not really actually, a light aircraft like a cessna is pretty easy to fly. Landing is more tricky but certainly not overly difficult to learn. Besides, by the time we have cars that can actually fly and available for consumers? I imagine auto pilot will be used for the most part and capable of take off and landing.

You would still need to know how to fly manually in cases where auto-pilot can't or won't work.

Aircraft may seem easy to fly, but also consider that the skies are pretty empty now since the only flying man-made craft are airplanes and helicopters. That won't be the case with flying cars when you have traffic jams in mid-air. Flying through the empty skies isn't going to be like flying through traffic.

Why do we even need flying cars anyway? There isn't any real need for them. People just want them because they look cool. Flying cars will never exist because there is no real practical need for them and they're just too dangerous in the hands of the average citizen. I don't want Jim Bob flying into my roof because he was reading a text on his phone instead of paying attention to where he was going. Keep the traffic accidents on the road where they belong.

I'm speaking from experience, it's really not as hard as you make it out to be.
---

rogerskg1979 posted...

LOL Anyone who thinks flying in the air is going to be as easy as driving on the ground has no fucking clue what he is talking about. There is a reason that pilots go to pilot school for specialized training on how to fly. It is fucking difficult to fly and nothing at all like driving on the ground. It is not at all feasible to send the average citizen to pilot school just so they can fly a car.

Anyone who thinks that has zero imagination, considering how the tech might someday evolve. You're positing on complete unknowns and arguing that it HAS to work THIS way because THIS way is the only way it's been done... which, if you took that idea and applied to cars, cars would never exist.

rogerskg1979 posted...

Like I said before, flying cars are nice in theory, but they would be a nightmare in reality. You can't teach the average citizen to fly, and flying is just too dangerous. Real life isn't like the fucking movies. Just because everyone flies cars in perfect harmony in the movies doesn't mean that shit will ever happen in real life. In real life you would have idiots who drink alcohol and fly, idiots who text and fly, slow elderly people with slow reflexes, assholes with fly/road rage, etc. That shit is dangerous enough on the road, but in the air the danger increases exponentially.

Again, you're basing it on a very limited -- perhaps ignorant -- modern understanding of the mechanics. Even if you don't account for automated vehicles (which we'll likely have someday), you can *still* put safeties and controls to prevent a lot of those mishaps.

rogerskg1979 posted...

Why do we even need flying cars anyway? There isn't any real need for them.

Basic convenience? The fact that it's easier to fly *over* buildings rather than navigate streets? The fact that you wouldn't need nearly as many roads. The fact that roads can often be rendered impassible following storms, etc, yet that poses zero problems for a flying car. Not to mention greater speed.
---

Zeus posted...

rogerskg1979 posted...

Why do we even need flying cars anyway? There isn't any real need for them.

Basic convenience? The fact that it's easier to fly *over* buildings rather than navigate streets? The fact that you wouldn't need nearly as many roads. The fact that roads can often be rendered impassible following storms, etc, yet that poses zero problems for a flying car. Not to mention greater speed.

You would still need street lanes. You would need some kind of street lanes in the air, although I am not sure how that would work. You can't just have people flying anywhere they want. For example, what if someone is flying to the west while you're flying north, and you're about to intersect? Who has right-of-way? You still need streets and rules and traffic lights/signs, etc in the air.

Storms, especially winds, would affect a flying car more than a driving car. Winds can rock a car and make it difficult to steer, and that becomes even more so flying in the air. Airplanes get around storms by flying above the clouds, but cars won't fly that high. Airplanes can still be grounded at the airport if the weather is bad, and it is too dangerous for them to take off.

Greater speed? LOL That's how accidents happen. You seem to think that there won't be streets, rules, traffics lights/signs, etc and that you can just fly as fast as you want anywhere you want. You do realize that this won't be the case, right? If everyone has flying cars, traffic in the air is going to be as bad as it is on the ground, and you will have traffic jams and such in the air. There will still be "rush hour" to get to work in the morning. Flying at a greater speed seems even more dangerous than driving at a greater speed.

The biggest issue with flying cars is that youd have to construct flying garages to store them
---

rogerskg1979 posted...

You would still need street lanes. You would need some kind of street lanes in the air, although I am not sure how that would work.

Not if it's 100% automated. You'd just have flight paths for certain altitudes and detection.

rogerskg1979 posted...

For example, what if someone is flying to the west while you're flying north, and you're about to intersect? Who has right-of-way? You still need streets and rules and traffic lights/signs, etc in the air.

Again, you're kinda forgetting that you have multiple altitudes to work with. It's not like streets where everything operates solely on one level.

rogerskg1979 posted...

Storms, especially winds, would affect a flying car more than a driving car. Winds can rock a car and make it difficult to steer, and that becomes even more so flying in the air. Airplanes get around storms by flying above the clouds, but cars won't fly that high. Airplanes can still be grounded at the airport if the weather is bad, and it is too dangerous for them to take off.

Again, wouldn't be steering and there would likely be contingencies for stuff like that. There might even be ways of limiting the impact of weather.

rogerskg1979 posted...

Greater speed? LOL That's how accidents happen.

Again, no. Accidents are the result of user errors while traveling fast. Automated systems wouldn't really have that as an issue. There was that video about frictionless traffic a while ago which kinda illustrates how much better things run when automated systems are involved.

rogerskg1979 posted...

You seem to think that there won't be streets, rules, traffics lights/signs, etc and that you can just fly as fast as you want anywhere you want. You do realize that this won't be the case, right? If everyone has flying cars, traffic in the air is going to be as bad as it is on the ground, and you will have traffic jams and such in the air. There will still be "rush hour" to get to work in the morning. Flying at a greater speed seems even more dangerous than driving at a greater speed.

You realize that nothing of what you said will likely be the case, right? You've somehow assumed that everybody would travel at the same altitude while doing whatever. In reality, the greatest inefficiency today is bottlenecking on roads because you only have so many lanes and you have drivers causing friction. An automated system with multiple altitudes basically renders all of your complaints obsolete.

Mead posted...

The biggest issue with flying cars is that youd have to construct flying garages to store them

---