AI and boats

[Hydraulicjump]

Thought I would share this amusing anecdote. I am sure others will chime in. On a lark, I starting messing around with BARD, Google’s AI program. The answers to my questions about my own specialty (water in California) were spectacularly wrong. So, of course, I had to try boats. It all sounded good on the first read, but if you look close, not so great. They had a certain Freshman composition ring to them (I used to teach at UC Davis), full of factoids.

Here is my favorite.

“How do I calculate displacement speed of a boat?”

“The displacement speed of a boat is the maximum speed at which it can travel through the water without planing. It is determined by the length of the boat's waterline and the shape of its hull. The formula for calculating displacement speed is:

Code snippet
Hull speed = 1.34 x (√Waterline length)
Use code with caution. Learn more

For example, a boat with a waterline length of 30 feet would have a hull speed of 10.3 knots (11.9 mph).”

!!!!!!! AI can’t even solve its own equations!!!! As everyone on this site knows, it is 7.3 knots. Do not trust AI (at least BARD) to get this right.

I found lots of really funny mistakes about mechanical and electrical systems. It may be a Google thing, but a cautionary tale none-the-less.

 

[Shrew]

Hull speed = 1.34 x (√Waterline length)

For example, a boat with a waterline length of 30 feet would have a hull speed of 10.3 knots (11.9 mph).”

Interesting.

(√30) * 1.34 = 7.34

(√60) * 1.34 = 10.37

I'm not sure where the code would insert logic to accidentally double the variable, (L). I couldn't find a permeation from the 9 combinations of (134) that came as close.

Unless it's just a weird coincidence. Note the the product was notated to the 10th, but was not rounded up. I'm not sure if that makes a difference, but interesting.

 

[twistedtree]

Seems worse than the answers you get asking a question on an internet forum


It encourages less individual general knowledge, less individual specific knowledge, less scrutiny of information sources, and less critical thinking. What's not to like about it? I ask you, how many people would even spot or check for the calculation error? If it's widely enough "known", incorrect becomes correct, and the hull speed of a 30' boat is 10 kts. That's not progress.

 

[RT Firefly]

Greetings,
ONE of the shortcomings of "modern" school systems is none of them teach critical thinking any more. AI will hasten the death of same where, if it's on the internet, it's true. Garbage in. Garbage out.

 

[Hippocampus]

Very interesting studies have appeared concerning shift in brain function by using gps for navigation. Found it delightful the neuroscience has caught up my experience.

Some years ago I took one of my partners on a cruise of Maine. I stood watch from our home port in SE Massachusetts to Maniticcus Rock then turned the boat over to him. Went for a nap but woke up upon hearing waves breaking. Went to the helm and had to physically remove him from the wheel. He said MFD showed us well under a 1/4 mile offshore and was insistent that the gps was correct. I said we are at risk to run up on the rocks. Fog and rain cleared momentarily and he said OMG. Pointed out to him
1 use your senses
2 look at the radar.


It’s interesting that when the Plymouth 400 boat entered US waters it was not allowed to travel using its self contained AI steering computer. It had crossed the Atlantic by itself with no human onboard and no human input from outside so clearly had the capability. This is a big deal as there’s a strong movement a foot in converting shipping to these systems. Be interested in the thoughts of the merchant mariners aboard this site.

 

[twistedtree]

The race to replace people is misguided. The race needs to be to improve people, not to replace them. Computers are a fantastic tool to assist people in being more productive and more effective. That's where the focus should be.


It all reminds me of my favorite line from Jurassic Park. "You were so focused on whether you COULD do it, you never stopped to think about whether you SHOULD do it."

 

[psneeld]

We have been replacing people on boats since the beginning.

Sails took less people than oars.

Motors less people than sails.

Radar replaced lookouts.

GPS MFDs replaced navigators.

Autopilots replaced helmsmen.

AI will replace everyone. It may occur in steps and it may take something like Starlink to keep tabs on every function of a vessel at sea...but it will get there. Costs too much to send people to sea.

I did like the comment I believe the Navy's Chief of Naval Operations made recently.... "AI has to be able to follow orders"... boy is that an understatement.

 

[Hippocampus]

Remote death has an interesting impact on people. Just as bad as up front and personal from what I’ve been told. Wife’s nephew and close friend two sons (WP grads) are lifers. They explained both munitions and drones can be set loose acquire the predetermined target and terminate. Discussion got in to facial recognition and they got quiet. Suspect we’re at a level one could stipulate “eliminate so and so” and it would happen. They said future combat likely will not include human combatants. But as in the past wars usually won by logistics and supply.

 

[psneeld]

Just reading book "Hunter Killer: Inside America's Unmanned Air War" by T M Mccurley and Kevin Maurer. It was written by one of the first Air Force combat drone operators. The book has opened my eyes to a few things and I really believe the factuality of it as a fellow field guy and operator...you can tell by what he emphasizes and doesn't.

He always wanted to be a fighter pilot but not in the cards. After several tours and killer missions, he wrote that the drone pilots got to know their targets after weeks of surveillance, got to know their families routines and usually saw their victims faces just prior to death and the bomb assessment damage of their smoldering bodies.

Something almost no other combat pilot would see. So killing is VERY REAL to drones and their operators.

As far as I know we don't have autonomous seek and kill drones in the military, too many rules of engagement to go through prior to a shot. This is my understanding from many reads on military drone operations. Do they have that capability?...sure....well maybe.... but collateral damage is HUGE in terms of top brass worries so I don't think fire and forget stuff is or will be past a single munitions fired at an active target.

The San Fran police department almost set forth lethally capable robots on the streets...probably not realizing the consequences of new tech.

As of now, I believe the military does not see taking the human totally out of combat. As I posted before, the Navy has basically pioneered long distance crewless vessels but has still maintained that AI must follow any and all orders (probably including abort).