So you're going to be murderd by stationary super computer.

[Ben]

Although logic would seem to dictate that any computer that has been fitted into a bi-pedel walking frame would have made sacrafices in its efficency to get it into the walking frame.

The transformers are a diffrent kettle of fish all together, they arn't really even computers anymore. They are closer to just another life form. They have there own souls, an entire planet and history, no creator race in sight.

[Noc]

I think the main difference between a supercomputer and a robot is that the supercomputers are almost always like "I have an intelligence seventy-five times higher than the genius level of humans," while robots are generally like "I. AM. A ROBOT. DOES NOT COMPUTE."

Robots are like metal zombies, while supercomputers are like metal Bond villains. You CAN put a supercomputer in a robot shell . . . but if it's just walking around awkwardly and making clanky motions, there's nothing really super computery about it.

[Jim North]

Although logic would seem to dictate that any computer that has been fitted into a bi-pedel walking frame would have made sacrafices in its efficency to get it into the walking frame.

Why would logic dictate that? The trend in computers has long been towards miniaturization. Getting more out of smaller parts, making computers that you can easily carry with you, etc. Plus, as far as fictional supercomputers go, those sorts of restrictions are inconsequential. Most fictional supercomputers that are primed and ready to off humanity are light years ahead of anything else that's on the computer market, so the physical technology that encases their programs could be of any size, even smaller than a human brain.

I think the main difference between a supercomputer and a robot is that the supercomputers are almost always like "I have an intelligence seventy-five times higher than the genius level of humans," while robots are generally like "I. AM. A ROBOT. DOES NOT COMPUTE."

Robots are like metal zombies, while supercomputers are like metal Bond villains. You CAN put a supercomputer in a robot shell . . . but if it's just walking around awkwardly and making clanky motions, there's nothing really super computery about it.

Those are vibe things again, not the actuality of the robot brain's ability. I mean hey, Stephen Hawking is stuck in a wheelchair and what movements he at least used to be able to make were generally awkward, but the junkiness of his frame doesn't keep him from having one of the most brilliant minds on the planet.

And robots don't have to be clunky and awkward by any means, anyway. Ultron disapproves of your stereotypical view of metal men!

[zirnitra]

I just realized the one supercomputer that this thread is missing.

Deep Thought.

[Jim North]

He kills you by making you wait too damn long for an answer?

[zirnitra]

And by being the 2nd toughest computer ever.

[Knight]

Poor Earth. Twice.

Or was it four times? It's been a while.

[zirnitra]

I never finished all of them. I got half way through Life, The Universe, And Everything and I decided it wasn't as great as the other ones. Plus I had to return it to the library.

[muzugu]

Well, the Age of the Knight as an effective war machine came to an end with the advent of the firearm . . . and robots have LASERS.

I think you're outclassed, Knight. Not to say that you aren't classy. You're just not . . . laser classy.

So all she'd have to do is really shine her armor. A lot.

[Ben]

Why would logic dictate that? The trend in computers has long been towards miniaturization. Getting more out of smaller parts, making computers that you can easily carry with you, etc. Plus, as far as fictional supercomputers go, those sorts of restrictions are inconsequential. Most fictional supercomputers that are primed and ready to off humanity are light years ahead of anything else that's on the computer market, so the physical technology that encases their programs could be of any size, even smaller than a human brain.

Ok yeah the trend in computers is towards minatureisation, but that is taking something we allready have and making it smaller and more accesiable, not developing new powerhouse super computers in tiny shells. Even today, super computers are still massive sure the super computers of yesteryear have been compressed down to basicly a calculator, and in the future the super computers of today will have the same thing done to them, but then newer massive ones will be built, etc etc in a contiuing cycle.

And I disagree with your dismissil of the vibe. The Vibe is deffintly important, I mean its the vibe that makes 28 days later a zombie movie. So why can't the vibe diffrentiate between super computers and robots.

[Xannaeth]

GLaDOS... you know, for the might be cake.

[Jim North]

Poor Earth. Twice.

Or was it four times? It's been a while.

Spoiler: show

Along with the Earth destroyed at the beginning of the first book, the replacement Earth and all other Earths across all possible timelines were destroyed at the end of Mostly Harmless. So the number's quite a bit higher than four.

I got half way through Life, The Universe, And Everything and I decided it wasn't as great as the other ones.

Man, seriously, am I the only person on the planet who thought the third book was the best of the entire trilogy? I don't think I've run across another person who even really liked it all that much.

and in the future the super computers of today will have the same thing done to them, but then newer massive ones will be built, etc etc in a contiuing cycle.

Not necessarily, which was my point. Thing is, such massive computers require a lot of time, money, and effort to upkeep, and that upkeep is going to continue getting more and more time-consuming, expensive, and difficult to do as the technology progresses. And eventually, there's going to be somewhat of a limit to just how much processing power we're going to need, both as individuals and as a species. Massive machines housing more power than we could possibly use even in several lifetimes, come in immobile shells, and cost way more in resources than they bring in . . . folks just aren't going to need that sort of thing eventually.

And I disagree with your dismissil of the vibe. The Vibe is deffintly important,

You can feel that trees are wonderful things, all shady and beautiful. Or you could feel that trees are in your damn way and they should all be knocked down so you can make a nice little parking lot. Neither feeling defines what trees actually are: a woody plant that has secondary branches supported clear of the ground on a single main stem or trunk with clear apical dominance. (Thank you, Wikipedia!)

Vibe is important to conveying an emotional message. Vibe is not important in defining an object's exact attributes. Utilizing vibe is quite often detrimental to the latter endeavor, in fact. If I am sure of anything, Wolf, it is that word definitions will not survive if they are to be subject to people's feelings!

I mean its the vibe that makes 28 days later a zombie movie.

28 Days Later isn't a zombie movie, tho'. There'd have to be zombies in it.

Hell, the vast majority of the so-called "zombie movies" out there aren't even zombie movies. They're ghoul movies. It's one of the reasons behind the big tradition of not saying the "zed word" in said movies.

So why can't the vibe diffrentiate between super computers and robots.

It's a very simple inequality statement.

Facts > Gut Feelings

Not all robots are supercomputers and not all supercomputers are robots, but the two can still overlap.

But speaking of guts, I think mine are starting to tell me I'm getting too worked up again. And that's a fact!

[Ben]

All valid points, however as the OP I'm going to cheat to bring myself a decisive victory.

[Jim North]

<.<

>.>

Megatron was stationary for eons in the Transformers movie, only moving around at the very end.

[muzugu]

Oh snap!
Also, that's the perfect height for whispering.