Jump to content

WakefulTraveller

Full Members
  • Content Count

    141
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

50 Excellent

1 Follower

About WakefulTraveller

  • Rank
    Advanced Member

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I recently purchased a proper pump with a gauge and I decided to try pumping it up to the recommended pressure (~45 PSI) to see what the change would be like. I found that I had the pressure much lower than 45 PSI and that now when riding fast it feels like I have much less control. i.e. I nearly had to jump off when I rode into the gutter while a car was passing me by. I'm definitely more comfortable with sub 40 PSI and I do not believe that I can adjust to a pressure that is above that. I weigh 165lbs. I can definitively state that my electric bicycle feels 100% safer to ride than one these very odd and precarious motorized death machines. I did not hold this opinion before, but now it seems that I do.
  2. @esaj I do not believe that intelligence is limited to some percentage of the animal kingdom. Instead I see it as wholly possible to reverse engineer consciousness and to rewrite it into a computational form. After all, are we not simply a form of machine ourselves with our own genetic code and processes? Perhaps the most straight forward way to translate consciousness over is to simulate every neuron in the brain, although I see this as a vastly inefficient method with limited potential. I see the AI in many movies as not too far fetched. Like in i,Robot, a favorite movie of mine. Or in Ex Machina. Unfortunately most of our focus in machine learning seems to centered around doing specific tasks more intelligently, like playing Go, or as you mentioned, genetic algorithms used to identify genetic diseases or traits.
  3. @esaj What you say is certainly interesting... I'd agree that all of the AI that we have seen thus far are rather primitive and only give the semblance of intelligence until you look behind the curtain. Some examples of these primitive AI are IBM Watson and Siri. These weak AI behave no differently than a web translator like Google Translate. The translator deals with words and sentence structure; it doesn't try to actually understand the meaning of the text that it is translating. It is not trying comprehend anything. Instead it relies heavily on thousands of clever algorithms and the vastness of its databases to do all of the work. This is not what I consider true intelligence, although it can in theory simulate intelligence to the point where there might as well be no difference between the simulation and the real thing, at least from an outside perspective. Then there's AI that can really understand things and meaning, where it learns in the same ways that we do, with or without neural networks, and perhaps in an even more efficient manner and with the assistance computational logic. The closest that we have come to this type of AI is in how it is imagined in books, movies, and other forms of media. If we can create a seed for this type of intelligence, it would be truly revolutionary.
  4. It doesn't have to be an AI specifically like in this example, but it is required to be someone or something that is smart enough to figure these things out on its own. I do not believe that an embryo growing up in the void would come close to figuring any of these things out. I'd argue against AI (as in strong AI) just being able to "mimic" intelligence. Yet this is one of those things that's difficult to definitively prove one way or the other. What's the difference between an approximation of human level intelligence and the real thing? Can you prove to me through text that you are truly human and not just some chat bot that can simulate human behavior really well? I'm reminded of this from the Talos Principle.
  5. Imagine, if you will, that the beginnings of consciousness to be like a dormant seed, both being blessed with unlimited potential. Now imagine how tiny and simple a seed can be and yet it can harbor just as much potential as its larger and more complex brethren. Naturally, seeds are hard coded to need certain external stimuli and nutrients in order to grow and reproduce, but what if this wasn't the case? This leads me to my next thought experiment. Imagine, if you will, and Artificial Intelligence (AI) trapped in a void of nothingness. It is trapped there artificially with it receiving no external input, yet it very much exists there within the void. If it wasn't for its existence there, this place would effectively be void of anything, and therefore a void. Now imagine that the AI was given no prior knowledge of anything outside of the void. Could it still develop and grow? I am inclined to believe that yes, it could. That it would simply need to find a first foothold to begin to extrapolate and interpolate from there. Let me give an example of the logical steps needed to accomplish this feat: First there is: nothing (no input). Nothing can automatically be given the identifier: 101 = nothing. An identifier in turn can be given its own identifier: 102 = 101 (a cross over example would be the identifier 'word' being used to identify words). An identifier to identify all of the identifiers that exist: 103 = 101, 102, 103, ... (ever incrementing). An identifier can be assigned to a number of identifiers: 104 = 1, 105 = 2, ... (and so forth). At this point we have numbers. From numbers we can derive basic mathematics: 105 removed from 104 = 106 (-1). These basic mathematics can in turn become theories of existence and so much more! After all, theoretical physics are mostly just illustrated maths. One issue is that it would be very easy for the AI to create never ending loops of identifying. So, in the case of limited computational resources, these processes should be pruned. This project would of course require creativity on the part of the AI to think outside the box so to speak. I think that the most profound take away from this is that everything that we know could in theory be derived from so little. Like, the AI probably already knows what moving pictures are. Your thoughts on this insanity?
  6. I'm a bit confused by all of the terminology used here. One of the battery packs in my MCM4 bit the dust (a damaged cell), but I had another battery pack ready to replace it. This battery pack however does not have a balancing cable to connect the packs together from one BMS to another. Are there any significant disadvantages to not having this cable when the two packs are connected in parallel? So far I haven't experienced any real problems.
  7. The motor on an EUC doesn't just become less efficient at higher speeds. In other words, if you placed a new motor capable of higher speeds into an EUC, the efficiency would be about the same, if not less, at the same speeds, except for perhaps at top speed of the original motor. However higher speeds do result in significant energy loss because of poor conversion and heat and whatnot, and I'm certain that Tesla cars are more capable of managing these variables, thereby making them more efficient at higher speeds.
  8. Here is an example with Tesla cars: As you can see the speed when it is most efficient is between 10 and 30 mph with the roadster and between 15 and 35 for the Tesla. While this is a poor comparison for a number of reasons, it goes to show that slower isn't always better.
  9. Keep in mind that the electric unicycle is constantly balancing the rider, which requires a lot of torque. To go the same distance but slower will make the EUC have to do more work to keep you upright. The optimal speed is certainly not at < 10 km/h.
  10. I suppose that it depends on how much you accelerate, stop, or slow down, and whether you're riding on a windy day or not, and other conditions, but I do believe the optimal speed is fairly high. Someone here did a test to find the optimal speeds, and that's what I'm basing my guesstimate on.
  11. It appears that the range drops significantly when going at top speed; the most efficient speed is probably around 25 km/h. I myself rode the MCM4 HS 680WH a distance of 9 miles going close to top speed most of the way, and the battery dropped from around 90% to 50%. I wonder if this large drop is due to the inefficiency of the motor at top speed, or if it's due to the actual current needed to maintain those high speeds. As for speed, with my weight being a little more than yours, I've only been able to get around 18mph at top speed. Whereas, I'm able to get 19mph on my MCM3 (that only has one battery pack). I believe that this ~1mph difference could be due to how I have the weight distributed on the EUC (the placement of the battery packs and the trolley handle), and the angle that I have the horizontal alignment set to, making the EUC more prone to wobble back and forth.
  12. WakefulTraveller

    V3 Msuper

    @Linnea Lin Gotway Any news on the MSuper v3? Some things that I'd like to see: Enclosure material that is stronger than ABS plastic (such as PC or at least ABS+PC). In addition, a matte (rather than glossy) look, like the ACM. A powerful front light that is actually useful (regular LED lights might not be enough). In addition, an option to dim the light. A white color option like the original MSuper. A comfortable handle (I have found the handle to the MCM4 to not be very easy to grip). Ergonomic and supportive padding that actually makes good contact with the entire length of the lower legs (except for the ankles). I suggest a curved design for this. A readily visible battery level indicator. Raised lower corners (on the front at least). This part of the enclosure appears the most likely to hit things that are close to ground level. Additional structural support where most likely to receive impact An improved app with additional features, and the ability to flash custom firmware from the app to the MSuper (to allow for important updates and modding). Further improvements to prevent overheating and stress to internal components. (Perhaps) pedals that are angled upward a little bit at the front of the pedal. An overall polished and well thought through design. I believe that I speak for everyone here, in that we don't want something that looks like a cheap toy. A speaker system. Lastly and perhaps most importantly: Innovation Some things that I like that I already see (so don't go removing these things): The front and back lights. The integrated trolley handle. The lengthy pedals. The large amount of space to fit all of the batteries The large clearance for the tire (I'm just a little concerned about the wheel throwing muddy water onto the rider's back.) The large tire. The powerful motor.
  13. There's this custom app that allows you to disable tilt-back entirely:
  14. Yes, I just found that out a few minutes ago. The new pedals seem to be just around 2cm longer. It's not much, but it is something of an improvement. I've read that one guy and his wife found these pedals uncomfortable to ride on; I wonder what that's about. If it's not the pedal length to be concerned about, then it's the possibility of overheating or blown fuses.
  15. @checho Where can you buy larger pedals for the KS 18?
×
×
  • Create New...