Skip to comments.RoboCop 1924
Posted on 09/28/2013 11:19:49 AM PDT by Islander7
Scientists have been making bone headed predictions of the future for decades. Found this on the web. Thought it an interesting bit of history.
Peter King would love one of these to ‘protect’ him from his constituents.
SO what goes on in the minds of people who utilize their knowledge and talents to invent things specifically for crowd control by an oppressive government?
I love the multi-sap hand. LOL
Is that for real?
Was this really from 1924?
has anyone checked this?
Love the anatomically positioned Tear Gas outlet and exhaust port.
I couldn’t find the exact article but found this from even early so yea, its probably true.
So far it does.
see above post for cover of Science and Invention May 1924..touting said article
LOVE this one....the FIRST Google Glass??
I’m kind of surprised Henry Ford didn’t build a few of these.
Imagine what we could do today with advanced electronics and controls-—I would not be surprised if Obama put a few of these out to counter the tea parties.
I was thinking the same thing. What is it with humans and the draw to dominate and oppress?
I suppose we are hunters, with instinct to kill outsiders and dominate the tribe for women, food and glory.
Humans pretty much suck.
It’s likely real. The author is Hugo Gernsback, for whom the Hugo Award in Science Fiction is named for. Wikipedia has a decent write up of him.
SO this was science fiction?
“Is that for real?
Was this really from 1924?”
Tesla made a radio controlled boat in 1898.
LOL! I can see one of these things get taken out by an attempt to go down a flight of stairs like ED-209 was...
“I was thinking the same thing. What is it with humans and the draw to dominate and oppress?”
You’ll find a lot of sociopaths and narcissists in leadership positions. Not all humans suck.
It’s an evolutionary advantage. If our species periodically “thins the herd” by fighting wars then the weaker genes are eliminated from the pool and we become a stronger species. Competing species that do not do that are at risk of being wiped out by the ones that do. Passive, docile species have a tendency to get destroyed by more dominant ones. All it takes is one tribe to decide to be warlike before every other one has to either learn to fight wars just as well as they do or be wiped out.
I hate when I’m dining near a crowd-control robot and its yapping away on its celltelegraphone.
I guess you could day that. Although no more “science fiction” than Popular Science through the years. Recall that this was during the Roaring 20s when technology promised to solve all of society’s ills.
That was what first came to mind. A very accurate prediction I think.
Any articles about Automatons for lettuce harvesters or tomato pickers?
I love to read the old Popular Science mags from the 20’s to the 50’s. From the “build your own airplane with that old Model T engine” to the “Is television really coming?” to the atomic cars, personal spaceships and condos on the moon, it’s a great look at the past. My personal favorite was a “Gus’ Garage” where Gus debated the value of 4-wheel brakes and stop lights on cars.
Ah, spoken like a Nazi Theorist. That is pretty much my point.
Yes I understand we were forged in a brutal trial for survival. We must rise above the animal instinct.
Sure...civilization is all about reprogramming our brains through education, religion, etc., to restrain our antisocial impulses and rise above the law of the jungle. But it does create a problem when we have an enemy who throws that away and behaves like savages and we neglect to suspend the Marquess of Queensberry Rules when we fight back.
“Those who beat their swords into plowshares, will plow for those who don’t”.
I am not a pacifist. Far from it. I believe that a man avoids a fight until he can’t, then a man finishes it. A man prepares for the fight and by preperation the fight may be averted.
However, Man is a beast that wants to dominate. My comments were predicated on the cover art, showing “police robots” running amok in a crowd. My thinking was that a popular magazine wanting to sell magazines has the pulse of the people who could lay down money to buy. For them to make a cover like that is a reflection of the people who may make a buying decision. So they entice with art that would appeal to those decision makers.
Hence, art that appeals to those decision makers is a self righteous state bullying the masses... The decision makers are just Joe Bag O Donuts. The decision makers are us. Damn shame.