August 22, 2018 at 3:49 pm #833852
Yes, I think it would be possible to type that out. This looks like a line that is already typed out, thus he probably needed to say this once in every interview, so he could have just picked it out among a list of other popular replies with the flick of an eyelash or something.August 28, 2018 at 12:38 pm #833964
Do you think it was possible for him to type out that line spontaneously – with his cheek controlling a randomly scrolling cursor – in one second?August 28, 2018 at 5:57 pm #833965
Probably not in 1 second, but I imagine he would have had in the least, a spell prompter. So when he types Y it comes up with You (if it is the most popular word that starts with Y, otherwise if it is another word, then Yo automatically become You and so on. I’m thinking he doesn’t have to type out all the letters for the words: realize, typing, response, difficult, and correct as a few letters in and it becomes obvious what it is. Further, the joining words might not need to be typed as the program could place them in there logically. I also note that the word ‘realize’ is American spelling whereas Hawking spoke the Queen’s English, so if he manually typed that word out it would have been ‘realise’. But yes, if this is a question that is asked all the time, then it could be pre-written out fully and could take 1 second to post it.August 30, 2018 at 11:47 am #833980
T8: Probably not in 1 second…
Well, he gave the response from the screenshot in one second.
T8: …but I imagine he would have had in the least, a spell prompter.
Yes, we have them on our phones too. The difference is that we can hit the “T” and then the “h” and it will prompt “The”, “Them”, “They”, etc. Hawking didn’t have that ability. Instead, he had to wait for an auto-cursor to randomly scroll through letters, and then the prompted words. So imagine watching a cursor on your phone screen just randomly move up and down columns and rows. You’d have to wait for it to come across “T”, and then twitch your cheek to select “T”, right? And that means it can’t be moving too fast, because it must pause a little on each letter to give him the chance to twitch his cheek when the cursor was over the correct letter, right? Because if he twitched on the wrong letter at any stage during the sentence he was trying to compose, he’d have to wait for the auto-cursor to hover over “Backspace” – and then wait again for it to hover over the letter he really wanted, right?
So let’s say his cheek reflexes were superb, and the cursor only had to hover over each character for half a second. And let’s say the cursor hits the most common letters and prompted words first, okay? So the prompter may begin at “T”, in which case Hawking can immediately twitch his cheek to select it. Now, will the cursor go to another suggested letter, like “h”? Or will it go through a list of the most popular words beginning with “T” first? Let’s say it’s the latter, okay? So he selects “T” in half a second, and the prompter highlights “The” next… and so he twitches again immediately. In one second, he has successfully selected the word “The”. What’s the next word going to be? “Universe”? “Black hole”? “Cosmic”? “Reason”? “Way”? “Theory”?
Let’s say he wants to say, “The universe is vast”, for example. So he has “The” within a second, but then has to wait – at half a second per character – for the auto-cursor to highlight the letter “U”. “U” is not a particularly common letter with which to begin a word, right? So let’s say it’s 10th on the list that the auto-cursor is scrolling over. Well, that’s another 5 seconds just to get “The u”, right? And then more seconds for the cursor to hover over an “N”, or over the word “universe”, right? And then how many seconds until it hovers over “I” or “is” for the third word? How many more seconds for it to hover over “V” or “vast” for the fourth?
So can you see how it could take him 30 seconds or more just to type, “The universe is vast”? Yet if you watch the video that I’m showing the screenshot of, you’ll see that produces that 12 word answer in one second.
T8: So when he types Y it comes up with You (if it is the most popular word that starts with Y, otherwise if it is another word, then Yo automatically become You and so on. I’m thinking he doesn’t have to type out all the letters for the words: realize, typing, response, difficult, and correct as a few letters in and it becomes obvious what it is.
Now put that into practice and think how long it would take the auto-cursor to randomly hover of the “Y”. And then the “o”. And then the word “You”. And then how long to hover over the letter “R”. And then “e”. And then “a”. And then “l”. And then it’d probably have to scan through common words like “real” in the process – before hovering over random letters again to reach the letter “i”. So we’re looking at maybe 12 seconds just to type “You realize”.
All you have to do is think it out. Put yourself in his position. Imagine you are strapped to the same exact device, and twitch your cheek for each “accept” like he allegedly did. It would take you three minutes to type, “Nothing to see here”. 😀
T8: But yes, if this is a question that is asked all the time, then it could be pre-written out fully and could take 1 second to post it.
Not even close. The most ingenious way someone could devise a program like that would be to have the cursor always begin by hovering over a “Scan Characters” icon. When he twitches after hearing the interviewer’s question, it will remain on that icon long enough for him to twitch a second time to select that category. If he doesn’t twitch again within half a second, it will move on to the “Scan Common Words” icon. If he doesn’t twitch on that one within a half a second, it will move on to the “Scan Common Responses” icon.
So in your scenario, he twitched on the “Scan Common Responses” icon. Then what? Will the auto-cursor just start scrolling through different full responses every half second, waiting for him to twitch and accept one of them? Or will it start scrolling through letters, so he can twitch on the letter his common response begins with, thereby narrowing the amount of common responses the auto-cursor must scroll through? If the former, how long until it gets to that “You realize…” response? If the latter, how long until the cursor hovers over the letter “Y”? And then how long to get to the “You realize…” response out of all the pre-written responses that begin with “Y”?
Come on, man… why are you being so obtuse? Why must you bend over backwards to make sure you’re disagreeing with anything I say – despite how silly and ignorant it makes you look?August 30, 2018 at 9:53 pm #834002
T8: Probably not in 1 second…
Mike: Well, he gave the response from the screenshot in one second.
Then maybe he didn’t type it out one letter at a time. Pay attention. The line could have been part of a list of common answers that he could select from.
Or it could have been prompted similar to doing a google search in the toolbar. So maybe he typed out 3 letters and that whole sentence appeared and he hit enter. In other cases if that sentence popped up and was wrong, he continues to type and the next most likely sentence appears, and so on.
Mike wakeup. The man had a disability and some smart people created a way for him to communicate fast. If you think this is impossible, then it is only so in your own mind because you have not experienced smart technology before because you do not come across it in your work. I work in IT and a group of smart people where I work created an amazing robotic hand and gave a demo of it the other day. Weta Digital is not far from where I work. Man you should see the special effects these guys pull off. They did LOTR, Avatar, Planet of the Apes, Maze Runner, etc.
Mike we live in the future, that is when I was a kid, I always wondered what the year 2000 would be like, perhaps spurred on by the comic 2000AD. But it is nearly 2020, we have global internet, smart technology, rockets, robots, drones, and advancements in these fields are exploding in growth. Scripture says the knowledge shall increase and that if men spoke one language then anything would be possible for them. Well we are heading back to one language. My father in law who cannot speak English uses his phone to speak to me in English. He scans packaging etc and sees writing in Spanish. And here is you thinking it is impossible for Hawking when he was alive to give an answer in 1 second and for a rocket to land back on its platform.
Mike, you seem more at home in the Middle Ages when superstition was rife. The Trinity was God, witches were drowned, and technology was evil magic. Yet the weird thing is you were able to see through the lie of the Trinity and now you seem like a paranoid conspiracy guy who cannot reason well. What happened to the Mike who use to be here 8 years ago? He could reason. Did you start smoking Pot? What exactly happened? Old age perhaps?September 2, 2018 at 10:39 am #834041
T8: Then maybe he didn’t type it out one letter at a time. Pay attention. The line could have been part of a list of common answers that he could select from.
You pay attention. How many “common answers” are on his list? How long would he have had to wait for the automatic cursor to hover over that particular common answer so that he could select it by twitching his cheek? And why would that particular answer be on a list of pre-written common answers, when the gist of the answer is that it takes him a long time to type an answer? If he didn’t actually type that answer right then and there, the answer itself is a deception, right? Because the answer itself only works if we believe he typed it right there on the spot, right?
So the only choices are that Hawking spontaneously typed that answer in one second, or we were deceived into believing he did. So which is it?
T8: …maybe he typed out 3 letters and that whole sentence appeared and he hit enter.
I addressed this in my last post. How long would it take him to type out even three letters when he has to wait for the automatic cursor to hover over the letter he wants before he can twitch his cheek to accept it? More than a second?
T8: Mike wakeup. The man had a disability and some smart people created a way for him to communicate fast. If you think this is impossible, then it is only so in your own mind…
Of course he wasn’t communicating spontaneously, T8. That’s the point of this thread. I’m curious to see who will accept facts when they are shown to them, and who will immediately start making up completely absurd excuses when facing evidence that belies their indoctrination. Guess which group you’re in so far. 🙂
T8: Weta Digital is not far from where I work. Man you should see the special effects these guys pull off. They did LOTR, Avatar, Planet of the Apes, Maze Runner, etc.
Maybe they’re the ones who do the ISS special effects too. 😀 Ask them the next time you’re there. At the very least, they’ll be able to show you how each piece of fakery was done.
T8: And here is you thinking it is impossible for Hawking when he was alive to give an answer in 1 second and for a rocket to land back on its platform.
That’s right… here is I knowing for a fact Hawking couldn’t have been communicating in real time on any answer other than “Yes” and “No”; and that Space X has never landed a rocket backwards onto a barge floating on a wavy sea.
T8: Mike, you seem more at home in the Middle Ages when superstition was rife.
Nothing I’ve pointed out to you has anything to do with superstition.
T8: …the weird thing is you were able to see through the lie of the Trinity and now you seem like a paranoid conspiracy guy who cannot reason well.
Now think hard on that for a while. Billions believe in a Trinity Godhead for no other reason than that is what they were taught. Of course it doesn’t take too much of your own research into the Bible to figure out that the Trinity isn’t scriptural, right? But the reason that the majority of Christians still are Trinitarians is that they stubbornly hold on to the man-made traditions they were originally taught – even when clear and obvious evidence is place right before their eyes. Do you see a parallel here? Because I sure do.
T8: What happened to the Mike who use to be here 8 years ago? He could reason. Did you start smoking Pot? What exactly happened? Old age perhaps?
I’ve been reasoning the crap out of you on this one, T8 – just like we both used to reason the crap out of the Trinitarians. What’s happened is that while I continue to follow observational truth no matter where it leads or how unpopular it makes me, and you don’t. Heck, maybe you never really did. I mean, maybe the Trinity was your one and only swan song… the only time you allowed the actual evidence to override the tradition, and took the road less traveled.
You certainly remember my old thread about cave men – because you brought it up recently. But while you still believe in this big bang/deep time/evolution crap, I spent a few years doing my own research, and found out that there’s absolutely zero real science behind these fanciful stories. There is no real science that points to a big bang, or an expanding universe, or billions of suns coming into existence before trillions of planets, or cave men, or a 4.6 billion year old earth. These are just stories you’ve been told, but you hold so strongly to the man-made traditions that you’re even willing to correct God Himself about how many days it took Him to create the heavens and earth, and about which day He created the sun. Don’t you see a problem here? Doesn’t it sound a little like this…
The coming of the lawless one will be in accordance with how Satan works. He will use all sorts of displays of power through signs and wonders that serve the lie, and all the ways that wickedness deceives those who are perishing. They perish because they refused to love the truth and so be saved. For this reason God sends them a powerful delusion so that they will believe the lieand so that all will be condemned who have not believed the truth but have delighted in wickedness.
My years of researching into the evolution/creation debate taught me that I can trust the Bible over the deep time evolutionists. My months of researching into flat earth have taught me that I can also trust the Bible over the sun-worshipping heliocentrists. In fact, I will never doubt the Bible on any subject again. Ever.September 2, 2018 at 12:32 pm #834042
How about this scenario…
Hawking and interviewer start the interview.
The interviewer asks his first question while cameras are rolling. Then the cameras pause. Hawking types his answer. The cameras begin rolling again and Hawking clicks on his answer, the machine reads it, then the interviewer responds and proceeds to ask his next question. The cameras pause once again while Hawking types his answer then the cameras begin rolling again. Hawking selects his answer, the machine reads it, the interviewer responds and asks the next question. Repeat.
Seems reasonable and genuine for the situation, right?September 3, 2018 at 5:51 am #834068
So then like a movie set, Kathi? I suppose we can allow for multiple takes to get it just right, too? Sure it could most definitely be done like that… but is that what we were sold as a viewing public? Or were we led to believe that – as T8 put it – “The man had a disability and some smart people created a way for him to communicate fast” ?
That’s the point, Kathi. Not that it couldn’t have been done with action cuts and retakes and everything else they employ on a Hollywood movie set – but that we were clearly led to believe we were seeing ingenious technology that allowed a disabled man to communicate spontaneously during on the spot news interviews.
T8 says that if I think it is impossible, then it’s only so in my mind. What do you say now? Was it possible for Hawking to carry on lengthy spontaneous communication during interviews and even live appearances?September 3, 2018 at 5:55 am #834069
Okay, next up…
Who among us believes a hollow aluminum container can cut through a huge steel-girded concrete structure like a knife through warm butter, and come out the other side with it’s aluminum nose cone still intact?
Oh, and that the nose cone can be sliced off afterwards by thin air?September 3, 2018 at 5:04 pm #834078
Do you know of a “live” appearance where the speed in which Hawking answers is immediate as it seems in this interview?
The interview did not say it was a live interview, btw. It is not discussing the communication device, also, btw. I don’t know why you feel like the show is trying to make you think that the machine is somehow speaking basically at the speed of thought. They never mention it or discuss the device.
I think one has to be gullible to think that the producer of the show is trying to fool the audience into believing that the communication is as quick as a thought as it appears to be in the video.
Anyway, I thought this picture would make a good screen saver for you:September 3, 2018 at 5:17 pm #834079
Your aluminum can video isn’t playing correctly.September 4, 2018 at 2:53 am #834085
Interesting. It’s just a regular GIF, and plays fine on my computer and my phone. But here’s the same footage on YouTube. I have it queued to the right spot…
Also, stop the video at the 1:10 mark, and look at the nose of the plane going behind a separate CGI layer.September 4, 2018 at 4:05 am #834088
Kathi: Do you know of a “live” appearance where the speed in which Hawking answers is immediate as it seems in this interview?
In this live lecture, a question ends at 1:11, and Hawking begins a minute and 20 second answer at 1:21. So we have an initial 10 second pause before he speaks his first sentence. Then this sentence is followed by 6 more long sentences with only a second or two pause between each. After that initial 10 second pause, Hawking rambles off 7 long sentences for a minute and 20 seconds with a total of 10 seconds of pauses in between sentences. That’s a lot of cheek typing in 10 seconds.
Here is how Hawking describes his own speech process…
“ACAT includes a word prediction algorithm provided by SwiftKey, trained on my books and lectures, so I usually only have to type the first couple of characters before I can select the whole word. When I have built up a sentence, I can send it to my speech synthesiser.”
How long would it take YOU to type the first couple of characters using a cursor that randomly hovers over various letters until you twitch your cheek to select one? Maybe 3-4 seconds before it happens upon the first letter you want? Then maybe another 2-3 seconds before it hovers over the second letter you want? Then another couple of seconds before it hovers over the word you want? Now you have one single word, Kathi. And so you have to continue the above process for the second word. And the third. And the fourth. And so on until you have one single sentence you can send to the speech synthesizer. Remember that’s how Hawking himself described the process.
So while it’s ludicrous to think he came up with the first sentence in the above video in only 10 seconds, it’s absurd in the highest possible degree to think he was able to produce the six long sentences that followed with only a second or two pause in between each one.
I asked you in the third post of this thread if you thought Hawking was carrying on impromptu discussions with the people who interviewed him throughout the years via his speech synthesizer. Instead of answering “Yes” or “No’, you’ve turned this into a diversion about whether or not rational people should have known all along that there were camera cuts, rehearsals, and pre-written scripts.
To that I say no, because it was never presented to us as such. Instead, it has always been presented to us as, “The man had a disability and some smart people created a way for him to communicate fast. If you think this is impossible, then it is only so in your own mind…”
Do you understand the difference? T8’s words above are exactly how it was always presented to us. It was never presented to us as a Hollywood movie with scripts, rehearsals, and camera cuts. So while I understand that you’re saying T8 and I were gullible fools for believing what they actually told us, and not being as enlightened as you about the Hollywood movie set process that went into Hawking’s interviews, my question to you from the third post is still lacking a direct answer…
Do you believe that Hawking was able to carry on impromptu interviews where he was answering in real time without rehearsals, camera cuts, and pre-written scripts? Yes or No?September 4, 2018 at 4:54 pm #834100
Mike you asked:
I asked you in the third post of this thread if you thought Hawking was carrying on impromptu discussions with the people who interviewed him throughout the years via his speech synthesizer.
Yes, it could have been impromptu but with pauses in the filming while he wrote his answers. It is also likely that he was given most or all of the questions ahead of time so he could prepare his answers. I don’t believe that the interview only took as long as the final video presentation. Furthermore, I don’t feel like I have been tricked by the producer.September 4, 2018 at 6:30 pm #834101
About your plane video, I believe both towers were hit by planes and it was a terrorist attack. Whether every aspect of the video is authentic or not, I cannot say.
Images can be edited. People can imagine they are seeing things a certain way but it isn’t that way when the “smoke” clears. I will be visiting the actual site where this happened in a few weeks and will be going to the museum about it. That should be interesting and really sad too.
Take care, LU
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.