Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Catrike Ryder Newsgroups: rec.bicycles.tech Subject: Re: The AI specified bicycle features of the future Date: Sun, 26 May 2024 08:34:37 -0400 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 48 Message-ID: <4ga65jdbjmd9jevgc3imeal6b2jhn672u3@4ax.com> References: <8c915jh72csumpn470ur8ffo2v7odn6j8c@4ax.com> <1ja45jhruruii7ap5scg4i5hrv2amsiqvs@4ax.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Injection-Date: Sun, 26 May 2024 14:34:40 +0200 (CEST) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="e09f3f852aa723a80bedd324d82cf3d3"; logging-data="3591183"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/2HKDk6A5nBYv4sBfQOhvN7JMilPJJjSg=" User-Agent: ForteAgent/8.00.32.1272 Cancel-Lock: sha1:JDCcC48lLbS4AhmAjxViAmxnhvw= Bytes: 2997 On Sat, 25 May 2024 14:09:39 -0500, AMuzi wrote: >On 5/25/2024 1:51 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote: >> On Fri, 24 May 2024 14:44:04 -0400, Zen Cycle >> wrote: >> >>> On 5/24/2024 10:47 AM, Jeff Liebermann wrote: >> (mega chomp) >> >>>> Remember, this is a conceptual design, but who knows? The future might >>>> surprise us with even more incredible innovations! >>> >>> Meh...I'll just stick with the basics.... >> >> Did you notice that the CoPirate AI generated list of features didn't >> include anything that would be considered innovative or revolutionary? >> All of the items suggested were existing for failed products. Nothing >> futuristic or attention grabbing. That's to be expected because the >> data used to train the AI was probably limited to existing products >> because Microsoft doesn't make any money advertising science fiction >> bicycles. If you're brain storming for revolutionary ideas, then >> CoPirate and probably Google Gemini, both of whom are funded by >> advertising, are unlikely to be very useful. >> >> Hmmm... basic bicycle? Like this? >> >> "A Prehistoric STONE bike?" >> (19:54) >> To bypass the construction and go directly to the first ride: >> >> >> >> > >Makes sense. Bicycles reached their apex before 1900* (steel >frames, neutral handling geometry, tubular tires and fixed >gear). > >Typical example: >https://luxlow.com/bicycles/vintageroadtrackbikes/1898-antique-davis-dayton-model-22-special-road-racer-bike-2950/ > >All features after are refinements and/or geegaws. > >*one might quibble that coaster brakes date from 1899. Seems to me that the description of a "basic bicycle" is a subjective evaluation. It's the same with many other subjects. Is the synchromesh transmission a geegaw?