Slashdot Mirror
Will Robots Cheer Up the Elderly?
Drath writes "Researchers at Purdue University are conducting a study by placing Sony Aibo robots in a Lafayette, IN nursing home. They want to see if robots can make people happy. Lets hope they have robot insurance." Makes you wonder if the AARP will have a position paper on this. Hope when I get old(er) I'll have gold plated killer robots around for my entertainment. pycananthemum also was kind enough sent in a link to the Project page.
It's a pretty well-proven fact that regular contact with loved ones keeps you healthier. So this could actually prove to be either a good thing or a bad thing...
Assume that these robots become friends to the patients. They will get their daily dose of contact from someone whose patience never gives out, and gives them someone to talk to about war stories or crocheting or whatever it is old people talk about nowadays.
But I'm worried that this may prove to create some problems too. It's already difficult enough to drag some people to see grandma in the home, and now they will have the excuse "she's not lonely, she's got CompanionBot!"...
So maybe this will actually reduce the interpersonal contact experienced by the elderly.
...but it's being eaten...by some...Linux or something...
- a hundred years ago, the elderly lived with the family and were happy, taught the children etc.
- then we put them to special "homes" or 3rd age residences (not to say "prisons" or ghettos) so that they aren't a nuisance for us young ppl any longer
- and now that we've denied them any family warmth, we'll entirely replace all their remaining human contact with cold robots (costs less than nurses,eh)?
i think i'll soot myself before i get old, since
being old nowadays can no longer be called a life
Patch Adams seemed to work well for elderly patients, why wouldn't Bicentennial Man?
Everyone knows robots can't make people happy. It just gives them a headache to think down to our level.
At least, they opted for cute Aibos in stead of cute Marvins with Genuine People Personalities...
This is very sad. I recall discussing with a colleague at Stanford University how Sony, while excellent at consumer electronics, may go to far with their robot technologies by allowing people to choose robots over animals, simply because a robot is 'cleaner' or initially, less expensive to maintain. Despite being a fan of technology and like most /. readers amazed at Sony's dancing robots (Search BBC website for video), I shudder at the thought of a sterile world where genuine life is sidelined for metal and plastic. I would prefer a dog's wet nose anyday to the artificial equivalent.
O'WONDERWe're working on it.
This is a great experiment. However, I do think that animals need to be taken care of. They also give back a lot of love, not only take. And they are moody, they need as much as they give. I think that's what will be missing in the end... a small furry nose besides the person in the bed, giving heat.
This movie explains why I have doubts about this.
I can't see that this is any different to putting televisions into old people's homes, it's another (albeit novel) type of entertainment - the real point is if the technology should be used as a substitute for "real" human interaction. In the article a sociologist from MIT asks:
"I think we should take it as a wake-up call and really say, 'Now, why are we giving robot pets to old people?' And the answer, I think, is that we really have been struggling to figure out how to give enough people to old people."
The answer would be to allow them to have real interaction - wouldn't it be better to install some PCs in homes like this, to let them use the web, email, ICQ, BBS, whatever, and interact with real people. In cyberspace no-one knows you're old.
Elderly persons often have problems keeping in touch with family and friends. This probably makes things worse, since they no longer have a reason to leave their home, and the "electronic pets" can by their very design never have the complexity of a realy living creature. If you have a dog, you have a lot of responsibilities, which keep you upright. An electronic pet does basicly not need more then fresh batteries every few days. And a mind with nothing serious to do decays all the faster
Wouldn't it be a lot more productive to use real animals instead?
Another ham-fisted PR stunt to show the caring side of a massive multinational.
I am a Karma Library.
Human contact should be something that does not need to be mentioned. These people raised you!
...check out the Nursebot Project here at CMU. Not only will these robots provide companionship, but they are intended to provide basic health monitoring and assistance with activities of daily living. The prototype robots have already gone into nursing homes and interacted with residents, and in general the response has been very positive.
woohoo!! i shudder to think how advanced the Britney Spears BOT will be by the time i'm 90 and slobbering all over myself in a old folks home... damn.. thank god we'll have viagra and Britney Bots.. Woo!!
Are they still showing reruns of Matlock in the year 3000?
/^[A-Z0-9._%+-]+@[A-Z0-9.-]+\.[A-Z]{2,4}$/i
If the robot is a cross between the Honda creation and a Real Doll, then yeah, I'm pretty damned sure this thing would make me right happy in my old age....
Max
My god carries a hammer. Your god died nailed to a tree. Any questions?
This is ridiculous. There are so many dogs and cats that are killed every day because they cannot find a home. Why can't these animals comfort the elderly we sweep aside? It could be like the Island of Misfit Toys. Everybody wins.
I know there are concerns about real animals doing all those annoying things like consuming food, excreting, and all those other bothersome life activities. Here's a plan: Let's work on bioengineering dogs and cats that eat used Depends and excrete Viagra! Another win-win situation!
Seriously, if we can't afford to take care of our domesticated animals, can the day when we can't be bothered to take care of our elderly be far off? This all comes back to our habit of tossing away the old possessions when the new model comes out, which is merely a scam of growth-based capitalistic consumerism.
One final thought: Any robot that is sufficiently lifelike to provide satisfying companionship would probably deserve the same respect we give "real" living creatures. (Of course, given the standards set for the two leftover groups above, this is not much.) I know everyone hated the ending to "A.I.," but go back and watch the first third of the film.
What's wrong with using regular animals? An AIBO might be effective, but I'm positive that people would respond better to a warm, living, happy animal than to a mechanical toy. Which would you rather have comfort you, a nice cat that could curl up on your lap and purr for hours, or something metal that needs to have its batteries replaced? And if you factor in the cost...I just don't see the point of doing this, unless allergies to pets are a huge issue.
Colin Winters
I'll give the researchers and Sony credit. They see a problem and they're trying to find a solution. I don't expect them to fix the bigger problem. I HOPE that the rest of us will assess our personal situtations and do the right thing.
I'm stepping down from my soap-box now. Thank you.
- Bill
"HAL, please let me leave my home to visit my grandchildren."
"I am sorry, gramps, I'm afraid I can't do that."
I intend to live forever, so far so good.
Is Slashdot picking out robots for their subscription-based geek retirement community? If so, I'd like to change my vote. I don't think Maximillian would make very good company.
Some people have a way with words, and some people, um, thingy.
I heard a story on NPR the other day about some of the robots at Robodex, and they talked a little about how in Japan some nursing homes are doing this. They gave reasons such as some people are afraid of animails (dogs, etc), nothing to clean up, you can't be cruel to a robot (at least not untill People for the Ethical Treatment of Robots is created), don't have to feed/walk/clean up after them, etc. I think this is a good idea.
Comment forecast: Bits of genius surrounded by a sea of mediocrity.
Researchers at Purdue University are conducting a study by placing Sony Aibo robots in a Lafayette, IN nursing home.
In a related study, researchers at Purdue University were examining the health consequences that can occur when a large number of old people trip over small Aibo robots roaming around their otherwise peaceful nursing home.
For when the metal ones decide to come for you... and they will!
(Low bandwidth one here.)
Saturday Night Live was hilarious especially getting Sam Waterston to narrate. But still with robot lawnmowers selling in the surbaban marketplace I know I'd feel more comfortable about buying one if I knew I was protected from liability if the thing strays into my neighbors yard and takes out a 2 year old playing in her sandbox.
It's only a matter of time before this kind of thing shows up in the newspapers. And if it doesn't happen to me I'll piss myself laughing at every headline.
The consume some food and attention, and they provide mental health. They encourage empathy and awareness of life, and often are a child's first experience with the realities of life and death. Domesticated animals are a pan-cultural phenomina, and are often used in therepy to stabalize and bring out patients with mental problems.
I think people that cite the fact that animals raised for food take up more space that could be used for food also should look at the severe pet overpopulation in the world as well.
Animals are tasty too. There's plenty of food in the world, and no threatened shortage. Steaks are tasty, and I'm munching on a salsa and mozzarella omlette, sausage patties and tofu chips with a scallion pepper sour cream dip. Mmmmm... good breakfast. Yay for the chickens, pigs and cows that went into my meal.
If people think this shit is going to go down when we colonize other planets they have another thing coming, resources are scarce and the more that can be used by humans the better imho. Once companion technology has progressed beyond the dog (a pet rock is better than a cat) we should cull the population and be done with them. This all might sound harsh but their usefullness is soon coming to an end and to keep them alive in the face of far greater human needs is inhumane.
Whoa, there buddy. If we sufficently lower our standards to the minimum necessary for mere life, then we've wiped out all that it is to be human. Sure, eking out life on a UV blasted landscape is going to be tough. The pioneers will have to suffer, many will die, and they will lack many amenities. But their children with be slightly better off, and their children's children will progress farther. Eventually, they will be sufficient enough to get to the level of civilization, and all that implies. Art, music, philosophy, pornography, reading Slashdot. I hope that they will be of the level so that pets are an afforable luxury.
Your vision of the future is inane - the logical end is simply to replace humans with robots, which is not exactly a survival minded concept. I'm speciest. I believe that humans are more important than anything else out there, because it's my team. And domesticated animals are a perk of civilization.
Colonizing other worlds is, IMO, an absolute necessity. But I hope we bring more than just mindless automitons there. We must bring civilization, and all that it implies. Each world will progress in a different direction, but I hope they all have the luxury of life to have a pet.
After all, as the quote says: "Where cat is, is civilization".
--
Evan
"$30 for the One True Ring. $10 each additional ring!" -- JRR "Bob" Tolkien
Who's gonna cheer up the robots? This is a bad idea, as it will only create a generation of maladjusted, angry robots. And we all know where that will lead us, eh?
Attention all planets of the Solar Federation! We have assumed control! - Neil Peart
Ya, one of my personal favorites.. video here.
Nice to see you stand firmly on principle. "I got mine, sucks to be you." Pets give you warm fuzzy feelings... but you proudly proclaim that you couldn't care less about the suffering of your fellow humans.
Wow. You're so cool. And deep. Wow. I hope that all Americans can be like you. Oh, wait. They already are.
I've got a bad attitude and karma to burn. Go ahead. Mod me down.
Any kid would probably love to go and visit CompanionBot. So if CompanionBot stay's close to granny she'll still be able to see here relatives.
That was a set-up, right?
if they look like Bob Barker
What could be worse than being a pet in a nursing home. You're responsible for cheering up a bunch of depressed seniors, and who's there for your needs? Nobody that's who.
I suggest we use the robots to cheer up the pets when they get off duty.
Or get them a monkey. He likes pumpernickel [monkeybagel.com]
My Heart Is A Flower
benefit. Nor would they if I said, "Hey mom, no food for me this week, please!" Pets consume $11 billion a year and have better health care than some people elsewhere. The same applies. If I didn't have a pet, I wouldn't be sending the whopping $100 or so it costs me a year to starving kids in Foobarland. You can argue that I should give $100 (more) than I already do to starving kids in Foobarland, but were I to be swayed by that I'd cut the $100 from something other than maintaining a pet.
You really might consider a career other than micromanaging everyone elses resource use. We're fortunate[0] here in the U.S. to be rich in many things, just like other parts of the world are rich in the same things and others (oil in the Middle East comes to mind). We already give away tons of that (literally) in private and public charities. That some US citizen dares to spend < 1% of their income on something that makes them happy is really absolutely none of your concern. Most slashdotters probably spend more on internet access in a year than I do on my pet. More power to them. I do hope a large portion of your resources go to provide food and health care to those who don't have it.
[0] Possibly not the right word, but "lucky" is certainly not. We're in the position we are only as a result of decisions made by our economic ancestors--those who colonized the states and industrialized them. I'm better off than my grandparents and parents. My kids will be better off because I'll continue the same tradition of working hard to improve their condition.
I have no "specific studies" for you. Having spent many years with dogs, however, there is simply no question whatsoever in my mind that animals have emotions. Dogs in particular seem more emotional than humans. At least, they're more expressive. Happiness, sadness, anger, guilt, irritability, they've got it all.
Instead of "data", try Occam's razor on this. Is it more ridiculous to believe that animals have emotions and thought, or to believe that humans alone of all animals have them? I think there are no fundamental differences between animal and human minds. We're just farther up the grade on the intelligence meter.
In an old folks home there are younger workers whos job is to take care of these details. Most of those old folks cannot take care of themselves, so somebody is paid to do it. Pay these people to take care of feeding and excretment, and then the pets are there all day every day.
Nursing home workers soon realise that even if they want to, there just isn't time to do the nessicary work and spend quality time with residents. A pet however can get all nessicary work done in just a few minutes, before the workers heads off to whatever else needs to be done. The pet then can head off to spend quality time with the older people.
So pets (live for sure, and likely robotic) really are better for both the staff and the residents. Not as good as enough staff to spend quality time with everyone, but the number of people needed for that simply do not exist.
Because pets, like humans, are flawed, unpredictable, self-centered and unique. Robotics is fun, interesting, and a wonderful relaxing hobby. I have no doubt that it's a great thing to get into. But why should one preclude the other? Both are perfectly valid aspects of human interest. I don't like potato chips. They are also generally considered to be unhealthy. Should I say that you are illogical and shouldn't eat them?
Empathy would require the animal to have emotions, I did not know that cats and dogs were capable of such things, please point out some specific studies. Since you will be probably be unable to cite any relevent studies
Click here for nine studies from diverse, respected journals, just on the first page of returns. Scientific American, The Society for Neuroscience, Rutgers' University, University of Toronto, University of Houston, and several others treat emotional response in animals as fact, and both study those emotions and base studies on them.
But that's moot - my initial point was that it develops empathy, which requires emotion to be present in the human. Perhaps you work under the assumption that humans do not have emotions either?
It disturbs me greatly that you labor under the assumption that animals do not have emotions. That indicates either a near pathological denial of observed fact, or a total lapse of experience in a near omnipresent aspect of society. It's as if you denied that men and women were physiologically different, and that there would be no studies to prove that.
Most animals do not have the ability for self-recognition let alone emotion towards what must be percieved as the "other" in a relationship.
You are a perfect example of why pets are an important aspect of life. Your views are not only very at odds with observable fact, they seem to derive from a lack of emotion on your part. Do you have *any* passion in your body? You seem to lack basic emotional balance, and while I am not one to attack a person in an argument, I (and I am sure many people reading this exchange) am utterly baffled by how you could have come to your current view points.
--
Evan
"$30 for the One True Ring. $10 each additional ring!" -- JRR "Bob" Tolkien
I'm sorry. I can't do that Dave.
Gort, Let's go trolling for Ho's. Get the wheelchair.
Will they be trained not to hump people's legs? Frail bones, robotic strength, could be messy!
GTRacer
- C-3PO is rendered powerless to annoy if the audience is deaf
Defending IP by destroying access to it? That makes sense, RIAA/MPAA. Go to the corner until you can play nice!
does anyone remember the SNL sketch about robots attacking the elderly and taking their medicine for fuel??
this is far too much of a coincidence
MARIJUANA, SHROOMS, X: ONLINE?! - E
It is a pretty common vision, argued by many as inevitable. The only qualm that I have is the simple fact that you are negating the perpetuation of civilization by saying that the continuation is fostered by mere movement. I am stating that the aspects of humanity that form our fundimental being includes various fundimental aspects that you neglect to consider in your vision of the future. A simple von Numann machine would satisfy your requirements for the future, but the end result is pointless perpetuation and reproduction. A human mind, complete with ration and emotion in balance gives meaning to activity. That mind may well arrive at a non organtic lineage, but no time soon. By the time that happens, things will be so radically different, the concept of "animals" and "species" will have been redefined. At this point in time, however, they have not, and we go on enjoying the company of pets, enjoying a good meal, and speculating idly on a future that is to come.
--
Evan
"$30 for the One True Ring. $10 each additional ring!" -- JRR "Bob" Tolkien
I was discussing with my family the other day the question of why Dogs and Cats are not considered Sentient species (albiet of a lower level intelligence then Humans).
One of my dogs can understand when She is being refered to by Pronouns.
Now THAT is spooky.
"Is it time for her you know what?"
::dog proceeds to run over to the biscuit box::
Shnitz!
Annnyways.
The final conclusion was that we most likely do not consider other animals besides ourselfs to be sentient because of the legal and moral ramifications that it would bring up, it would be a royal pain in the ass to deal with and most people quite frankly just do not want to deal with those types of issues.
:(
Need help treating your acne? Come here!
When I was not but a small newborn babe, my family had a dog named Sady.
When ever it would be that I would cry, Sady would come over and lick my face to cheer me up. If that failed, then she would go and alert my (likely already busy making up a bottle or such) Mother and attempt to drag her over to my side so as to comfort me.
When a friend of the family came over one time and picked me up and threw me in the air (and caught me) Sady immediately jumped up and bared her teeth at the person, threatening him with harm should he attempt to (in her mind) threaten me again.
Later on in years I had a wonderful Cat. Whenever I would cry the Cat (I am omitting names from this point on so as to limit possibly identifying myself) would come over and sit on my lap or come up and wipe the tears from my face. If I was sick the Cat would sit by my side and wait for my recovery.
Do not tell me that either of those wonderful creatures was uncaring or had no emotions. Any creature that is capable of giving of themselves to another, or removing themselves from their own self gratifying actions so as to comfort another, has emotion, and more then that, is a damn deal better person then most people are.
Need help treating your acne? Come here!
You know, Douglass Adams is probably rolling over in his grave.
-- IANAEG - I am not an elder god.
I think we all know that the current generation robots made of metal and electronics don't have sufficient warmth, cuddliness and responsiveness to make people happy.
I'm sure there will be some stopgap measures for people that aren't too particular, including GeorgeClooneyBots for grandma and BritneySpearsBots for grampa.
But seriously, I think the only way these things can succeed is to make them correlate with what old people recognize as genuine warm and friendly loved ones.
Face it, short of the loved one actually being there, we get some small bits of satisfaction out of seeing their photographs, their videos, hearing their voice on audio, talking with them on the telephone.
That being the case, the robots should mainly be communication and recording devices. Designed so that real loved ones can present their visual and audio images effectively through the robot at at distance, or, with recording, through time.
"Provided by the management for your protection."
I agree with your point.
I also add that pets are furry and cuddly (and all the geeks on slashdot say "that's nice. Now shut up and go back to playing with your giggley-puff doll".) Won't lovable robots be just as sufficient and furry and cuddly pets?
In the mid 50's, a psychological researcher by the name of Harry Harlow, a pioneer in the study of attachment theory, did an experiment where he took infant rhesus monkeys away from their mothers and put them in front of two different "artificial mothers": one made of wire that carried a bottle of milk, and one artificial mother made of cloth that didn't have a bottle. The infant monkeys vastly preferred the cloth cuddly mother "doll" over the wire mother "doll", even though the wire doll had a bottle and the cloth one didn't.
For more info on this (and to prove I'm not BS'ing), check it out here
I think it's a neat experiment what they're doing with the AIBO's, but in the end its still "Cloth doll vs. Wire doll".
Empathy would require the animal to have emotions, I did not know that cats and dogs were capable of such things, please point out some specific studies.
It's not the pet that has to have emotions; it's the human. All that is necessary is that the pet interact with the human in such a way that it helps build empathy in the human. Dogs certainly do this. It also helps if the pet does not behave in a way that is inconsistent with the hypothesis that the pet has empathy. This is true of dogs; if they lose control with a human, they usually then behave as if they were sorry. It is not true of most cats.
As for whether pets have real love, it isn't a useful question. I don't know if any human other than me can feel love, and there is evidence from some ex-girlfriends and wives that many of them cannot. However, Bosco, Siren, and Tess display more evidence of love for me than you display of the ability of cognition.
Not if the robots are Jack Valenti.
"I may not have morals, but I have standards."