Slashdot Mirror
Dr. Robot Watches Over Home And More
jverbov writes "A Canadian firm has created what they call an 'intellgent personal robotic companion.' It can be wirelessly connected to your home Internet connection, has a built-in camera and speech recognition software. There's a recent article about it at the Toronto Star." This thing promises a lot, and while the price is steep, it's a lot cheaper than some other household robots due out.
I would like to see them make robots that are very modular, This would have a couple of benifits, people would be able to start their robot much cheaper (Only have to buy one or two functions to start with) and they would be able to upgrade and expand their robot as they needed more features. This would be kinda like computers are now and would help bots get adapted by the population at large much more quickly. (Think of how fast things took off after clones came out)
The article says these robots will be under $3k. If that turns out to be true, it would finally make advanced robots like this more affordable for the home. If they could get the price down below $1500, then this is the price of a good purebred pet. It might be interesting to have such robots that look like animals. No more cleaning the cat box!
Or it walks out of range of the wireless base station? I know my base station's coverage is pretty weak thoughout my house. Then again, at $1500+, another base station looks cheap.
On a more serious note, I'd really like to see how well it handles stairs and how well it can keep from running into things. I'd also be interested in how pet-proof it is.
What this does represent is the very earliest twinkle in the imagination of robotic developers who are waiting for the technology to catch up to our science fiction dreams - the day when personal robots will truely be useful as 'pals' that will help you in your daily life and provide an anthropomorphic touch, kind of like Data and his 'positronic brain'.
At some point, the argument will begin as to whether they are 'alive' or not, and robot rights groups will spring up everywhere! Whee!
--Mike
I must admit this has a lot of potential! Especially the low cost is interesting, since it makes it available to a much larger group of consumers. But there is one thing I wonder about though: In the picture, although the robot does not look like some cheap, 99 cent item, it still appears to be... rather fragile.
I am not sure if the bipedal robot is the best design, simply because it seems rather unstable. And with cameras, advanced processors and so on, I would think that you do not want this thing to be just that - unstable. It seems to me that you would want it to be as stable and as sturdy as possible. Otherwise, all the great examples of home-use don't really seem like viable options for many families.
You would never let your expensive new laptop with built-in thermal detectors, and all sorts of other great gadgets walk up and down stairs unprotected... would you? I think we can all just picture the shiny little computer comming apart in slow-motion...
So before I would ever consider investing in something like this (which I at some time surely would), I would be VERY certain that it can stand up to the strongest natural force known to man: Children and stairs!
I am not sure I like this,
In patrol mode, the bipedal robot acts as a home security system, scoping out your house for intruders.
These were called dogs. Sometimes they are known as the family dog to most people.
The robot uses the owner's home computer and Internet connection to answer questions or help a human shop online.
Used to be a local teenager called a geek, sometimes the child would be yours.
The robot can also upload everything it hears and sees to the Internet.
These were called little brothers, except the did not tell the whole world through the internet. Maybe they do now, I donna know.
It can also act as a personal digital assistant, reminding the owner of appointments.
These are called wives, and they can be more fun than just reminding your of appointments, *nudge* *nudge* *wink* *wink*!
So basically you can replace most any person in your household with a $1,500 robot. I guess we really don't need other living beings at home.
And here I was just six stories ago pointing out my not-so-humble opinion about how misguided trying to emulate biological systems was. This proves my point doesn't it?
A manufacturer went to a lot of trouble (and presumably expense) to make their device less reliable (hexapod locomotion is demonstrably optimal) and try to give a pointless appearance of intelligence.
If the robot had been built like a cockroach, arguably one of the most effective designs, I wouldn't have been any less likely to think it intelligent (it's not), but far more likely to think the designer was.
-- MG
OK, the too many movies line is getting old. Let me flesh this out a bit.
I graduated from the United States Naval Academy with a Degree in Engineering and have been invited back to teach Computer Science by that department's chair. I am currently living in Japan where I study Distributed Operating System design and Artificial Intelligence research in my spare time. While I may speak enough Japanese to pick up a girl at a bar, I do not understand enough to watch movies; hence why I don't have cable.
The FACTs of the discussion are these:
#1 Research on the human brain and how it learns is still considered to be in its infancy. Current experiements in the subject are almost barbaric in their simplicity; such as performing CT scans on a subjects brain while they are exposed to extremem emotional states, just to see which location in the brain becomes more active.
#2 Expert systems already exist today that are capable of creating, or rewriting the rules they operate off of. Exactly how much memory do they need to have and how much information do they need before they begin writing rules that don't pertain to their original design? What point does the information processing load become more than the current hardware can handle?
#3 Neural networks of some pretty fair complexity have been played with, but we still haven't quite reached the stage where the computer will mimic human learning and no one can say how close we are. Again, how do we know we don't already have the right algorithm, and just not the right input information.
One might infer from my sig that I read too many books, but Dostoevsky had the fall of the Russian government, the rise of communism and the abolishment of the church in Russia nailed decades before it actually happened. Bullishly pushing forward with a misunderstood technology or concept has screwed us over many times. I don't think it's out of line to accept that the artistic half of our species occassionally has very clear insight into our future.
I've dirtied my hands writing poetry, for the sake of seduction; that is, for the sake of a useful cause. --Dostoevsky
It's already covered by the first 2 laws.
The robot cannot harm a human being, this includeds psycological damage and one would assume the personal damages o fhaving yourslef broadcast over the net would be included.
If that law doesn't work, the second one will definately kick in, self preservation except where it conflicts the first. If that robot got caugt, he'd be one smashed bot.
T Money
World Domination with a plastic spoon since 1984
> Hello master. This is an automated message to let you know that I am being stolen.
And you thought the Kidnapped Robot Problem was just an academic exercise!
Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade