Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Immobile Robots

Posted by michael on from the what-you-get-when-the-servos-break-down dept.

Roland Piquepaille writes "Wade Roush wrote a long and well-documented article for the Technology Review about this new concept, the immobot, short for "immobile robot." He gives different industrial examples, from NASA to the water utility in Porto Alegre, and from Toyota cars to some new Xerox photocopiers. And he looks at the programming model behind the immobots. No "heuristic" programs here, but model-based programs instead. Check this column for details." The original article has more information.

3 of 92 comments (clear)

  1. IN SOVIET RUSSIA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

    Immobots program programmers

  2. What am I supposed to say now by i_luv_linux · · Score: -1, Troll

    Immobile robots, nice, but what should I say now. Great story, great article. Thank you guys for posting it. Now mod me up please.

  3. go back to school, you moran by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

    Please pardon me for flaming you, but are you going to now redefine how to engineer safe systems for doing control? If you don't understand about control systems, then you have no business talking about how to design one. Do you think that engineers have been f'ing off for the last hundred years? Do you not understand that a PERSON in the control loop is a very vital part of the system. Here are some good reasons:

    1. Provide jobs for workers. That way they don't plot revolution against the rich corporate money mongers who would love to run the world with robots.

    2. Provide control when the robots fail. An important part of engineering is understanding that every system will fail.

    3. Systems are for the benifit of people, and so people should be involved.

    The level of cluelessness in the scientific community astounds me! Do you really expect that you can, through science, do away with the worker?

    If that is your plan than you really are a fool.