Slashdot Mirror
Robodex 2003 Shows Robots Ready for Work & Play
Roland Piquepaille writes "Robodex 2003 was held last week in Yokohama, Japan. At this show 38 companies, colleges and other organizations introduced more than 90 different types of robot. Many were designed to handle tasks too dangerous for humans and assist people in their daily lives. In this column, you'll find a selection of articles and short quotes about this trade show which attracted about 70,000 visitors. I also built my own Robodex 2003 Fashion Show (the whole page weighs 172KB). You'll find there pictures of many new robots, including Banryu, developed by Tmsuk, Inc., which will control your home while you're away, Doki, the world's first gender-aware robot, built by Intelligent Earth, from Scotland, or the Comet III, a one ton mine-clearance robot from Chiba University. There are also pictures of new machines from Sony, Mitsubishi or Fujitsu among others."
Many were designed to handle tasks too dangerous for humans and assist people in their daily lives.
Call me when they make one that will fetch my beer
I would expect such blatant racism on Fark, but on Slashdot? Mods please ban this asshole.
New generation hackers, break into the robot while someone is away and have him unlock all the doors and the safes in the house
Call me a skeptic, but I don't like robots doing too many tasks, let's not forget human's make robots, and some humans are crooked, so who knows when you will end up with an influence robot?
Posting useless rant since 2003.
Some of these guys are tethered, but for those that aren't I'd really love to know what they're using for power, and how long these robots can continue to run. I can't seem to find much (except for Asimo, which uses NiMh batts). Anybody else find some more solid specs?
Roving Web-Teleoperated Robot
MS-Robot EULA
*The robot is not your property. MS owns and controls it except where you are given permission by MS to control it. Controlling it except as permitted by MS is illegal under the DMCA. Everything the robot does is your responsibility, no matter if you controlled it or if MS did. You are criminally responsible for anything your robot does. You will not sue MS or defame MS in any way. You will acknoledge that you solely controlled the robot to do everything it does, even though you didn't. The robot's parts are warrented for 30 days. We cannot be responsible for damage related to operation of the robot, however. The function of the robot is not warrented in any way. You may not replace any major parts of the robot without buying another license. If a major part is replaced, it will be considered, at MS's sole determination, a new robot. If MS considers it a new robot, you agree to pay $500 to continue using it. Making your robot interact with other robots requires RALs. (robot access licenses) Allowing robots to interact in any way without the proper number of RALs is illegal, and you will be prosecuted.
I'm sure most of you herehave heard of Asimov's three laws of robotics.
The Three Laws of Robotics are:
1. A robot may not injure a human being, or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm.
2. A robot must obey the orders given it by human beings except where such orders would conflict with the First Law.
3. A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Law.
My question is: when do robots become capable enough that we start worrying about them having ethics programmed into them? We already have robots that can walk around and watch the house. When do we start to worry that they're dangerous? Do we wait until they've hurt someone?
Beware of he who would deny you access to information, for in his heart he dreams himself your master. -Commissioner Lal
here i am. brain the size of a planet and they ask me to go and fetch their beer. i wont enjoy it you know. oh im so depressed...
this sig steers like a cow. and i can prove it
Asimov's laws are based on an anthropomorphic view of artificial intelligence. They assume that robots will "think" in such a way that they can follow instructions provided in the form of "ethical principles."
It turns out that cost-effective robots are cost-effective because they've been reduced to the minimum amount of motions, brains, etc. to do a specialized task. And no robots think in a way that would make Asimov's Laws (or Tesuka's Laws) particularly relevant.
In reality, it's a lot simpler and safer to run the robot inside a safety cage that keeps people from wandering into it.
Jon Acheson
All opinions expressed herein are my own, and not those of my employers, who are appalled.
Where are the BuffyBots?
I'd settle for a Cherry 2000, but that model is outdated already.
You can't take the sky from me...