Slashdot Mirror
Japan's Proposed 30-Year Robot Program
Gallamine writes "A group of Japanese researchers have proposed a Government plan to spend 50 billion yen per year (that's over 400 million $US) for 30 years on developing a robot with capabilities of a 5-year-old. Japan's current economy may prevent the plan from happening, but the interesting point is the parallels to the U.S. Apollo space program, America's attempt to put a man on the moon. While expensive, the benefits to the American population from that program are probably unmeasurable. Perhaps the U.S. Government should consider funding such a program over here?"
...unless one of their "constituents" (read: Large corporations) see a way to profit from it.
Honey, I shrunk the Cygwin
This isn't the first time Japan is doing one of these long term plans. I watched a program a few years back explaining that japan had several plans like this ("tommorow's world" for people in the UK). Firstly they did a huge investment into transistors then silicon manufacturing and at the time of the program (1995 ish) they were part way through a huge investment into flat screen displays (not even TFT at that stage I dont think).
At the time I was thinking it was a huge mistake. Flat panes were slow, small and hugely expensive and no one would spend extra to have one to replace a better CRT. Im sure people were thinking the same sort of things on the other projects but they sure did pay off.
I'm not sure how Japan figures out what to pick but it seems to work. Maybe they are making very good choices or maybe if you stick enough money into something it will eventually pay off. And as sceptical I am of humanoid robots I can't say this is a silly idea any more.
Mouse powered Chips, Open source Processors and Lego
Way back when ('80s i think) the Japanese Government (MITI) decided that the Prologue language (Proudly Recursive - great for the Tower of Hanoi problem) was to be the basis for the artificial intelligence revolution that they wanted to lead. Don't remember? The problem with planning for the future is it keeps changing.
"Knowing everything doesn't help..."
again:we have to first understand the mechanism of how human brains work
Uhh... so that would be AI, right? That should be easy, I mean no has every tried THAT before!
Ok, 50 billion yen is 422,904,508 USD... half a billion a year. That's a lot... I'd like details though... like is most of this going out in grants? Will they create a new 'department'? HOW will the money be spent? What are the milestones?
Sounds very interesting... but I'm skeptical... AI is the holy grail... and not only do they want the grail, they want a walking talking vessal to put it in.
On the other hand, big plans can lead to big results. Aim for the sky.
Japan has pitched an idea to create in 30 years a a robot with the capacity of a 5 year old child. The idea struck a cord in me, and I decided to take a break and just think on that.
Let's define the nature of the ultimate goal in robots in the business - I'm sure there will be quibbles, but this is my definition:
Ultimate Goal: To create a robot with human level intelligence and physical manipulation without sentience or self awareness.
By this definition, we mean the capacity to learn, to be instructed in tasks and incorporate ideas into itself and understand commands without detail, but without sentience or self awareness, never having emotions or being able to make fully independant decisions about freedom, what to do for itself.
In a word, the ultimate metal slave.
Let's throw ethics out the window for a moment - we'll get to those in a minute. But let's say you could make such a machine. One that you could give orders to "go clean the house", and it would intelligently understand and fulfill your wish without the "evil genie" effect (where a badly ruled wish has unintended consequences - see "The Monkey's Paw" for an example, where you could wish for a million dollars, and you would get it - after your son was killed in an automobile accident and the money was payment from a life insurance policy).
Ignoring if such a goal is possible (and, seeing how far we've come in 100 years, is it so far to reach that in 500 years we would be capable of building such a machine?), let's see what would happen to society.
Employees, especially blue collar, farmers, manufacturing and the like, could be mass produced. A whole army of robots that would work without tire, without pay, and if you could make them mass produced to be cheap (say $20,000 - $40,000 a year), if they break, get a new one. They could work day and night, rotating in 8-12 hour shifts for maintenance and repairs. Farms could be worked all day long, and if there was a problem, robots could go out and fix the issue. Need to pick the cotton/coffee beans? Just hire the robots to go out and do it. Wars fought by machines - never tiring, truly "bloodless" wars where a million "soldiers" could be airdropped into the field loaded with advanced weapons to wipe out the enemy by beings that have no conscience. (Granted, hacking would truly become the greatest weapon in society at that point, but just go with me a moment on the idea.)
Food prices, car prices - hell, prices for everything could actually drop, since the human cost of making them would be negligable. Ah - but for one major problem:
What do the people do?
Millions - let's even say 25% of the work force alone, just to argue - out of work. They're not needed at McDonald's or Ford or even Dell - replaced by machines. So what do they do? Not everybody could work in a robot making factory. Does the world start to become a place where human labor is practically no longer required? Where only a few work because they want to to design new things or create art, while millions simply live a life of leisure? Where everyone is guarunteed a certain level of life and comfort, and those who want more can sell their services of entertainment or some unique idea they are able to create in this new utopia of fully attained basic life for all people?
Or a world where millions can not get work and search but become homeless? If people think that having jobs from their country exported to foreign places willing to do it for less, how will they feel when the factory is still on native soil, but the jobs are for those tireless, non-paid, non-complaining machines? When they can't provide for their children, and the line between "haves" and "have-nots" is larger than ever?
I actually see a lot of promise in the idea - I really do. The benefits to business, to humanity could be huge. But I have the feeling should such a creation actua
52 Weeks, 52 Religions with John Hummel
I must ponder this question: Before we create machines with human-level intelligence, shouldn't we first ask "why?".
As it is, we're running out of human jobs to do (McDonald's for example is toying with the idea of fully-automated vending machines), so what will happen when we can make machines that can work for almost nothing, and start replacing human jobs? And what will happen if and when these machines start thinking by themselves (in which case they will demand rights, just as we do) and if they decide that they don't need us?
I'm not saying we shouldn't do it, I just think we should be careful on _how_ we do it. I'm actually a believer that at some distant point in the future we humans will slowly evolve into machines, and _then_ at that point creating more machines will be a natural thing for us.
So I must ask, should we spend all those billions on machines instead of education? I don't want to sound like a miss universe contestant but right now world peace, world hunger, and world education should be our top priorities.
Again, don't bash me, I'm a true geek, I love machines, robots, AI, etc, it's just that I think we should spend some time thinking about the big issues facing humanity today.
On a related side note, space exploration is probably where I see the best use for robots.
Seriously, thought, what's with all this madness of making robot as close to a human as possible? Humans as such are quite imperfect and while it is quite a nice to impress people around, it's practicall applications are rather fare fetched.
Building robot that can intelligently mowe your lawn (without need for special costly installation), deliver pizza in a building etc.and dynamically react to it's enviroment is much more usefull and almost equally as hard.
These Japan guys should consider if they want to put their money into impressing the world or making usefull, althought not so ipmressive, technology.
"Two beers or not two beers. That's the question." -- Shakesbeer
In one episode of The Simpsons, Homer decides to set up a bar in his garage. Dialog paraphrased:
Scene: Homer is clearing out the garage.
Bart: "Is this one of those projects you start and never finish?"
Homer: "Hey, when I start something, I stick with it to the end!"
Homer removes a box, revealing a pathetic robot with a bucket body and mismatched arms, one made from a broom. It looks exactly like what Homer would come up with if he decided he wanted a robot boy.
Robot: "FA-THER! GIVE ME LEGS!"
Homer: "I thought I told you to clear out!"
He grabs the robot and tosses it into the road.
Robot, trailing modules from his open lower torso, drags himself away. He pauses and looks back, but Homer points firmly down the street.
((Shudder))
* * *
What's great about this vignette: It could have been done in 1964, by "The Other Limits" or "The Twilight Zone," only they would need a full hour.
In the hands of Groening and company, this drama of horrifying pathos gets boiled down into a throw-away segment lasts thirty seconds, tops.
* * *
And, um, to make this topical: Given the Japanese tendency toward faddishness, I fully expect the garbage dumps of Tokyo thirty years down the line to be swarming with last year's model of robot child.
(I actually wrote a story about something similar; American kid discovers that the neighborhood lawn-care robots are repurposed My Buddy Dragon and My Pretty Lioness playmate 'bots, shorn of their cosmetic foam rubber shells and sealed in utilitarian green plastic skins.)
Is that it assumes that with constant progression you can reach a given goal. They set the goal seemingly-low -- "A five year old" -- to make it seem more achievable, when the real problem is that to achieve this it's going to take a paradigm shift in technology. This shift could occur thirty years from now, a hundred years from now, or tomorrow, but it's not something you can put on a schedule.
The idea of setting a "five-year-old" requirement on it is ridiculous, because what we lack is the basic ability to create human-like intelligence in the first place. Once we have that, it will be trivial to make the equivalent of a five year old human (basic sentience), or a fifteen year old human (the peak of human intelligence), or even something beyond that that humans are incapable of achieving (After fifteen years of age or so human intelligence goes into a slow downward slide, though overall capability often goes up thanks to accumulated experience and knowledge. Imagine a being that had equal or greater intelligence to a fifteen year old, but with the knowledge and life experience of a fifty year old!).
It's kind of like the development of the microprocessor. Before we knew how to make one, there was nothing -- but once we had the basic technology to make one, Moore's law kicked in and the capability of microprocessors grew by leaps and bounds. AI will be the same way. Once we have a big breakthrough that allows us to create the first real AI, the technology will progress with incredible rapidity. The problem is that first big breakthrough, and it's not something you can simply budget time and resources for and expect results. You can't put it on a "thirty year plan".
Conceptual Guerilla is a great site with a decidedly leftist political bent that attempts to expose and digest some of the consequences of this new reality. I suggest anyone who's interested in discussing this further to head over to the forums there. I'd also like to thank the Slashdotter who put this link in their sig.
"I assumed blithely that there were no elves out there in the darkness"
I'm not sure how Japan figures out what to pick but it seems to work. Maybe they are making very good choices or maybe if you stick enough money into something it will eventually pay off. And as sceptical I am of humanoid robots I can't say this is a silly idea any more.
One Word: CONSTRUCTION
Although my own insticts in this regard go to smaller construction-bots (say mouse or even cockroach sized), using loosely coupled swarming network communication and behavior to build. Probably cheaper and more powerful. But, let em try... Even if it's a stupid idea, if no one else competes, they will win.
The reason that it can be true that 1+1 > 2 is that very peculiar nonzero value of the + operator
Our children should do nothing for a living.
There isn't any reason to concoct something for them to do.
They should simply be educated on the dangers of over-population and the use of contraceptives and how to operate the robots.
That's it.
"I assumed blithely that there were no elves out there in the darkness"