Study Says 4.1M Domestic Robots In Use By 2007

jangobongo writes "The U.N.'s annual World Robotics Survey for 2004 predicts that there will be a seven-fold surge in household robots by the end of 2007. Robots that mow your lawn, vacuum, wash windows, clean swimming pools, as well as entertainment robots such as Aibo are all vying to take a place in our homes and ease our workload. The study says that Japan is the leader in consumer robotics, with Europe and North America quickly catching up."

Comments

Let me be the first to say...

[metlin]

I, for one, welcome our new lawn mowing window washing swim suit wearing robotic over...err...dogs?

Re:Let me be the first to say...

[swordboy]

Not so fast - read closer:

The U.N.'s annual World Robotics Survey for 2004 predicts that there will be a seven-fold surge in household robots by the end of 2007.

Hmmm... multiply, carry the one... There it is... in 2007, there will be a grand total of SEVEN household robots.

Nothing times a billion is still nothing. I would hardly call it a surge.

Re:Let me be the first to say...

[stecoop]

Nothing times a billion is still nothing

This is true for regular algebra but in calculus there are formulas where even though the regular math proves 0*n = 0; studying points as they approach really close to the numbers will show that sometimes will not be zero. Like sin(x)/x as x -> 0 should be Undefined right? Well as you study the limits on both sides of 0 to infinite "closeness" you'll see that the formula actually equates to 1. Therefore if you had sin(x)/x as x -> 0 * billion it would equal a billion. Weird huh?

Re:Let me be the first to say...

[Stealth Potato]

Therefore if you had sin(x)/x as x -> 0 * billion it would equal a billion.

Um, no it wouldn't. Zero times one billion is still zero. Furthermore, sin(0)/0 does not equal 1, it is undefined. The limit of sin(x)/x as x goes to zero is 1, but that doesn't change the fact that you can't divide by zero. Now, if you take the value of that limit and multiply by 1 billion, the result will be 1 billion, because 1 times 1 billion equals 1 billion. Like this: (lim(sin(x)/x,x,0)*10^9 = 10^9, because the first part (the limit) is equal to one. What you are indicating is the multiplication of the zero, the limiting value for x. Zero times a billion is zero, so you're taking the limit as x approaches zero, which is, surprise surprise, 1.

Time to get

[beacher]

ROBOT INSURANCE!!!!! Because robots have steel claws and they eat old peoples medicine for food!

Yup

[Xpilot]

Just like how they predicted everyone would using flying cars in the 21st century. Yawn.

Re:Yup

[Short Circuit]

But how many years ahead were the predictions? This study says three years. Weren't flying cars predicted for fifty?

In terms of maturity, the technology behind household robots is a lot closer to producing affordable units than that behind flying cars.

Re:Yup

[Firethorn]

Well, you take the expansion of the definition of "robot" to mean any microprocessor controlled mobile mechanical device. If you look at many of these "robots", you find that they're more wonders of doing more with less than intelligent or complex programmed behavior. The robo-vac? Psedeu-random movement with a cliff & bump sensor. It runs over a room enough to be statistically unlikely to miss a spot, but it does it at a cost of covering most spots multiple times.

Re:Yup

[fleener]

Don't blame us if you haven't bought your own flying car yet. Cheap bastard.

Re:Yup

[danila]

Actually robovacs develop very quickly. It is true that the first versions were basically suck-and-bump, but newer models often have rudimentary navigation based on infrared sensors (they do build a mental map of the room) and most newer robots (including Aibos) can locate the charger (the most important feature for their autonomy). The newest Roomba can "see" dirt underneath and understand in which areas it needs to suck most, so to speak.

Another type of robots

[Underholdning]

They forgot sex robots. Add a bit of movement and AI to a RealDoll and you will have a bestseller.
(I'm only partially kidding.)

Re:Another type of robots

[MikeDX]

I'm not. I for one welcome our Artificially inteligent Latex overl. erm... ladies?

Yeah, right

[Tyndmyr]

I love these drastic studies... Sure, it might make sense for people to do that, but since when has the general population had more than two brain cells in use at a time?

I predict painfully slow progress in robotics, and a vast increase in tech support when they first become prevailent.

perspective pleeze

[lottameez]

From the article: "robots will ...carry out surgery..."

And you people are worried about e-voting? How about e-i-just-lost-my-ear-lobe-due-to-a-software-glitch -in-the-dr.-kildare-robot?

What is a robot?

[Laur]

What exactly is the definition of a robot here? Why is a machine that washes your dishes an "appliance" while a machine that mows your lawn is a "robot"? How about washers/dryers (some even have advanced computer control)? What if you put a sophisticated computer in a toaster or a fridge? Where is the line drawn?

Re:What is a robot?

[Hittite Creosote]

When the machine that washes the dirty dishes comes and collects them from the table first, then you can call it a robot.

Re:What is a robot?

[BrK]

I think it is considered a robot if it can move from Point A to Point B under it's own power and logic control ("logic" might just be recalling a pre-programmed pattern from a storage device, etc). Or also, if it stays in place, but can manipulate other objects about.

An appliance can have a large degree of intelligence, but is generally an object that does not move about after installation.

Ie: a dishwasher that plays chess on a screen is an "appliance". A dishwasher that plays chess by actually moving the pieces about on the board (via articulated arms, etc) is a "robot".

alternative article on UN report...with more links

[museumpeace]

2004.10.20: UN predicts much wider use of robots
An Associated Press report [via yahoo] of United Nations Study on robots is predicting robust increases in the use of robots both for both domestic and industrial uses. If you googled for this news you would find similar reports each year going back a ways. Here is the PDF straight from the UN. What makes this news is that its the UN talking, not some manufacturer's press release and that the numbers are more sanguine than ever:

"There are now some 21,000 "service robots" in use, carrying out tasks such as milking cows, handling toxic waste, ferrying medicine around hospitals and assisting surgeons. The number is set to reach a total of 75,000 by 2007, the study says."

But is there a job in this "boom" for any of us?

For comparison here is last year's report, tidied up by your favorite submitter, Roland Click-appeal [hey, at least he RTFA!].

what will the kiddies do then?

[Anonymous Coward]

Robots that mow your lawn, vacuum, wash windows, clean swimming pools

I thought this was why people had kids.

Re:what will the kiddies do then?

[catherder_finleyd]

The kids will still have jobs programming the robots:

"Hey Son, How do you program this thing? It's still flashing 12:00!"

Satanic Robot Chicks Again

[zenmojodaddy]

I may have mentioned this before, but Anton LaVey suggested that the next big industry will be the production of robotic companions, because they can be programmed to provide the exact type of stimulation or gratification that the user requires, thus avoiding the need to interact with real people who are imperfect at best.

Natch, the Slashdot model will look like Princess Leia, know how to handle a soldering iron, and talk about how great Linux is. Or something...

There may also be an easily-repairable Wesley Crusher model for those 'GNYAR!' moments. Or Jar Jar Binks. Or that ultimate nightmare, Jar Jar Crusher.

four million robotses...

[gomel]

... and none have the three Laws of Robotniks programmed in.
I smell trouble.

Robot, it ain't what you think it is

[(SM) Spacemonkey]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robot
At first this may seem a pointless karma whore link to wikipedia, but I have a point.

When you talk to the average person about Robots, they think of that terrible Robin Williams movie, or more recently I,Robot (the movie, not the terrific book). The point is, the term "robot" conjures up thoughts of artifical humans. However the strick definition of a robot is a machine automated to perform tasks in the place of humans. This is why I get disappointed reading articles like this, I go in with the anticipation of every geek. "Sex robots by 2007!" Ok maybe female geeks want cuddle robots... Anyway instead we get stuck with.... lawn mowers, and pretend dogs?

Robots for autistic childeren

[SmallFurryCreature]

Saw a bit on tv about robots designed to deal with autistic childeren. These kids find human interaction far to complex to the point where they just give up and stay in their own world.

What they need is something to play with them but in an extremely simple ruleset. They don't understand lies and half-lies let alone jokes. Human caretakers can't descend that low (we are talking well below the social skills of even a pet) but robots can. They can be programmed with a very simple ruleset of play and repeat this over and over again.

So for these kids at least the future of robotic playmates is now. They don't need massive advances in AI, the exact opposite infact. The total predictabilty of current AI is exactly what they need.

Very prescient

[esconsult1]

I was reading Marshall Brain's essays on the subject yesterday when I caught a gander at the news story.

Check out the series of essays on:

• Manna software that "runs" service oriented businesses, therefore driving down wages
• Robotic Nation about how robots are slowly taking over "routine" type jobs.

I'm sure this was covered in Slashdot sometime before, but Marshall's essays are eerie when juxtaposed with this article.

Re:maybe it's just me

[DLR]

Buy a goat?

As a disabled person myself

[pair-a-noyd]

I would like to have some of the auto-cleaning robots, like the roomba
and the Robomaid

to help me out around the house. It's almost impossible for me to do housework. Having a large dog makes housework even harder, what with the hair problem. I can not sweep, vacuum, mop, etc..

I think they should classify these devices as assistance devices for disabled/handicapped people because I can't afford them as I'm sure many other disabled/handicapped are on very tight budgets like myself. It would be nice to get them covered like scooters and wheelchairs are..

I won't be holding my breath though..