Slashdot Mirror


Robot Makers Say World Cup Will Be Theirs By 2050

mindpixel writes "The Scotsman is reporting that the Japanese are very confident they can build a robotic team that will win the World Cup by 2050 using a descendent of the 38cm tall VisiON which operates completely independently of human input, making its own decisions based on information that it perceives with its 360 degree vision, and is able to recognise the football, approach it and deliver a hefty kick. It is also able to identify an opponent and shield the ball in much the same way as a human player does."

345 comments

  1. im going to watch that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny


    in my flying car !

    1. Re:im going to watch that by ftzdomino · · Score: 1

      Sorry, you'll have to wait a little longer. In 2050, your flying car will still be 20 years away.

    2. Re:im going to watch that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And so will Longhorn.

    3. Re:im going to watch that by Rod+Beauvex · · Score: 1

      And don't forget Duke Nukem Forever.

    4. Re:im going to watch that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      and windows will be secure and bug free

    5. Re:im going to watch that by the_mad_poster · · Score: 0

      No, Duke Nukem Forever will still be....

      Fuck, how do I type the mobius strip character on this stupid keyboard?

      --
      Alito: A vote for Alito is a punch in the eye to put that bitch back in her place!
    6. Re:im going to watch that by kesler · · Score: 0

      Hopefully your car isn't running Windows 2049 and the robots are...

    7. Re:im going to watch that by Oktober+Sunset · · Score: 1

      http://www.moller.com/skycar/ you have one of these?

  2. It reads so much better... by mikeophile · · Score: 0

    When you replace the word "football" with "head".

    1. Re:It reads so much better... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What is this world cup? Soccer? Is that even a sport? Stupid game if you ask me.

    2. Re:It reads so much better... by paranode · · Score: 1

      Or with "soccer ball" for the Americans among us. :)

    3. Re:It reads so much better... by imbert · · Score: 1

      So, Brazilians are teaching Football (Futebol or soccer whatever you like) to the Japaneses. And few crazy engineers are DREAMMING to have robots able to play soccer with "humans". Poor Japaneses! Today Brazil wont 5 World Cups (so 20 years in a row just to cacth up with the Brazilians numbers). Where is the Love? Robots sucks!

    4. Re:It reads so much better... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      it's called wop hockey

    5. Re:It reads so much better... by Fionn21 · · Score: 1

      The problem with human players is consistency. For example robots don't get sick (unless you count software viruses), won't get injured/damaged as easily as human players, and don't have hangovers (unless someone invents robot intoxicants in the the next 30yrs, nothing's impossible). Also they won't have out rageous pay demands, have tantrums, fall out with team mates, get into pitch battles, bar brawls, sex scandals, etc. All in all, robot players would seem to have quite a few advantages over human players (at least most current generation ones). The Brazilians may be helping greating a monster that will come back to haunt them, especially given the fact that there is no guarantee [unless you get into areas like genetic engineering] that the Brazilian World Cup team of 2050 will be a team of greats. Remember, like all countries, Brazil has had both great teams, and truly terrible teams, as well as those that fall in between. Just my two cents on the subject.

    6. Re:It reads so much better... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It reads so much better...When you replace the word "football" with "head".

      Yes, a robot that gives head *does* sound much better.

  3. Mascot? by larry2k · · Score: 0

    And who/what will be the mascot? the AIBO? the Robosapien?

    --

    The package said "Windows XP or better. Pentium Class Processor or better"... So I got a Mac with OS X

    1. Re:Mascot? by ackthpt · · Score: 1
      And who/what will be the mascot? the AIBO? the Robosapien?

      Dunno, but...

      The team manager will probably be Sir Alex Fergustron

      /dev/null the goalkeeper

      --

      A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
    2. Re:Mascot? by masonry · · Score: 1

      Nah the mascot for a robot team would have to be a human. I am picking Pele!!

    3. Re:Mascot? by uncoveror · · Score: 1
      Maybe their mascot will be Scruffy the Roomba.

      It would not surprise me at all to see robots winning soccer tournaments. They are already making a big splash in teen pop.

      --
      The Uncoveror: It's the real news.
  4. Umm, rules anyone/ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well if the damn thing can see 360 degrees at once, that's not really fair, is it?

    1. Re:Umm, rules anyone/ by Alkaiser · · Score: 1

      Yeah...but can a robot player take a dive? We'll be shooting penalty shots all day long.

      --
      Netjak.com independent reviews of domestic & import video ga
    2. Re:Umm, rules anyone/ by nyekulturniy · · Score: 3, Funny

      Can they train a robot to roll on the ground, screaming "My support units!" in hope of drawing a penalty shot?

      Maybe the Italian robots.

      --
      Nyekulturniy... Proudly confusing readers and editors since 1981!
    3. Re:Umm, rules anyone/ by maxwell+demon · · Score: 1

      Well, for robots they could also replace the hands with a second pair of feet. That would give the robots another distinct advantage (no hand play possible!).

      Also, if they kick the ball with enough force, the goal keeper will leave the goal in his own interest (I think even severe injury from being hit by a ball doesn't count as foul).

      --
      The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
    4. Re:Umm, rules anyone/ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      or they could just equip them all with machine guns and forget about that stupid game and all those stupid rules. let god sort em out.

    5. Re:Umm, rules anyone/ by Amer · · Score: 1

      Dude, if I had mod points, I'd give all of them to you. That was +25 FUNNY.

      --
      -- To gain that which is worth having, it may be necessary to lose everything else. Bernadette Devlin McAliskey
    6. Re:Umm, rules anyone/ by Alkaiser · · Score: 1

      Then the robo-trainer will come by with his "magic spray" and the robot, who had ruptured an actuator a second ago, will be able to shake off the damage and get back in the game.

      Nah. It'd take way too long for these subtleties to work out.

      Plus...how do you use your body to shield the ball from other players when they can just jump over you? These things are 30-some cm tall. Personally, on the attack, I'd just blast the ball straight at the nearest defender.

      Hoho! Robot down, indeed.

      --
      Netjak.com independent reviews of domestic & import video ga
  5. Sure by slobber · · Score: 3, Funny

    Just replace players with tanks and the cup is yours!

    --
    "You mortals are so obtuse." -Q
    1. Re:Sure by emjoi_gently · · Score: 1

      Exactly! I was going to say Steamrollers, but tanks will do.
      Line up a dozen side by side on the ground, and just send them forwards..... not much AI required there.

    2. Re:Sure by mboverload · · Score: 3, Insightful

      People dont seem to GET the challenges of AI, hell, getting a freakign robot to WALK took us DECADES. Now they want them to play soccer? This is flying cars all over again.

    3. Re:Sure by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      I was going to say Steamrollers

      I don't think they actually use steam anymore.

    4. Re:Sure by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's so much easier to just levitate a train.

    5. Re:Sure by FleaPlus · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Now they want them to play soccer? This is flying cars all over again.

      Psst... they already do play soccer:

      http://www.robocup.org/02.html

    6. Re:Sure by GuardianAngus · · Score: 1

      Um, that flying car thing has a bit of precedence as well - the idea just needs to take off.
      Commercially speaking, that is.

    7. Re:Sure by nauvillain · · Score: 1

      If you call this playing soccer. Robots roll, there seems to be a magnet to keep the ball, the ball always rolls, the pitch is perfect, there is no body contact. Nobody's moving except the one with the ball.
      Even if the mechanics part of handling & vizualizing the ball with body contacts, obstacles, imperfect pitch with varying bouncing conditions (due to water also)... if this is possible in 2050 (which I doubt), there will still need to be a decision algorithm, and that is not likely to happen. Ask all the soccer coaches in the world, you will have a different answer each time.

      For the basics of soccer, I agree it can be done. To master it, is something else.

  6. But... by dougw101 · · Score: 1

    will FIFA let them play?

    1. Re:But... by all+your+mwbassguy+a · · Score: 2, Funny

      theres nothing in the rulebook that says a mule^H^H^H^Hrobot cant play.

    2. Re:But... by Class+Act+Dynamo · · Score: 1

      Hmmm, robots playing soccer. "My nipples are hard just THINKING about it..."

      --
      My other computer is a Jacquard loom.
  7. What about feigning Injuries?? by TheShadowHawk · · Score: 5, Funny

    Will the robots also be able to fall down and scream in 'agony' when the opposition barely nicks them in the hope of getting a easy penalty?

    --
    Friends don't let Friends use Internet Explorer.
    1. Re:What about feigning Injuries?? by grub · · Score: 2, Interesting


      I was wondering about the 3 "rules" of robotics. Namely will these robots not get aggressive in their gameplay to avoid harming a human being? If they move out of the way to prevent hurting an oncoming player then the only thing they'll have going for them is the goalie.

      --
      Trolling is a art,
    2. Re:What about feigning Injuries?? by KiloByte · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I'm sorry, but the "3 rules of robotics" are just some do-gooder blabbing that no one cares about the slightest.

      In fact, military purposes are one of key fields for robots.

      --
      The creatures outside looked from Alt-Right to Antifa; but already it was impossible to say which was which.
    3. Re:What about feigning Injuries?? by CanSpice · · Score: 1

      You realize that the three rules of robotics are fictional, right?

    4. Re:What about feigning Injuries?? by Dizzle · · Score: 1

      The rule doesn't cover hurt feelings. Presumably the robot would be able to steal the ball much more effectively than a human, probably without contact at all. Or at least contact that would cause harm.

      --
      -Dizzle
      "I most likely AM so interested in myself."
    5. Re:What about feigning Injuries?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Perhaps we should outlaw humans playing soccer because it's so dangerous, and only allow robots to play.

    6. Re:What about feigning Injuries?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I wasn't talking about the movie "I, Robot" but what Asimov wrote and (maybe) people would adhere to.

    7. Re:What about feigning Injuries?? by SubtleNuance · · Score: 4, Funny

      If they make them in Italy - yes.

    8. Re:What about feigning Injuries?? by imr · · Score: 5, Funny

      No, they won't, they're japanese robots.
      The italian robots, tho', will fall without anyone in a 1,5m radius.
      The argentinian robots will use their hands, and they will have 8 of them.
      The german robots will be be very fair ... as long as they win the game, if they are loosing around 15 mns before the end, they will begin to break the other robots legs.
      The french robots will have so much cosmetics enhancements because of all the commercials they play in, that they will be barely able to run.
      The british team wont have a robot goalkeeper.
      The us robots will make everybody laugh but nobody will show it. Despite their advanced design (and the heavy armor of the goalkeeper) their programmation will be terrible. They wont get anything of the game and will err randomly on the field and will even fall when there isnt anybody in a 5 meters radius. Yet the referees will still continue to be really really nice to them since the fifa will still want the us market.
      As for Brasil, they won't have any robots but real players and will continue to win.

    9. Re:What about feigning Injuries?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You know that Asimov wrote "I, Robot" (the book) right?

    10. Re:What about feigning Injuries?? by superpulpsicle · · Score: 1

      LOL LOL.

      Brazil will still win with a secondary human roster.

      US will show up with football players with pads and an american football robot.

      English robots will have to carry 10x the armor to protect themselves from insane crowds who try to light them on fire.

    11. Re:What about feigning Injuries?? by QuantumG · · Score: 1

      nah, the do-gooders are the ones that want to give robots rights equivalent to a human as soon as some crackpot codes into them the ability to say "I don't want to be a slave".

      --
      How we know is more important than what we know.
    12. Re:What about feigning Injuries?? by Frogbert · · Score: 1

      I, for one, would be happy if militaries poured their money into robotic soldiers. Perhaps one day all wars would be fought with robotics and human casualities would be a fraction of what they were before. Unlikely I know, but perhaps...

    13. Re:What about feigning Injuries?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That would be a sad day. One of the biggest preventers of wars is fear of casualties and the political damage those casualties do to the government. take that away and we move ever closer to extinction as war becomes to easy and far to impersonal. Making war against another country SHOULD have grave consequences.

    14. Re:What about feigning Injuries?? by Sebadude · · Score: 1

      Yes, but only the Italian version will have that feature.

      --
      Eh.
    15. Re:What about feigning Injuries?? by Epistax · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Well, I would ask you at what point a robot is equal to a person. I mean in theory if you took a computer right now and simulated an entire real brain (real simulation talking here, I assume atom level up will do it but I may be wrong) you'll have something that is just as much thinking as anyone else, and certainly has no less consciousness, just people will demean it because they know an easy way to pull the plug. Of course if one day that's you, you may not want them to pull it.

      So yeah, if someone programs something to say "I don't want to be a slave", it's meaningless. Then again if your superultratron vacuum cleaner starts painting abstract landscapes and dreams of visiting London, that's different. It's quite unlikely we'll be letting vacuum cleaners get that far.. well then again look at cell phones.

    16. Re:What about feigning Injuries?? by QuantumG · · Score: 1

      exactly, and if your vacuum cleaner did do that you'd return it to the store cause it was "acting funny" and they'd melt the fucker down and give you a new one.

      --
      How we know is more important than what we know.
    17. Re:What about feigning Injuries?? by Flamingcheeze · · Score: 2, Insightful
      "That would be a sad day. One of the biggest preventers of wars is fear of casualties and the political damage those casualties do to the government. take that away and we move ever closer to extinction as war becomes to easy and far to impersonal. Making war against another country SHOULD have grave consequences."

      Curious... if there are no/low casualties resulting from this politically-correct warfare, how, exactly, will that lead to extinction? We can't have "safe" wars, because it would be too dangerous? I'm confused...

      --
      The Philosophy of Liberty | lewrockwell.com
    18. Re:What about feigning Injuries?? by Epistax · · Score: 1

      Would you do that with your kid? Or someone you hired? How come whenever anything new comes along we get a great "ism" against it, persecute it for awhile, then after about a hundred to a thousand years accept it?

      If you don't want to treat something as an intelligent being, don't make it an intelligent being. That's my guess as to how things will be done. I don't want to be born a silicon shell on this planet any time soon.

    19. Re:What about feigning Injuries?? by HybridJeff · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Well I disagree with you on that one. Robotic soldiers would result in more death, not less. Robotic soldiers would allow rich countries to wage war much more freely, as there would be no body bags coming home, and much less public resistance towards the war. This would result in more wars, with more civilian casulties, all be it fewer deaths of invading soldiers since they would mostly be robotic.

    20. Re:What about feigning Injuries?? by QuantumG · · Score: 1

      Something tells me that if you're making a vacuum cleaner you're not trying to make something intelligent and if you do so "accidentally" then you best kill it before doomsday comes knocking. What a silly conversation.

      --
      How we know is more important than what we know.
    21. Re:What about feigning Injuries?? by Jeremi · · Score: 1
      Curious... if there are no/low casualties resulting from this politically-correct warfare, how, exactly, will that lead to extinction?


      Perhaps not so many people die from the fighting, but lots of people end up dying from the resulting destruction of the environment, money that was diverted away from other necessary purposes, etc. And of course there is no guarantee that someone wouldn't program their robots to kill the people of the other side, if they thought it would help them to do so...

      --


      I don't care if it's 90,000 hectares. That lake was not my doing.
    22. Re:What about feigning Injuries?? by uncoveror · · Score: 1

      Even in Asimov's I Robot, the novel that gave us the laws of robotics, robots didn't obey them.

      --
      The Uncoveror: It's the real news.
    23. Re:What about feigning Injuries?? by Stealth+Potato · · Score: 1

      Well, there's the fact that in almost any war, civilian casualties usually account for most of the deaths. Somehow I doubt war can be made less brutal with more deadly technology. One Richard Gatling thought that once, I recall...

    24. Re:What about feigning Injuries?? by pclminion · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Great, so we'll have fields of robots blasting each other. Then what? Whoever has more robots at the end wins?

      What exactly is the point of war if people don't die?

    25. Re:What about feigning Injuries?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Good point

    26. Re:What about feigning Injuries?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yep, and if your slave starts organizing the others, you best kill him before you've get a revolution on your hands.

    27. Re:What about feigning Injuries?? by clem · · Score: 1

      Even more nagging is the question: Will robotic football holligans be rioting in the streets afterwards?

      --
      Your courageous and selfless spelling corrections have made me a better person.
    28. Re:What about feigning Injuries?? by fedork · · Score: 2, Funny

      No. US robots will fail because they will forget to convert feet to meters.

      --
      ...remember good 'ol times when IP used to mean Internet Protocol....
    29. Re:What about feigning Injuries?? by Red+Pointy+Tail · · Score: 1


      Actually, isn't it that they were obeyed, but due to interpretation of the laws and circumstances, have contradictory consequences? Say like being able to kill Hitler because in the long run you save even more people?

    30. Re:What about feigning Injuries?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      er, there is no such thing as the british team...

    31. Re:What about feigning Injuries?? by niker · · Score: 1

      Hooligans will bring portable EMP generators :-)

      --
      Moderators: Don't agree? pray tell why.
    32. Re:What about feigning Injuries?? by El+Torico · · Score: 1

      No, these are Japanese robot players, not Italian.

      --
      In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is usually crucified.
    33. Re:What about feigning Injuries?? by zero_offset · · Score: 1

      Would you do that with your kid? Or someone you hired?

      No, but I'd damned sure do it to a rented vacuum cleaner with delusions of grandeur.

      --

      Slashdot quality declines as the number of hot grits posts decreases. - Provolt's Law, Apr-09-2005

    34. Re:What about feigning Injuries?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ok.... So what happens when a country runs out of robots?

      what happens if they start using people?

      what happens when a population turns against the invading/ocuppying(matter of opinion) force?

      whats to stop the owners of the robots "defending" them? After all they will probibly not be cheep

      Robotic warfare will not result in lower casualties... because until there is destruction there is no reason to surrender.

      War without cost to both sides is without purpose, if only one side has to pay a cost then we risk a return to the days of imperialism.

      The biggest problems come from the inequality of war, if all sides had robots then maybe you could have safer wars, if all parties were rational (not that likely as we have many "rouge" states already).

    35. Re:What about feigning Injuries?? by mmkkbb · · Score: 2, Funny

      During the World Cup 2002, there was an editorial cartoon with a little boy watching television:

      BOY: LES BLEUS, they...they scored!
      HIS DAD: Relax kid, it's only a commercial.

      (for the ignorant, the French team, the defending world cup champions, did not score a single goal during the world cup finals!)

      --
      -mkb
    36. Re:What about feigning Injuries?? by lonesome+phreak · · Score: 1

      Exactly. And since I am Emperial Citizen, I see absolutly no problem with that. Robots building robots, flying them right into Iraq...indeed, it will be a glorious day for the Empire!

      --
      Maybe we DID take the blue pill. You wouldn't remember anyway.
    37. Re:What about feigning Injuries?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Something tells me that if you're making a vacuum cleaner you're not trying to make something intelligent

      Roomba?

    38. Re:What about feigning Injuries?? by OwnedByTwoCats · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It's not just the soldiers that die. The US invasion and occupation of Iraq, ordered by George Bush, killed 10,000 to 100,000 civilians.

      If he were the leader of almost any other country, he'd be in the dock at the Hague awaiting a War Crimes trial.

    39. Re:What about feigning Injuries?? by Mysticalfruit · · Score: 1

      I agree.

      No vacuum cleaner company is ever going to build a vacuum cleaner robot that is any smarter than the minimum it needs to complete it's job. I don't need a vacuum cleaner that's capable of indepenent thought. I need a vacuum cleaner that's just smart enough to go move a chair out of the way so it can vacuum under it and then move the chair back.

      --
      Yes Francis, the world has gone crazy.
    40. Re:What about feigning Injuries?? by vidnet · · Score: 1
      No body bags, but think of all the duct taped cardboard boxes!

      Free positronic emitters for those who care to dig through them though, it won't be all bad.

    41. Re:What about feigning Injuries?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      20/20 hindsight :(.

    42. Re:What about feigning Injuries?? by dmh20002 · · Score: 1

      whats a 'meter'?

    43. Re:What about feigning Injuries?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      just as a slaver would do to an 'upitty nigger'.

    44. Re:What about feigning Injuries?? by Fjornir · · Score: 1
      --
      I want a new world. I think this one is broken.
    45. Re:What about feigning Injuries?? by Oktober+Sunset · · Score: 1

      hooligans attack each other, not the players. Of course all the monkey chants will be replaced by people making 'robot noises' whenever a robot player gets the ball.

    46. Re:What about feigning Injuries?? by QuantumG · · Score: 1

      Roomba is barely as intelligent as a cockroach. And they're too damn noisy.

      --
      How we know is more important than what we know.
    47. Re:What about feigning Injuries?? by Flamingcheeze · · Score: 1

      That hasn't always been the case. For a while, the western world's wars mostly spared civilians. That all ended some time in the 19th century, as in the American Civil War, which saw the deliberate and savage targeting of civilian populations as a tactic.

      --
      The Philosophy of Liberty | lewrockwell.com
    48. Re:What about feigning Injuries?? by Flamingcheeze · · Score: 1

      All of that pretty much eliminates the central point of the original argument, does it not?

      --
      The Philosophy of Liberty | lewrockwell.com
    49. Re:What about feigning Injuries?? by HybridJeff · · Score: 1

      Quick, get into the duct tape business now! Its going to go through the roof.

  8. Comment by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Will Smith was not available for a comment at the time...

  9. Hmmm... by identity0 · · Score: 1

    How convienient - team sets outrageously ambitious goal, deadline is after everyone involved will have retired...

    Maybe they should volunteer to help Bush make a colony on Mars while they're at it.

    1. Re:Hmmm... by murdocj · · Score: 1

      I'm reminded of the Japanese 5th generation AI / language project of the 90s... that was going to somehow revolutionize everything. Anyone hear about that in the last few years?

    2. Re:Hmmm... by Marxist+Hacker+42 · · Score: 1

      Not too terribly ambitious- Sunday's Scientific American Frontiers had the current Robotic World Cup, a miniaturized version of this, and I've got to say, the current state of the art as far as game theory was quite impressive (as well as some of the hardware- one American team had a backspin roller on the front of their bots that meant that the bot could actually autonomously "pull" a ball out of a corner on the modified foosball table they were using for a field). I have NO doubt at all that 2050 is a realistic goal date for a robotic team playing against humans wining the world cup. Of course, long before then, they'll be stocking the shelves at your local costco.

      --
      SJW: a person who perceives an injustice, and while correcting it, commits a greater injustice.
    3. Re:Hmmm... by tuxter · · Score: 1

      How convienient - team sets outrageously ambitious goal, deadline is after everyone involved will have retired...
      Or shuffled off this mortal coil.....

    4. Re:Hmmm... by woah · · Score: 2, Informative
      I'm reminded of the Japanese 5th generation AI / language project of the 90s... that was going to somehow revolutionize everything. Anyone hear about that in the last few years?

      You mean this?

    5. Re:Hmmm... by chris_mahan · · Score: 1

      What do you mean playing against a human team? Your robots will play against my robots.

      I suppose the Windows 2050 "Processors" will get trounced in the quarterfinals by the Linux 2050 "Beowulf Clusters" 5-1, to the delight of the fans watching on cornea-integrated-media-delivery systems.

      Of course, same robots will be busy eradicating the last of mankind to "restore peace and democracy" in the "digital world."

      --

      "Piter, too, is dead."

    6. Re:Hmmm... by GreyWolf3000 · · Score: 2, Funny

      Announcer:

      And Tux, who's come off of a left paddle injury with tremendous intensity here in the quarterfinals, takes the ball down the field. Score is still tied 0-0 with just twelve seconds on the clock to do it for the second half....He gets past Beastie with an impressive stutter step....HE GETS IN RANGE....THE GOALIE GETS DOWN....DO YOU BELIEVE IN MIRACLES?

      Let's check our official Netcraft judges panel--and they're going to count it! *BSD is dead!

      --
      Slashdot: Where people pretend to be twice as smart as they really are by behaving like children.
    7. Re:Hmmm... by Marxist+Hacker+42 · · Score: 1

      What do you mean playing against a human team? Your robots will play against my robots.

      The dream (perhaps not in this article, but in the SAF show I saw) was not to play against other robots- but rather to one day play against, and beat, a human team.

      I suppose the Windows 2050 "Processors" will get trounced in the quarterfinals by the Linux 2050 "Beowulf Clusters" 5-1, to the delight of the fans watching on cornea-integrated-media-delivery systems.

      Of course they will- the Windows 2050 team will be stuck on BSOD.

      Of course, same robots will be busy eradicating the last of mankind to "restore peace and democracy" in the "digital world."

      Ah, you watched sci-fi channel while you were typing this....

      --
      SJW: a person who perceives an injustice, and while correcting it, commits a greater injustice.
  10. That's smart by thesatch · · Score: 1

    So when they tackle thier opponents, they'll just rip that person's legs right off!

  11. Autonomous robots and the dangers thereof by IO+ERROR · · Score: 1
    One area that researchers are not keen on tackling, however, is robot armies. "Down through human history, the weapon that has caused the most deaths has been the knife, so all technology has a risk, but what we do with this technology is up to human beings," Mr Ishiguro said. "I don't think the idea of robot armies is a good one, but that's not my decision."

    He also dodges the question of a robot insurrection, a possibility that will not have escaped anyone in the industry after the release of the Will Smith film I, Robot. "All these advanced technologies have an element of risk and we can warn of the dangerous aspects of robots in human society," Mr Ishiguro shrugs, "but cars, for example, successfully collaborate with humans and have been safely integrated into society.

    Yeah, but cars aren't fully autonomous. These robots certainly appear to be. Even if they're only playing football (and that's soccer to the Americans), they certainly could be programmed to do other things. And I'm still not discounting the possibility of AI being created within my lifetime.

    --
    How am I supposed to fit a pithy, relevant quote into 120 characters?
    1. Re:Autonomous robots and the dangers thereof by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Yeah, but cars aren't fully autonomous.

      But they should be. Think how many people die on our highways -- way more than americans killed by terrorists -- and yet we're blowing money armor plating cars there, but not here.

      If we had autonomous cars, that I could say "drive me to work" and it'd just do it safely -- that would save far far more lives than autonomous-cars-with-mental-problems-going-crazy would take.

  12. Physical contact by Asterixian · · Score: 5, Interesting

    So what happens when one of the human players on the other team does a slide tackle on the robot? Does the robot fall down? Does the robot get damaged? Does the human get injured? IANASP, but it seems like physical contact between opposing players is so common that replacing man with machine is either clumsy, scary, or both.

    1. Re:Physical contact by IO+ERROR · · Score: 2, Insightful
      So what happens when one of the human players on the other team does a slide tackle on the robot? Does the robot fall down? Does the robot get damaged? Does the human get injured? IANASP, but it seems like physical contact between opposing players is so common that replacing man with machine is either clumsy, scary, or both.

      It's a foot and a half (38cm) tall and weighs five pounds (2.4kg)! I'm no physicist, but I can imagine what would happen.

      --
      How am I supposed to fit a pithy, relevant quote into 120 characters?
    2. Re:Physical contact by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      IANASP? "I am not a scientist person"?

    3. Re:Physical contact by Asterixian · · Score: 1

      IANASP = I am not a soccer player.

    4. Re:Physical contact by Jane_the_Great · · Score: 1, Troll
      "It's a foot and a half (38cm) tall and weighs five pounds (2.4kg)!"
      IT does not exist. They said they'd be creating this football player as a descendent of the robot you cite. It is intellectually dishonest to reply with such an answer.
      --
      THIS ACCOUNT IS OFFICIALLY RETIRED/RETARDED.
    5. Re:Physical contact by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Does the robot fight back?

    6. Re:Physical contact by zCyl · · Score: 1

      It is intellectually dishonest to reply with such an answer.

      And/or funny.

    7. Re:Physical contact by WillDraven · · Score: 1

      I read it as "I Am Not A Sports Physician" which would be even more relvant IMO.

      --
      This is my sig. There are many like it but this one is mine.
    8. Re:Physical contact by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > IANASP

      Faggot.

    9. Re:Physical contact by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well it makes more sense than "I Am Not A Slashdot Poster" I guess.

    10. Re:Physical contact by OglinTatas · · Score: 1

      I agree. There is a reason soccer players (should) wear shin guards and (really should wear) cups. By replacing bruisable and breakable flesh and bone with plastic and steel, they should heavily pad the robots for the protection of the human players.

  13. Kick legs by MoobY · · Score: 1

    From the looks of it, it will first kick the opponents in their knees so it can freely roam around and kick the ball without any opponents left.

    --
    --- Sigmentation Fault - Comments Dumped
    1. Re:Kick legs by nxtr · · Score: 1

      ...or they'll just shoot laser beams out of their eyes. Simple as that.

    2. Re:Kick legs by alue · · Score: 1

      I don't see how these robots can play soccer if they're 38cm tall. A soccer ball itself is like 30cm in diameter (just guessing). Besides considering how high up above the ground the ball can fly during a game, the robot'll have to be at least as tall as a human to compete--otherwise you could just kick the ball straight over these guys.

    3. Re:Kick legs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Did you even GLANCE at TFS?? The robots playing in 2050 will be descendants of the current robot.

    4. Re:Kick legs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Good to know that they will be developing robots that can have sex and produce offspring before worrying about soccer. Priorities must be kept in the proper order.

  14. They'll need more than 2 halves though by ackthpt · · Score: 1
    To run the players off the pitch to change their batteries ... unless they process crap thrown on the field into energy.

    Still, who's gonna watch 'bots kick a ball around?

    Obviously more 'bots, which'll 'splain why nothing gets down around the house on weekends.

    --

    A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
    1. Re:They'll need more than 2 halves though by masonry · · Score: 1

      I'd watch bots versus humans!! It's the closest thing we would have to a bloodsport, since ice hockey was invented... Imagine running into one, or a tackle from one...

  15. My Bet Is On by DannyO152 · · Score: 1

    The country that builds the robotic scorekeepers!

  16. yeah but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    can this thing run linux and more importantly will linux exist in 2050?

    1. Re:yeah but... by Narishma · · Score: 1

      Yes it will. Netcraft will confirm it.

      --
      Mada mada dane.
  17. A bit more to it than that by DrSkwid · · Score: 2, Insightful


    If only soccer was as easy as a bit of shielding and hefty kicking !

    --
    There are places where the networks are not touching,and there are places where they are-Boeing's Lori Gunter
    1. Re:A bit more to it than that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Computers are already extremely good at the other parts -- physics simulations - communicating without making eye-contact - communicating without competitors hearing you - strategy (think EA sports).

      Once they get the mechanics down, the other problems are quite trivial.

    2. Re:A bit more to it than that by QuantumG · · Score: 1

      You assume the robots will be permitted to have radio communication?! Why would you assume that?

      --
      How we know is more important than what we know.
    3. Re:A bit more to it than that by That's+Unpossible! · · Score: 0, Redundant

      If only they had 45 years to make good on their claims!

      oh wait

      --
      Ironically, the word ironically is often used incorrectly.
    4. Re:A bit more to it than that by J-Piddy · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Absolutely! By the year 2050 they may be as skilled technically as human players, but I really doubt they be able to win the World Cup. I think the Brazilians (not to mention the Germans, English, Italians, Argentinians, etc.) might have something to say about that...

      I've had several conversations with pro-level soccer players from Europe, and they've for the most part said the same thing about Americans; technically, we're better than most other countries. Unfortunately, as we've seen, that doesn't necessarily translate into winning games, particularly at a high level.

      If computers are still rank amateurs when it comes to Go, a game (as I understand it) which derives its complexity from the number of options available, how are they going to deal with such a large field, where the "possession" of the field and the positioning of players is so important? Can you really imagine a computer being able to see and react quickly to Brazil's "samba" style of soccer? I've played for my entire life, and even watching on tv I don't know how they do what they do!

  18. Photocopier/Lawn-Mower by elseedy · · Score: 0

    This is offtopic, but does anyone remember hearing about a photocopier that was modified to cut the lawn? This would go back several years, at least.

  19. Bones vs. Titanium by Sonicated · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Pampered multi millionaire footballers won't even step foot on a field if other players have slightly hard shin guards, let alone legs made of titianium!

  20. No shit.. by StikyPad · · Score: 1

    Of course robots are going to win.. who's going to slide tackle something with a solid exoskeleton which will presumably weigh significantly more than the average person? Can you say "compound fracture?"

    1. Re:No shit.. by konstantinlevin · · Score: 1

      I would not mind slide tackling an autonomous robot. They would fall the same as any other biped, but their components are more delicate, and they don't heal on their own. What would concern me (as a goalkeeper) is fielding a precision, laser guided shot travelling with the speed of a cannonball.

      --
      What the hell was I supposed to be doing? I was going to do something, and now I'm on /.
    2. Re:No shit.. by michael_cain · · Score: 1
      ...who's going to slide tackle something with a solid exoskeleton which will presumably weigh significantly more than the average person?

      I'll be impressed (really!) if they can do it and meet a reasonable set of restrictions to make it a "fair" competition. Self-contained, bipedal, height between 170 and 190 cm, total weight on the field under 100 kg, no fuel intake during a period, some reasonable restrictions on anatomy (eg, no trick arms for throw-ins, 360-degree rotating heads, or knees/hips that work both ways), restricted field of vision. Basically, no custom-designed soccer robots (aside from software) -- you have to fit it inside the normal size, shape and density parameters of a human.

      Unfortunately, unless I get nanobots that can clean out my arteries, kill any cancer cells I happen to develop, and take care of whatever build-up causes the assorted dementias, I'm probably too old to see the first team that makes a serious run at it...

    3. Re:No shit.. by OwnedByTwoCats · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Energy will be the issue. If a robot can use hydrocarbon fuels at whatever temperature the engineers can contain, they will have more energy available, and they will win.

      If they are restricted in their power sources to roughly the same energy density as carbohydrates and muscle, then it's a much greater challenge. They will be making the same tradeoffs as humans: sprint now to get there, if it means being winded for a little while afterward?

  21. Red Cards by marko123 · · Score: 1

    Getting them to not break the opponents legs and heads will be the tough part.

    --
    http://pcblues.com - Digits and Wood
  22. I for one, by lilmouse · · Score: 1

    will be rooting for our new robotic overlords!

    --LWM

    1. Re:I for one, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, no, no,

      that should read

      I for one,

      welcome our new Soccer Super-Star Robotic Overlords.

      Maybe they could be called,

      (wait for it)

      Positronic Punters!

  23. Very close already... by jemenake · · Score: 4, Funny

    Well, even today, I can build you a one-robot team that will, at least, would never lose.

    I needs no batteries or wheels. However, it is 24 feet wide and 8 feet high. If the ball is stiffly inflated, we can actually reduce the size of this robot down to about 23 feet wide by 7.5 feet tall. :)

    1. Re:Very close already... by davidescott · · Score: 3, Funny

      Add a canon and you could have a good shot at winning.

    2. Re:Very close already... by SenseiLeNoir · · Score: 1

      This reminded me of Doug Naylor's Red Dwarf Book (from the BBC), where they talk about special genetic organisms developed, and played football.

      The "joke" about that (which may be hard to understand if you are not English) was that "things got to a head when Scotland fielded an oblong the shape and size fo the goal to a world cup qualifier. Yet they still managed to not qualify"

      --
      Have a nice day!
    3. Re:Very close already... by Oktober+Sunset · · Score: 1

      what happens when the robot has to take a corner or a throw in?

    4. Re:Very close already... by mmaddox · · Score: 1

      Oh robot, thou prowess tall (..ro-o-bot thou prowess tall...),

      Thou can'st well-kick that rounded ball (..rou-ounded ball...)

      For, constructed well, you havst no knees(...no kneeeees...)

      Good luck in semis 'ganst Germany (Germaneeeee...)

      Canon? Like this? Or did you mean cannon?

      --

      What'dya mean there's no BLINK tag!?

  24. They've been saying this for a while by Disperz · · Score: 1

    I remember watching a robotics program on TechTV, not G4TTV, where they stated this exact same thing. Robots will be able to defeat humans in the 2050 World Cup.

    --
    Do you see how my mind works? It's like a laser!
    1. Re:They've been saying this for a while by MLopat · · Score: 0

      I was just thinking the same thing. Honda announced that they would have a team of Asimos that would be able to win the world cup someday.

  25. dammit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    these guys will be immune to tugging under-arm hair, stamping on laces, flicking nuts and going over the top.

    but..
    1. will they run linux

    and
    2. i bet they still won't understand offside

  26. As long as they're not white by Shadow+Wrought · · Score: 4, Funny

    and playing cricket we should be OK.

    --
    If brevity is the soul of wit, then how does one explain Twitter?
    1. Re:As long as they're not white by Insipid+Trunculance · · Score: 1

      Harrumph......Football is a kid's gam.Real men play cricket for 5 days.

      and then try to remember what they were doing in the first place.

      --
      Wanted : A Signature.
  27. Battlebots and Robot Wars by deadgoon42 · · Score: 1

    I think these shows prove that no one gives a damn about watching robots play sports.

    --

    Smeghead every day of the week.
    1. Re:Battlebots and Robot Wars by tomstdenis · · Score: 1

      The reason why those shows suck is that the robots are hella lame.

      300 lbs "spinning thingies" aren't really intelligent nor particularly interesting. I mean theree basically two robots. The wedge, and the thingy with a huge, slow, weak hydraulic "pincer" of some sort that spins around.

      Most matches are just attrition, e.g. who's robot will fail first and not which one will actually destroy the other.

      Oh and fuck humanity!

      --
      Someday, I'll have a real sig.
    2. Re:Battlebots and Robot Wars by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What about the old nes game Base Wars, I guess there haven't been too many sequels and other games in the genre have been DOA, point taken.

    3. Re:Battlebots and Robot Wars by Zen+Punk · · Score: 1

      BattleBots? That show is disingenous. Most(all?) of the contestants were not even robots. They're remotely controlled by a team during the battle! Just glorified RC cars with a buzzsaw or something equally ridiculuous bolted to the top. I would love to see a battle of actual autonomous robots.

      --
      Sleep is futile.
  28. Never will the robots win by RogueOne · · Score: 1

    winning FIFA World Cup != (Shield & Kick Ball)

  29. More Importantly... by Humorously_Inept · · Score: 0

    Will they be programmed to command outrageous salaries? "Pay, or fall victim to my pincers!" Would not paying them be some kind of violation of rights? Seriously, though, who'd bet on this? I'm sure that there are bookies out there right now offering 50:1 against. We were supposed to have flying cars and cities on the moon by now, so I wonder whether the soccer-robot schedule may have to be pushed back while we clear out the backlog of tall orders.

    --

    ~Someday, I hope to be an aspiring author.
    1. Re:More Importantly... by garbletext · · Score: 1

      whose rights would paying autonomous robots violate? I don't think that NOT paying someone because a robot took his place is a violation of that person's rights. just ask the millions of workers worldwide whose jobs have been made obsolete by assembly automation. Or were you referring to the fact that robots are not human enough to possess money? That might be an issue, but it certainly wouldn't be a violation of rights, quit the opposite; if anything it would be akin to granting rights to the washing machine.

    2. Re:More Importantly... by mangu · · Score: 1
      We were supposed to have flying cars and cities on the moon by now


      Yes, but we weren't supposed to have the internet. Arthur Clarke's "Imperial Earth", written in 1975, is one of the closest predictions of the internet that I have seen in science fiction. There's something that resembles Google searches in that book, but what they had were more or less dumb terminals connected to one central computer. And the action happens in the year 2276.


      We may not have flying cars, but in other aspects we are way ahead of the predictions.

    3. Re:More Importantly... by maxwell+demon · · Score: 1

      Well, given the trend to thin clients, web applications and trusted computing, maybe that will be the future?

      I guess MS dreams of owning that central computer ...

      --
      The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
  30. secret play by Tablizer · · Score: 4, Funny

    We'll just slashdot 'em in the final round

    1. Re:secret play by Alien+Being · · Score: 1

      Send in the robotic hooligans.

    2. Re:secret play by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      Send in the robotic hooligans.

      I know some @#*$! elevators qualified to kick ass.

  31. Robotic Hooligans by 2051 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    You wait and see ... they'll be droids everywhere getting pissed on cheap petrol

  32. Snake oil by Alomex · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Yet another product release by the Snake Oil corporation otherwise known as AI.

    Content-free statements like the 2050 press release is what gives AI a bad name. Serious AI researchers would be well advised to ostracized people who make such half hazardly statements, yet they seem to embrace them: the overly (and misguidedly) ambitious robot soccer competition is part of the main conference in the field (IJCAI).

    1. Re:Snake oil by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You would be well advised not to be advising AI researchers until you can do it in proper English. The adjective you mangled was "haphazard", and they are either making haphazard statements, or they are haphazardly making statements. Nobody can make haphazardly statements.

      That being said, wild assertions like "we'll have robots that can win the 2050 World Cup" can be beneficial. You can get a lot accomplished while trying to achieve the (sometimes only seemingly) impossible. For instance, once upon a time, a particular President of a particular nation said that they would put a man on the moon by the end of the decade.

    2. Re:Snake oil by FleaPlus · · Score: 1

      Could you elaborate on what's overly ambitious about Robocup? To my knowledge, it's been a great testing ground for ideas in robotics, and competing entries have performed quite well.

    3. Re:Snake oil by Alomex · · Score: 1

      and competing entries have performed quite well.

      As an example, the tie-breaking mechanism in years past consisted in leaving one team alone in the pitch and testing if it could score on the opponent's goal.

      Having the full blown soccer competition from inception was akin to JFK saying "we'll launch a manned rocket to the moon every month until we land one there" instead of "we'll design a program so that by the end of the decade we'll have a man on the moon".

      A less snake-oil-ish approach would have been to set out more or less achievable tasks and start with those as competitions, e.g. dribbling, penalty kicking (without goalie, simply to understand the mechanics of ball control).

      An even better approach would have been to avoid the publicity seeking soccer competition altogether and use more wortwhile tasks such as search and rescue among the rubble or a robot server in a restaurant (as in fact they did in IJCAI 2003).

    4. Re:Snake oil by FleaPlus · · Score: 1

      A less snake-oil-ish approach would have been to set out more or less achievable tasks and start with those as competitions, e.g. dribbling, penalty kicking (without goalie, simply to understand the mechanics of ball control).

      With the different leagues, I think they've already got very achievable tasks, it's just that they're running in parallel with the less achievable ones. For example, the simulation league and the small-size league do quite well, because people competing in those leagues mostly only need to worry about multi-agent coordination, with some simple visual perception in the small-size league. The 4-legged league introduces some more difficult tasks, with the humanoid league introducing even more difficult tasks.

      An even better approach would have been to avoid the publicity seeking soccer competition altogether and use more wortwhile tasks such as search and rescue among the rubble or a robot server in a restaurant (as in fact they did in IJCAI 2003).

      From the RoboCup page, it looks like this is now a more-or-less integral part of the RoboCup event. The set of challenges though is very different though: They're typically isn't any multi-agent aspect, the environment is much more chaotic, and there's typically a human remote-controlling the robot.

    5. Re:Snake oil by R.Caley · · Score: 1
      A less snake-oil-ish approach would have been to set out more or less achievable tasks and start with those as competitions,

      The nice thing about sprot, as opposed to real world, as an application area is that sports have evolved over centuries to provide those small challenges within the overall challenge. Directly competative sports (as opposed to things like golf) also have a self balancing difficulty level. Beyond the very initial level of standing up and kicking the ball somewhere within 60 degrees of where you wanted it to go, the challenge is the opposition, not the intentionally very simple environment. Since everyone is working at the current state of the art, your problem gets harder at roughly the same level as your abilities. This is why 5 year olds can play football (at least soccer) as sucessfully (in the sense of having a good game) as top level professionals. This useful property is not found in search and rescue.

      And JFK _did_ anounce the big target, not `we will, within one month, have a design for an air hose'. It's useful to keep the end target in mind.

      As for robot service in restaurants, if we went down that path, what would all those people studying for MSCE status do for a living?

      --
      _O_
      .|<
      The named which can be named is not the true named
    6. Re:Snake oil by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And JFK _did_ anounce the big target,

      It announced as something that will be done ten years into the future, not next year's competition.

      As well, a ten year target one can more or less see the path to completion, a fifty year target, specially in such a non-priority area as robot soccer is just publicity seeking.

    7. Re:Snake oil by R.Caley · · Score: 1
      It announced as something that will be done ten years into the future, not next year's competition.

      They can play soccer (poorly) now, whereas the USA couldn't get a man on the moon in 63. So the differecne seems sensible. ``We will do what we can do now better next year, lets see who does best'' is hardly a ridiculous strategy.

      a fifty year target, specially in such a non-priority area as robot soccer is just publicity seeking.

      And getting some test pilots to play golf on the moon was such an important priority?

      In both cases a ridiculously pointless objective was set because the objective was eye catching and it was believed that moves towards that pointless objective would be useful.

      The really silly bit in this soccer thing is the association with AI. It's clearly not AI any more. They are off where computer chess was a few decades ago when the technology reached the point when the problem was finally tractable, because the AI people had produced a few spin off technologies which the boring old engineering world could apply to the problem. This competition will hopefully produce lots of useful advances is mechanics and control systems and whatnot, but it's not going to throw light on intelligence or mind, anymore than Deep Blue did.

      --
      _O_
      .|<
      The named which can be named is not the true named
    8. Re:Snake oil by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mankind is always making advancements, but only rarely are they the advancements we predicted we'd be making.

    9. Re:Snake oil by FleaPlus · · Score: 1

      The really silly bit in this soccer thing is the association with AI. It's clearly not AI any more.

      Actually, a big part of soccer is coordinating with a group, which is arguably an important part of AI.

    10. Re:Snake oil by R.Caley · · Score: 1
      Actually, a big part of soccer is coordinating with a group, which is arguably an important part of AI.

      But a robot football team could have a secure, high bandwidth connection amongst themselves, making such coordination a matter of scheduling and message passing and shared data structures. Interesting IT problem, but no more AI than any other distributed computing problem.

      Even if you impose a limit to very low bandwidth to model human players shouting at each other and waving their arms, the fact that you can create players with identical models which make all kinds of assumptions about the inner workings of each other makes the problem different in kind. No robot will be thinking of his girlfriend, or have decisions influenced by ego or the fight with the left winger he had this morning or the guy in the crowd shouting robotist abuse or...

      This is the kind of thing I meant by comparing with chess. Work on getting such a team to coordinate it's attack by planning on a shared world model etc is not going to throw any light on what David Beckham is doing with his meat based ZX80 equivalent.

      --
      _O_
      .|<
      The named which can be named is not the true named
    11. Re:Snake oil by FleaPlus · · Score: 1

      There's somewhat of a difference between artificial intelligence and neural/cognitive modeling, which I think is what you're thinking of.

      Artificial intelligence is, well, the study (and implementation) of intelligent behavior in artificial constructs. Robots coordinating their activities in real time is an intelligent behavior.

    12. Re:Snake oil by R.Caley · · Score: 1
      Artificial intelligence is, well, the study (and implementation) of intelligent behavior in artificial constructs.

      No, AI is the creation of intteligent behaviour in artificial constructs. If we ever create any worth studying then we'll have to think of a name for studying it (artificial psychology?).

      The important point is `intelligent'. A modern chess programme is not intelligent, any more than Word is, it is the result of applying lots of processing power and good algorithms to a well understood problem. Similarly a robot foorball team designed primarily to play football well would almost certainly not be using anything usefully called intelligence. People (and other animals) use intelligence to do such things because they are basicly crap as computing devices:-).

      Consider what we might call `artificial locomotion'. There are all kinds of interesting things you could investigate by creating artificial muscle analogiues etc and neural nets or heuristic algorithms to control them and so on to achive bipedal locomotion. However, if you just say to some engineers that you want something to get from A to B as well as possible, you'll get a car or a plane or a segway or something with stair climbing wheel clusters, or a bullet, depending on how you phraise the spec.

      --
      _O_
      .|<
      The named which can be named is not the true named
    13. Re:Snake oil by FleaPlus · · Score: 1

      How are you defining intelligence?

    14. Re:Snake oil by R.Caley · · Score: 1
      How are you defining intelligence?

      I am being very careful not to try:-).

      For the current discussion, I think I'll limit myself to some examples and counter examples. It is not what you get more of if you add more processing power or network bandwidth, and it's not what you get more of if you improve your underlying math (eg better statistical analysis of chess positions or a better dynamical model of the flight of a football). It's the thing whose lack causes a bird to fly into a window the second time, and whose presence may be indicated when they learn to open milk bottles.

      --
      _O_
      .|<
      The named which can be named is not the true named
  33. Correction by Rie+Beam · · Score: 1

    Unless it rains.

  34. From the article.. by Sonicated · · Score: 2, Funny

    THE footballers of tomorrow will have the midfield guile of Zinedine Zidane, the finishing ability of Andriy Shevchenko and the staying power of Roy Keane.

    Roy Keane? Staying power? World Cup? They sent him home!

  35. And one more thing... by GeorgeMcBay · · Score: 4, Funny


    making its own decisions based on information that it perceives with its 360 degree vision, and is able to recognise the football, approach it and deliver a hefty kick. It is also able to identify an opponent and shield the ball in much the same way as a human player does.


    And if that doesn't convince you they'll win the World Cup, perhaps you need a demonstration of the man-killing laser beams that shoot out of their eyes, meatbag.

    1. Re:And one more thing... by SeaEye420 · · Score: 1

      Nice KOTOR2 reference ;) Looks like I'm not the only one who gets a kick out of him saying that repeatedly.

      --
      Wort Wort Wort!
    2. Re:And one more thing... by runamok1 · · Score: 1

      Let's see. How does it go again?

      I for one welcome our soccer playing, laser beaming, man killing, meatbag dominating overlords!

      Seriously though, I actually laughed out loud at your post and now my co-workers are eyeing me curiously.

  36. Pfft!!! by ackthpt · · Score: 1
    Will Smith was not available for a comment at the time...

    See Shoalin Soccer, which features:

    Steven Chow

    Team Evil

    Cheating with American Drugs

    A guy with a pair of underpants on his head

    The kind of kicks every soccer player has fantasies about delivering

    Shoalin master of sweet buns(!)

    --

    A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
  37. Obligatory Americanism by NoImNotNineVolt · · Score: 2, Funny

    The football? I thought they said the World Cup. Don't these foreigners know that footballs are for the Super Bowl and soccer balls are for the World Cup? Sheesh.

    --
    Chuuch. Preach. Tabernacle.
    1. Re:Obligatory Americanism by TheGavster · · Score: 1

      See, its like how Mozilla keeps having to rename their standalone browser because some tiny project no one has heard of takes the name ...

      --
      "Because Science" is one step from "Because old book". Try "Because of my experiment testing my falsifiable assertion".
  38. Shape Up by Rie+Beam · · Score: 4, Funny

    "a descendent of the 38cm tall VisiON"



    38cm = 14.9606299 inches, or about a foot and two inches



    Nothing to fear here. Except maybe leg-humping offenses.

    1. Re:Shape Up by node+3 · · Score: 1

      38cm = 14.9606299 inches, or about a foot and two inches

      Judge me by my size, do you?

    2. Re:Shape Up by Dj+Stingray · · Score: 1

      Nothing to fear here. Except maybe leg-humping offenses.

      (sarcasm)Which I am sure are not present at todays soccer games....(/sarcasm)

    3. Re:Shape Up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Another way to understand the 38cm without conversion:

      Average soccer players are about 1.8m, so this robot is about 1/4 ~ 1/5 a human's height.

    4. Re:Shape Up by Zims+Manson · · Score: 0

      Phew! Thanks for that. I was waiting for someone to clear up all this cryptic 38cm talk.

      /sarcasm

    5. Re:Shape Up by Buchenskjoll · · Score: 1

      I'm sure most of the world knows how tall 38 cm is. Which backward country do you live in, since you need to translate it to incehs and feet?

      --
      -- Make America hate again!
    6. Re:Shape Up by Rie+Beam · · Score: 1

      At least my backward country can spell "inches".

      But seriously, yes, I realize that most of the world understands metric - as do I, and I prefer it. I translated it to better suit the rhythm of the joke. That's right, my post was meant to be humor - if you honestly have to nit-pick at that, I feel sorry for you.

  39. How long will it be before by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    humans will be out of a job and can never find one because someone decides to reprogram them for different tasks?

  40. Steel and wire? by papadiablo · · Score: 1
    from the article
    Mr Ishiguro is confident a player of steel and wire will one day lift the most prestigious trophy in football. "The important thing to remember is what you see here is just the beginning," says Mr Ishiguro.
    Steel? In 50 years I hope they can come up with something lighter and harder (though maybe softer would be more applicable in this particular scenario) than steel to put into these guys.
  41. Yes and general voice recognition is 30 years away by gweihir · · Score: 1

    General, speaker and topic independent voice recognition (i.e. computers will understand general human speech) is promised for roughly 30 years in the future.

    Strangely the 30 year distance from "now" has been in effect for several decades. It seems the problem gets progressively more difficult, the better it is understood.

    I guess the same is true for the robot-issue: Allways just not quite in reach.

    --
    Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
  42. Bah the Clones Will Win! by Evil+W1zard · · Score: 2, Funny

    By 2050 we will be able to clone a team of David Beckhams with giant mishapen, club feet and a goalie with 6 arms that will own the robot team!

    --
    News Reporters Make Tasty Polar Bear Treats!
  43. obligitory by Brigadier · · Score: 1


    I for one welcome our new soccor playing robot over lords.

    I'm an avid soccer player and soccer is by no means a clumsy sport. It requires an ample amount of finace and agility. I don't see a robot achieving this. This is based simple on the fact that a robot the dimensions of a human being would probable way two or three times as much. thus having significantly more momentum to overcome on say on a simple move.

    1. Re:obligitory by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Is the spelling error obligAtory?

  44. In 10, 20, 50, 100 we can do this and that..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm absolutly sick of reading what we can do in the future. Scientist and Engineers should stop wasting their time predicting and start focusing on what we can do now and improving on that.

  45. a simple one - GO by dslmodem · · Score: 1

    It seems so complex to have all those position, speed, teammate, and other information.

    How about a simple game? So, when will Robot acquire the championship of GO?

    --

    ^(oo)^pig~

    1. Re:a simple one - GO by Descartes · · Score: 1

      Have you ever played go against a comuter? Pretty easy. I tried it a few times when I was first learning and I figured out how to be the computer on the hardest difficulty after about 3 hours.

      Here's the secret, make moves that don't make any sense in the short run but fit in with a larger strategy. The AI can't really predict beyond a few moves so it starts playing really stupidly.

      Go is hard for computers because there are so many possible moves. A human can understand the abstract nuance of the game in a way a computer never will. So I'd be way more impressed if by 2050 computers were beating go masters than if they won the world cup.

  46. because I can't help it by bersl2 · · Score: 5, Funny

    The World Cup? I'd say that they've set a pretty high

    GOOOOOOOOOOOOOAL!

    <ducks>

  47. yes but they won't have 2 minutes of play by Bender+Unit+22 · · Score: 0

    time followed by the players leaving the field for 10 minutes of analyzing it by commentators,(or commercials if you are watching it on a free channel), in a never ending cycle.
    So the will make 90 minutes of play time get done in 90 minutes instead of 4 hours.

  48. Kicking and blocking aren't the only things by dmccarty · · Score: 3, Interesting
    The biggest challenges aren't kicking and blocking. How will they handle a goalie bot being able to recognize an incoming ball and block it. And what if the ball has spin on it? 2050 seems like a long way away, but if you look at the state of today's vision recognition we have a long way to go.

    Also, there's the interesting question of logistics: will the World Cup champion team want to play against a team of robots? How would you like to miss the ball and kick your shin right into a robot's aliminum alloy leg? Ouch!

    --
    Have fun: Join D.N.A. (National Dyslexics Association)
    1. Re:Kicking and blocking aren't the only things by nurglich · · Score: 0

      Are you kidding? First of all, they didn't say they were going to win next week. It's not all there yet.

      But a pretty simple laser system could see velocity and rotation as it came off the kicker's foot and perform the required calculations in practically no time at all, making even blocking a penalty kick pretty likely rather than the crapshoot it is normally. As an added bonus, a soccer ball has very evenly spaced lines and spots. You could hardly design a ball easier to read by machine.

    2. Re:Kicking and blocking aren't the only things by InfiniteWisdom · · Score: 1

      When you consider that a little over 45 years ago discrete transistor-based computers were a new and major innovation, I don't think that being able to recognize a ball 45 years hence is ambitious at all.

    3. Re:Kicking and blocking aren't the only things by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A microwave radar ought to do the job....

  49. Re:No shit.. - Spikes by Graemee · · Score: 1

    Let's not even start about the spikes on their shoes.

  50. Just Curious by Rie+Beam · · Score: 1

    Is this in the same route of saying something in 1955 that will happen in 2005? If so, might I ask where all of the predictions from that era went? And why is no one bragging about "being right"?

  51. In 2050 I will care about soccer even less... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    than I do today. I don't care to watch a game where the final score can be and often is 1-0, much less such a game played by machines. The weakest NFL player could turn the strongest soccer player into a human pretzel.

    1. Re:In 2050 I will care about soccer even less... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The weakest NFL player could turn the strongest soccer player into a human pretzel.

      That's because soccer is a game of skill, technique, and endurance, not a game of human-crushing. You're comparing apples and oranges. Let's see an NFL player take the ball from the soccer player without breaking a rule of soccer. And if it's pretzeling you want, put a UFC champion up against the NFL player of your choice.

      Different sports, different goals. You can't analyze them one-dimensionally.

  52. skill beats might in football by weighn · · Score: 1
    Total height Weight 38 cm about 2.4kg

    I don't disagree that they will win football, chess and WWIV.

    I also support our robotic overlords.

    --
    Mongrel News all the news that fits and froths
    1. Re:skill beats might in football by gl4ss · · Score: 1

      maybe they just run 100kmh. that would do it.

      entirely stupid announcement for some cheap publicity... there's no point in putting machines vs. man on playing football.

      just like there's no point in car vs. man in 100m hurdle or a marathon....

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
    2. Re:skill beats might in football by weighn · · Score: 1
      there's no point in putting machines vs. man on playing football.

      just like there's no point in car vs. man in 100m hurdle or a marathon....

      I see your point, but when automotive technology was in its infancy, I'd imagine that engineers pitched their work in races against horses.

      Robotics is at a similarly early stage, and beating a football team has become a nice yardstick.

      --
      Mongrel News all the news that fits and froths
    3. Re:skill beats might in football by gl4ss · · Score: 1

      autonomic robotics yeah, but _cheating_ in football is largely a mechanical quest. it's certain you'll win if you take some liberties, and there's no ruleset to limit those...

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
  53. Another prediction no one will live to see by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    By 2050?

    45 years in the future!!!

    Great another prediction that no one will be around to see. And if they are around we'll have long since forgotten this bogus prediction.

    Don't encourage these people that make predictions in the far flung, unaccountable future. Don't give them press. Just ignore them.

    Yeah, I am going to invent faster than light travel by 2075. Seeing as I plan to be dead by then, I'll just pull some more predictions out of my ass.

    Every God Damn environmental "chicken little" prediction occurs about 10 years after the predictor's expected date of death. "The world will go through another r Ice Age.", "The polar caps are melting." "We'll be eating solent green."
    Of course, these claims aren't restricted to environmentalism. "The Japanese are going to own all of America." "The EU will pass a Consitution. (OK cheap shot)."

    Look if they can't make a prediction that is close enough in time to be held accountable for it, shut up.

    BTW, wasn't it predicted that I'd go to work in my flying car by the year 2000?

    1. Re:Another prediction no one will live to see by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...God Damn environmental ... "The polar caps are melting."...
      If you think that the polar caps aren't melting then you has better catch up on your facts. I think it is pretty obvious that they are melting (satalite imagrey anyone?) and anyone that doesn't think they are is just being selfish, all about the present with no regard for future generations.

      http://www.newsandevents.utoronto.ca/bin1/010221a. asp

      There, if you don't believe me. That is from the University of Toronto, a highly regarded university, if you don't believe them you wont believe anyone.

      BTW, I am not a random AC, my username is taylortbb , however I'll bet some crazy mod who thinks like you will mod this down.

    2. Re:Another prediction no one will live to see by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thank you taylortbb, for having the courtesy of signing your post with your slashdot username. Now, I can go find another one of your posts and mod that one down instead of this tripe.

      Thank you.

  54. Spectators by KiloByte · · Score: 1

    I seriously hope the robotic spectators will not cut seats in trains or spray profanities about the police all around.

    These two activities seem to be the purpose in life of like 80% spectators, at least where I live. But hey, in 2050 I guess I won't care about that anyway.

    --
    The creatures outside looked from Alt-Right to Antifa; but already it was impossible to say which was which.
    1. Re:Spectators by cranos · · Score: 1

      Some how I suspect that robot grafitti is going to run into space problems. For instance "Cops Suck Balls" comes out as 01000011, 01101111, 01110000, 01110011, 00100000, 01010011, 01110101, 01100011, 01101011, 00100000, 01000010, 01100001, 01101100, 01101100, 01110011

      I know, Im bored

    2. Re:Spectators by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hexadecimal??? Only twice the space, plus with extraneous spaces it looks more artful.

      I think they need to focus on making robots fuck. I want to know whether or not when a girl robot comes and she screams out the Lord's name, if it sounds like an old 9600 baud modem connection attempt failing.

    3. Re:Spectators by KiloByte · · Score: 1

      This is pretty much guaranteed to be a widely-perused field of robotics in the future.

      --
      The creatures outside looked from Alt-Right to Antifa; but already it was impossible to say which was which.
  55. Kinda unfair by EulerX07 · · Score: 1

    Considering the creation of Skynet will lead to the destruction of humanity, we simply won't be able to field a good team in 2050.

    1. Re:Kinda unfair by Chris+Burke · · Score: 1

      Wait... so are you saying the true goal of Skynet was to destroy mankind's football infrastructure -- civilization -- so as to win the World Cup? That's chilling! Not just the implications for A.I., but also for the possible plot of the next Terminator movie. *shudder*

      --

      The enemies of Democracy are
    2. Re:Kinda unfair by EulerX07 · · Score: 1

      Yes, and let me tell you, the best scene of the next Terminator is where Diego Maradona tries to a outrun a T-1000, but unfortunately for diego the robot was sent back to 2004, not 1984.

  56. Input by tuxter · · Score: 1

    using a descendent of the 38cm tall VisiON which operates completely independently of human input

    Much like any other soccer player then.....

  57. Maybe not but enhanced humans, yes! by gelfling · · Score: 1

    Maybe not robots but certainly bionically enhanced people by then.

  58. don't they mean by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ....soccer?

    1. Re:don't they mean by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Silly American.

  59. World Cup - Robo Style by Rie+Beam · · Score: 1

    Doesn't really seem practical for robot/human soccer matches (considering the humans would obviously be at a severe advantage), but what about a Robot World Cup? And yes, I mean real soccer-robots, not some BattleBot hitting a soccer ball with it's wedge before another innappropriately-placed hole appears.

  60. I've got a bad feeling about this... by nyekulturniy · · Score: 1

    Microsoft United.

    --
    Nyekulturniy... Proudly confusing readers and editors since 1981!
    1. Re:I've got a bad feeling about this... by cranos · · Score: 1

      Okay how about this:

      - MS United Players to bloated to fit down the players tunnel, Goal Keeper impressive though.

      - MS United Player sin binned after trying to embrace and extend an opposing player,

      - MS United starts own league with rules only it knows. Claims its easier for the average fan to watch.

      - MS United coach declares amatuer players as "Communists" because they let people watch for free.

      - MS United team banned in Europe for "bundling" own referees

    2. Re:I've got a bad feeling about this... by Dunbal · · Score: 1

      Hehehe, you forgot:

      - MS United keeps losing every game due to own goals, later it's found out that a couple [hundred] security holes allow the whole team to become pwn3d...

      --
      Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
  61. This will go the same route as the flying car. by ElDuderino44137 · · Score: 1

    Hey There ...

    I've watched the Jetsons.
    And I still don't see those flying cars we were promised.

    I smell a flying car in here somewhere.

    Cheers,
    --The Dude

  62. But the real question is... by saddino · · Score: 3, Funny

    ...can they design an authentic robotic soccer hooligan? (powered by alcohol of course)

    1. Re:But the real question is... by White+Roses · · Score: 1

      And the design concept? Three words: Bender Bending Rodriguez.

      --
      Do not touch -Willie
    2. Re:But the real question is... by doombob · · Score: 1

      we have the power source already

  63. But what about the cars? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    People forget that 50 years ago, we were also quite sure we'd have flying cars by now.

    I'm still waiting for mine.

  64. What an arbitrary claim by popo · · Score: 1

    This claim was made for one reason and one reason only: to get press.

    And what did "The Scotsman" do? They gave it to them. Why? To sell newspapers.

    There are so many other "robot" claims that could have been made, each with much deeper ramifications. (like robotic cars that drive themselves, or robots in combat, or robots performing tasks too dangerous for humans, robotic pilots, robotic servants, even robotic dogwalkers, the list goes on endlessly), but none of those predictions (as life-changing and useful as they are) makes for guaranteed press; So out comes the press release about something utterly nonsensical. "Watch out England! Robots will kick your ass at football in 45 years!"

    And so we have yet another marriage of the press-desperate to the story-desperate.

    Want an interesting story?

    Robots will replace human workers for non-repetitive tasks requiring decision-making well before 2050. Now *That's* a story that will change the world. But don't worry about that. Its depressing. Let's talk about football instead, we can sell more papers that way.

    --
    ------ The best brain training is now totally free : )
    1. Re:What an arbitrary claim by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Deciding you want to disrespect a well respected national newspaper because it isn't a big nation, then basing your comment around it and chuckling to yourself (because it IS yourself, you realise?) is a bit thick really. What you've done is debase the story, by rephrasing what is said and being a sarcastic dick.

      "Robots will replace human workers for non-repetitive tasks requiring decision-making before 2050" haha, i see what you've done there. Because they're already useful in assembly lines...and what you've done is you've taken it a little further and said robots will be the ones with most of the jobs requiring decision making and creativeness next. Gosh you're the most intelligent guy on slashdot! And so witty and fresh!

    2. Re:What an arbitrary claim by popo · · Score: 1


      I didn't "debase the story by rephrasing what is said".

      I made a valid criticism.

      You on the other hand got upset and lost your temper.

      My point was that this story like so many stories in so many newspapers is based upon a very common journalistic approach which is called the "arbitrary metric": a bar that has been arbitrarily set for emotional impact rather than social/political or economic impact.

      For some reason you got very upset.

      My advice to you: stay Anonymous.

      --
      ------ The best brain training is now totally free : )
    3. Re:What an arbitrary claim by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


      Dude the only "dick" here is you. Chill buddy. Chill.

  65. Windows 2005 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And it will run windows 2005. No need to worry, I bet it won't be able to reboot in time and instead will have green screen of death.

  66. MOD PARENT UP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No computer program in existence today even comes close to touching a Go 'grand master'. The parent is making an excellent point.

  67. Gaming the challenge by QuantumG · · Score: 1

    It's funny ya know. When the RoboCup was announced it was claimed that once we solve soccer, we'll be well on our way to solving all the problems of robotics. After all, for a robot to play soccer it has to be able to recognise objects right? Like the ball, the net, other players, etc. Well yes and no. If you're making a soccer playing robot you need to be able to recognise those 3 types of objects, but you don't need to code a general object recognision system to acheive that. You don't even need the robot to be able to learn new object mappings in a sensible amount of time (it doesn't matter if it took you 3 weeks to train the robot to tell the difference between the ball and the net, cause once it is done, it is done). So when a robot soccer team beats the world's best human soccer team, it just means that we've solved one more game. Some of that research will translate into research that will be good for solving other games (just like chess solving algorithms did) but most of it won't be any good for an actual product.

    --
    How we know is more important than what we know.
    1. Re:Gaming the challenge by Baron_Yam · · Score: 1

      It takes humans a fair amount of time to learn to recognise specific objects... more than three weeks. And once it's done, it's pretty starts to undo within 70-80 years.

  68. Against the rules? by billster0808 · · Score: 1

    Aren't there rules that say only people can play soccer?

  69. Oh yay, soccer by exley · · Score: 1

    I for one welcome our new soccer-playing mini robot overlords!

    Oh, wait a minute, no I don't. Fuck soccer. Maybe with little robots playing against humans I'd watch. For a few minutes. I don't care if a hot woman takes off her shirt at the end of every game, I'm not watching quite possibly the worst sport ever invented.

    1. Re:Oh yay, soccer by Dunbal · · Score: 1

      "I'm not watching quite possibly the worst sport ever invented."

      That wouldn't be "curling", by any chance?

      --
      Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
    2. Re:Oh yay, soccer by exley · · Score: 1

      Hell no, curling kicks ass. Where else can nerds with a solid understanding of basic physics excel so easily in a "sport"? Also, I remember the Olympics a few years back, and I think it was the Finnish team that was led by this math whiz who could do a Rubik's cube in 27 seconds or something obscene like that. I know it looks goofy at first, but I am totally on board with curling.

  70. Where the flair by powderbluedictator · · Score: 1

    When computer chess programs beat humans, their depth of strategy outplays the humans. The actual moves themselves have no flair or art. So when a striker creates a miraculous goal, it's not so much his strategy that makes it brilliant but the art in executing it. And like of these computer versus human competitions, be it chess or football, the computers aren't beating humans, a machine programmed by humans is beating humans. No matter who wins, humans win ..... until the robots gain conciousness and take over the world (sorry couldn't help it, watched that new battlestar galactica at the weekend)

  71. Robocup Challenge. by MDKKnD · · Score: 1

    I went to the International Robocup Challenge in Padua Italy 2 years ago and have to admit that it's just amazing what's being developed. While the human robotics competition side of things has only just started if anyone has seen the SDR (Sony Dream Robot) then you'll see that it'll probably take less than 45years to win. The Robocup challenge's whole goal is to produce a robot by 2050 that will beat the top human soccer team in the world cup. That goal has been around for quite a few years, and isn't exclusively for the Osaka robotics team. I became very good friends with one of the AI programmers of one of the Osaka robotics team, and amongst all the different human robots theirs was the best (the SDR wasn't competing, it was only dancing in the background). Don't forget their are more sections than just the Human robotics side. There is the Small robot league which has some of the fastest games of robotics soccer you'll ever see, there's also the Mid sized robots, which kick around real sized soccer balls and have been using the full 360deg viewing for some time. Rescue league has lots of potential, and coupled with the computer rescue simulation competition I can see in the future waves of small robots being controlled by a hot air balloon floating above a crash site as they scour the rubble for signs of survivors. The humanoid robots will be able to (hopefully) kick the soccer ball with such precision and accuracy that they just shouldn't miss. They will be able to run simulations to determine the best way to hit the ball. There is already a team of researchers trying to create mechanical muscles which will be faster and more efficient then human muscles but are powered by chemicals not straight electricity (solving the battery problem). Check out http://www.robocup.org/ or just email me for more info.

  72. Defense ramifications ... by glib909 · · Score: 1

    If they're able to make a robot so agile that it can compete with humans, they can no doubt make one that's armored and can carry an M-16.

    And they're already rolling out some robotic remote-controlled gunners in Iraq.

    Bullet-proof casualty-proof soldiers may change the face of global conflict nearly as much as the atomic bomb, if they can manufacture large numbers of them.

    --
    Suudsu, that stuff is G-E-W-D.
  73. In 2050 by NetNinja · · Score: 1

    My great great granddaughter will beat up your son.

  74. They've Missed the Point by GrunthosTheFlatulent · · Score: 1

    I think they have completely missed the point of sport if they think that having robots compete against humans is a worthwhile endeavor. Of course we should expect robots and computers to be able to beat humans at various tasks. But the whole point of sport is for humans to compete against other humans in the spirit of real competition. If you think this soccer game would be worth watching, ask yourself if you think human vs. robot arm-wrestling sounds interesting.

  75. What about the Badgers? by dedeman · · Score: 1
    They'll beat us humans, but never these guys.

    http://www.starterupsteve.com/swf/badgerfootball.h tml?

    1. Re:What about the Badgers? by tepples · · Score: 1
  76. Nonsense by nodnoL · · Score: 1

    Flying cars and even hoverboards will be available by 2015

    1. Re:Nonsense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Get a grip of reality, man.
      In 2015 we will barely have started using hydrogen fuel in our mostly ordinary cars.

  77. So to sum up the abilities... by Caeda · · Score: 1

    The robots can tell the difference between a team mate, which is 32 centimeters high... and a 5' to 6' high human being...
    Why does that not sound like much of an accomplishment.
    Its not like anything but the opposing team is going to come running at the robot with the ball...

    It can also determine that the only mid sized spherical object with a black and white pattern on it is in fact a ball...

    Once again doesnt sound like much of an accomplishment.

    How slowly do they do this at the present time?

    --
    ~~ Please keep your arms, legs, and outright stupidity inside the ride at all times. Thank You ~~
    1. Re:So to sum up the abilities... by MDKKnD · · Score: 1

      The current humanoid robots are very slow and very fragile. It will probably take 10 to 20 years until you see humanoids competing against each other, but at the moment they have enough difficulty walking and kicking a ball. I would say that the robots will probably be larger than 32cm tall, although if one robotics team want to make theirs that big, then they can. There's not yet been the rules for the final competition laid out. They will have requirements for the size, power, speed, communications, saftey switches (remote turn off) and object/human recognition. Once these are all established then it might turn out the robots have to be average human size, can't have extra arms, and isn't allowed to hover (couldn't resist).

  78. celebration by brer_rabbit · · Score: 1

    what sort of celebration dance does a robot do after scoring a goal...the robot?

  79. Yeah.. by Lord_Dweomer · · Score: 1
    Well of course by 2050 robots will be able to win the world cup. They could probably win it now if they just partnered with the folks over at BattleBots.

    "We have a red card for leg severing!"

    "Oh no...looks like Beckham got caught in the pulveriser! Will he make it folks?!

    --
    Buy Steampunk Clothing Online!
  80. A couple of thoughts by rewt66 · · Score: 1

    First, 38 cm high? That's... um... a bit of a hardship to the humans that are used to playing players that are 180 cm tall, isn't it?

    Second, 360 degree vision. Again, that's quite an advantage to the robots - literally "eyes in the back of their head".

    A bit fairer competition would be 180 cm tall robots with 180 degree vision. Let's throw in a restriction that the robots be bipedal, too - no hiding the ball among 8 legs or some such...

    1. Re:A couple of thoughts by beerygaz · · Score: 1

      And let's limit the processor to a 386, can't have your roboplayer smarter than the average Beckham!

      --
      Deja moo - The feeling you've heard all this bull before.
  81. 2050, too far! by [cx] · · Score: 0

    I'd much rather see robots used for some kind of intelligent purpose rather than with a goal like playing the World Cup in mind, without FIFA sanctions at all, which would never happen because FIFA wouldn't sanction a match 45 years away.

    With the kind of objectives this team has laid before them, I for one would love to play on the robot team, maybe just as a sub, they could afford to pay me my huge human contract as the other players would get nothing but WD-40 and a recharge.

    I think it would be interesting to have cameras installed in every robots head as well, and why not the human players heads as well, so that we can all watch the game from a certain players point of view.

    Not that I'm optimistic enough to believe in the human race surviving to 2050. But atleast now I have something to look forward to! Robot soccer team woohoo, money well spent!

    [cx]

  82. human players are allowed to talk to each other by taxman_10m · · Score: 1

    during play

    1. Re:human players are allowed to talk to each other by QuantumG · · Score: 1

      So let the robots talk too.. with speech.

      --
      How we know is more important than what we know.
    2. Re:human players are allowed to talk to each other by XMyth · · Score: 1

      Perhaps we shouldn't let them run faster than the other players too? Or not have any better reflexes.

    3. Re:human players are allowed to talk to each other by QuantumG · · Score: 1

      Sounds reasonable.

      --
      How we know is more important than what we know.
  83. "complete harmony" by sacrilicious · · Score: 1
    "By 2050, our aim is to beat the winners of football's World Cup and we are very confident that we will be able to do that," said Shu Ishiguro, who heads Robot Laboratory in Osaka. "When we have accomplished that, we will have a society in which humans and artificial intelligence are completely in harmony."

    WTF?? Yeah right. I don't know why we humans fight wars when all vestiges of dis-harmony could be eliminated by one team beating the other in soccer/football.

    --
    - First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then ???, then profit.
    1. Re:"complete harmony" by [cx] · · Score: 0

      I for one, believe complete harmony would better be achieved with a robotic boxing champion, we'd all be scared into a harmonious state!

  84. I'm surprised no one has said this yet. by Xyrus · · Score: 3, Funny

    All you balls are belong to us!

    ~X~

    --
    ~X~
  85. Team Argentina by SoCalEd · · Score: 1

    I'd like to see the lads from Buenos Aires field a competing team of automatons. When the going gets tough they can whack the ball into the goal with their little robotic arms and blame it on "the Hand of Robby"

    --
    Insert witty comment *here*. I'm fresh out of wit...
  86. Ouch by dangerz · · Score: 1

    It's bad enough being kicked by a human leg, let alone a robot leg.

    Could you imagine the bruises you'd get from playing this robot army?

    --
    The greatest experience we can have is the mysterious.
    - Albert Einstein
  87. Robot athletes? The next step is soldiers! by quarryknight · · Score: 1

    Oh geez, so now we're going to watch robots play at such a professional level that it'll be like those chess matches against the supercomputers you hear about. God knows I wouldn't play against them.

    So what's next? The Japanese are going to create robots that will fight in World War 3 for us all, but next thing you know they'll have made some sort of floating point error to cause the robots to turn on humans by 2096! Can we say Terminator?

  88. Re:Brazil by one_n_only_wildcat · · Score: 1

    Actually, Brazil is not far from robotic players right now- consider their rate of plastic surgery per person- now combine that with yesterday's news of UTD research on chemically fired artificial muscles and there you go. One day, Barry Bonds may be seen as a man ahead of his time.

    --
    "Something unknown is doing we don't know what." - Sir Arthur Eddington
  89. Just imagine though by Illserve · · Score: 1

    In theory these robots should be able to kick footballs around at tremendous speed with precision people will never be able to match.

    Vision systems will allow them to map the trajectory of the ball onto their own appendage with pixel accuracy, figuring out the precise power and angle of the return kick necessary to land that ball anywhere they want (within reason).

    And where vision fails, touch sensors on the surface of the foot will be able to figure out what part of the ball they are touching, and what speed, and readjust the kick while it is in the process of being carried, to enable even greater precision. This is something people will never be able to do. By the time our brains get information from touch sensors (some sluggish 50+ msec after the impact), it way too late to change the motor program.

    Once the physical technology gets into place, sports against robots will be as futile as fighting against railgun bots in quake.

  90. Time Frame Slip by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I don't recall where I read it but I thought the original target date was 2030. As impressive as all this is -- and it is impressive -- the pace of research going on in biotech (i.e. dna, synthetic biology, nano-machines, etc.) seems to indicate that any ancestor of these prototypes will be irrelevant by 2050.

    "I got 6 skin-jobs walking the streets, Deck. You know how it is -- if you ain't law enforcement you're little people."

    There is a much bigger question here however. Why are the Japanese all about things robotic? They possess the highest average age of any population on Earth. They don't have enough workers and the issue is getting critical. Most of the developed nations, including China, will be in the same position in 20 years. The big question is this -- do you import cheap immigrant labor to do your work or do you automate like hell. The Japanese have clearly chosen automation and these kinds of predictions make that decision clear. But implicit in their decision is the question of whether a national policy of extreme automation is in fact tacit descrimination against developing nations. Why not hire more foreign-born workers to make your Toyotas, Hondas or Mitshubishis? Focus all this robot stuff on extremely hazardous and dangerous jobs and give the
    1,500,000,000 people living on less than $1 a day a chance at a better life.

    I suppose automation will continue its march and I predict this social question is going to be huge in the next 5 - 10 years. But I'd hate to think that these stunning robotic achievements are really xenophobia by proxy.

  91. Well by Master_T · · Score: 1

    I, for one, welcome our new robotic overlords. -It had to be said.

  92. I, for one.. by mshiltonj · · Score: 1, Insightful

    I, for one, welcome our new soccer-playing robot overlords.

    1. Re:I, for one.. by clem · · Score: 1

      Yes, but will you be welcoming the robotic hooligans that start single-handedly overturning cars after the match?

      --
      Your courageous and selfless spelling corrections have made me a better person.
  93. Well sure the VisiON looks impressive by utahjazz · · Score: 1

    but, I predict that within 100 years, robot soccer players will be twice as powerful, 10,000 times larger, and so expensive that only the five richest kings of Europe will own them.

  94. Soccer robotics is a worldwide competition... by cuby · · Score: 1

    Lots of people are working on that fiel right now... From the portuguese ISR to Samsung. For an introduction on the subject I recommend the 2004 book, Soccer Robotics from several Korean autors, edited by Springer. http://www.springeronline.com/sgw/cda/frontpage/0, 11855,5-40109-22-29677021-0,00.html Like many HAL2000 related predictions somebody will discover some very dificult challenges on the way.

    --
    Math is beautiful... e^(pi*i)+1=0
  95. komatsu by jwdeff · · Score: 1

    ... and a robotic team will tie from 2015 to 2049 thanks in part to their goalie.

  96. I call... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    bullshit.

  97. Artificial Intelligence by adeydas · · Score: 1

    The robots will no doubt have the dexterity of Zidane and the speed of Ronaldo but what concerns me is whether they would have enough intelligence! Usually in a game of computer chess, the chess engine matches the best move against the move by the user. The moves are ofcourse pre-programmed during development or if the move fails the engine records the better move by the user. If this is how the robots are programmed, then don't you think each one of them will execute the same command under a certain condition, and it won't be much of a football match, would it?!

  98. 2050 - Right after they all retire... by TheMediaWrangler · · Score: 1

    ...fat and happy and don't need the funding anymore.

    --
    People should not fear what they do not understand; people should fear because they do not understand.
  99. Strange... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I work in Japan, and asking my coworkers about their robot team yielded nothing. Are the Japanese being less-than-forthcoming about the robots that they are collectively building? Maybe I should ask the walkie-talkie-waving Chinese hive brain if it's heard anything.

  100. Of course they'll win by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    After kicking humans in the nads with their hydraulic legs, terminator-style...

  101. Interesting... by Bill,+Shooter+of+Bul · · Score: 1

    You approached the question as if the robots of each country would reflect the defects of the human football players. I guess thats supposed to be funny. It's much more likely that they would reflect the technological prowless of the sponser country, or maybe the cars that each country produces. Looks like the brittish are really going to suck, but at least they won't be as bad as the french.

    --
    Well.. maybe. Or Maybe not. But Definitely not sort of.
    1. Re:Interesting... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Damn you're stupid.

  102. AI level will be critical by buckeyeguy · · Score: 1

    Otherwise, they won't know how to take a proper dive...

    --
    I'd have a personalized plate on my car, but "toxic bachelor" won't fit into 7 letters.
  103. Does a team of mothers count? by Excelsior · · Score: 1

    360 degree vision, and is able to recognise the football, approach it and deliver a hefty kick.
    Growing up, I recall my mother could give me a hefty kick in the butt after she saw what I did with her 360 degree vision (the eyes in the back of her head). I'm pretty sure she can recognize a football, but I'm still doubtful she could win the world cup.

  104. How about a track star robot? by NoYes19 · · Score: 1

    I would be happy just to see a bipedal robot that can beat me in a race (sprint or distance).

  105. Play in the 2050 olympics? by sowdog81 · · Score: 1

    But what about the rules? what if someone made all the robots 8 feet tall and weighed 800 pounds? Who would sliding tackle that? What if they made an 8 armed goal keeper? what if THEY sliding tackled YOU?

  106. Forget the robots, worry about their owners by serutan · · Score: 1

    He also dodges the question of a robot insurrection, a possibility that will not have escaped anyone in the industry after the release of the Will Smith film I, Robot.

    I'm not worried about a robot uprising. What scares me is that a robot that can play in the World Cup can also quietly and effectively kill me in a dark alley, take my wallet and return across town to its waiting owner. If pursued by police it could erase its memory or outright destroy itself to protect the owner's identity. I don't recall ever reading a sci-fi story about a human master thief overseeing a gang of robotic pickpockets and burglars, but if they can play football why not?

  107. Obligatory by mpeg4codec · · Score: 1

    I for one welcome our new soccer-playing overlords.

  108. Yeah, and I got a by Le+Marteau · · Score: 2, Insightful

    hydraulic jack which will win the weighlifting competition. And my Honda will win the marathon.

    Apples and oranges, peeps. Sure, it's interesting, having robots and stuff. But this fetish about machine/human competition misses a big point, and is just plain dumb.

    --
    Mod down people who tell people how to mod in their sigs
    1. Re:Yeah, and I got a by drunken+dash · · Score: 1

      i don't think the fact that robots can beat humans is questioned here - i think the whole point behind this announcement is the projected date of robots beating humans (i.e. we know it will happen, its a matter of when - and thats what the japanese here are addressing)

      --
      Enjoy an e-piphany
  109. Play-by-play from 2050: by Apostata · · Score: 1

    "Oh! And robot Joe Cole misses the net again!"

    --

    This wasn't just plain terrible, this was fancy terrible. This was terrible with raisins in it. - Dorothy Parker
  110. but..... by Chas · · Score: 1

    Will it be able to kick opposing players in the nuts?

    --


    Chas - The one, the only.
    THANK GOD!!!
  111. Giving Yellow and Red Cards, Re:Physical contact by Linuxathome · · Score: 1

    I wonder if the programmers will program in algorithms to weigh the cost and benefit of executing foul play in certain situations. I can see where machines with "360 degree" view can have a "leg up" (pun intended) on human players---they know when the official is not watching. Even if the official is watching, I can see certain situations where fouling a player would be advantageous.

  112. well, no... by roesti · · Score: 1

    In one of the halves, it would have to kick off from the centre circle. How would it get back into the goal square?

  113. Fiction... by Goonie · · Score: 1
    While Asimov's writings have undoubtedly influenced a great deal of thinking by real scientists about the ethics of robotics and artificial intelligence, the fact remains that they were promulgated in a work of fiction. To my knowledge, go government or professional body has adopted them in real life, nor are they likely to.

    If I recall correctly, Asimov was writing in the context of sentient (or at least the Turing-test-passing approximation of such) robots, which we do not have and aren't likely to any time soon. Secondly, the US military "violates" these laws just about every time it goes to war, if you count Tomahawk cruise missiles and armed Predator drones as robots, and, given their sponsorship of the DARPA autonomous vehicle challenge, they'll violate it left, right, and center if they ever get their hands on more truly autonomous devices. Whether this is morally correct or not is worthy of debate, but Asimov's laws are hardly the last word on the matter.

    --

    Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from a rigged demo
    --Andy Finkel (J. Klass?)
    1. Re:Fiction... by SnowZero · · Score: 2, Interesting

      As a robotics researcher, I've thought about this a lot, so here's my take:

      The biggest problem is that Asimov's 3 Laws require complete information, which is not possible. Opening a door could hurt a human on the other side, therefore no robot can open a door. If you walk backwards or in the dark, you might step on a baby, so you can't do that either. And so it goes, making any action not possible. At the sime time, a robot is supposed to act to save people from harm. In addition, this all assumes the robot can process its sensors well enough to recognize people in all situations, and all potential sources of harm.

      The best I've come up with is the following: A robot must take the action (possibly null) that results in the minimum expected harm to humans given currently available or easily obtainable information.

      That's a lot weaker, and results potential accidental deaths due to ignorance (just like human actions). But everything in life involves risk, so that's pretty much inescapable.

    2. Re:Fiction... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      The best I've come up with is the following: A robot must take the action (possibly null) that results in the minimum expected harm to humans given currently available or easily obtainable information.

      I hope they build decent sensors on those lawn mover robots, or else ...
      $ less /var/logs/LawnMoverProcess.log.69

      Scanning area: 0 % of the target grass cut
      Calculating the best cutting strategy: 5gf24dssf23
      Starting the cutting process

      Scanning area: 2.43 % of the target grass cut

      Scanning area: 4.62 % of the target grass cut
      Approaching object 157 detected
      Calculating object 157 distance: 11.4 meters
      Identifying object 157: little billy
      Odds of impact with object 157: 12 %

      Scanning area: 6.31 % of the target grass cut
      Calculating object 157 distance: 5.2 meters
      Odds of collision with object 157: 6 %

      Scanning area: 8.58 % of the target grass cut
      Calculating object 157 distance: 0.2 meters
      Odds of collision with object 157: Error: target movement too erratic

      Scanning area: 10.58 % of the target grass cut
      Impact with object 157 detected
      Lost visual on object 157
      Report incident 157 to administrator
      Warning: blade movement too rigid
      Starting blade cleaning process: completed

      Scanning area: 12.58 % of the target grass cut
  114. Sudden Death? by UTPinky · · Score: 1

    And in case of sudden death, do they get to use their lasers?

    --
    I'm only paranoid because everyone is against me...
  115. poor guys by Errtu76 · · Score: 1

    By 2050, our aim is to beat the winners of football's World Cup

    I hope the winners will run fast, before the evil robots come to beat them.

  116. re: by Fringex · · Score: 1

    Personally I don't believe it to be possible with the agility of humans. Sure a robot can probably kick harder and see 360 degrees around itself, but the footwork of defensive and offensive players in soccer is impressive to no end.

    However what I do find amusing is the little advantages they give machines to edge out over humans. Take the Kasparov vs. Deep Blue competition. The experienced chess player can see about 12 moves ahead. While Deep Blue was calculating billions of possible moves in seconds. Kasparov gave that machine a huge run for its money and beat it a few times if I recall correctly.

    Now these machines require 360 degrees of viewing, the added edge. I am also sure that they will kick the ball with amazing force that would make even the most stout soccer player wanna dodge the ball.

    Seems to me that the only way robots/AI has been able to best humans is by having distinct huge advantages in critical area's.

    Then again, when this fateful soccer tournament happens... no one in america will no since no one in america watches soccer.

  117. 150 pounds vs. 2 tons - gee, I wonder who wins. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It isn't exactly fair to have a robot with theoretically super-human strength to be knocking into human beings, kicking a rubber ball, and jumping around a field to attempt to win a soccer game .. is it?

    Uh oh - sounds like ethics here - "Robots are people too" and "Robots should be given fair treatment under title 9, like women" ...

    Great guys.

    So should insects, roaches, mice and dogs.

  118. on Robot Armies: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "One area that researchers are not keen on tackling, however, is robot armies. "Down through human history, the

    weapon that has caused the most deaths has been the knife, so all technology has a risk, but what we do with this

    technology is up to human beings," Mr Ishiguro said. "I don't think the idea of robot armies is a good one, but that's not

    my decision." "

    I can't beleive this ignoramus. THE KNIFE has killed more people than bombs and guns, huh? Wow. I guess World History never happened in the eyes of Mr. Ishiguro.

    As well, he claims that it's, "...not my decision" as to whether or not these things can be used as a type of clone-army (star wars!.. they kinda look like storm troopers!) and that is completely NOT true. If he really wanted protection against the use of this technology as robotic army prototypes or the framework for such an army, he could easily state such a doctrine in some type of legal document preventing the use of this technology for purposes of war.

    But he chooses not to, because everyone is thinkin of the bottom line, the big-fat BUCK, and he's no different than any other entreprenuer.

    Yay for the free market capitalists!

  119. Sounds familiar... by payndz · · Score: 1

    So when the England star players - Kev, Bev and the two Trevs - mysteriously malfunction during the World Cup, will Sam Slade: Robo-Hunter be hired to investigate?

    --
    You must think in Russian.
  120. not interesting? by MnO-Raphael · · Score: 1

    This will be about as exciting as watching a fork truck competing in weightliftning at the Olympics.

  121. they better make them extra tough by pugnatious · · Score: 0

    Or the human players will get "Inventive"
    also, no pocket EMP devices should be allowed
    to enter the stadium

  122. In the UK...(England) by hplasm · · Score: 0

    ...there has been a team of robots incapable of winning the World Cup since 1966....

    --
    ...and he grinned, like a fox eating shit out of a wire brush.
  123. The Scotsman? by TG1 · · Score: 1

    What they failed to report is the current robot team would probably beat the Scotland team as it stands!

  124. All your cup are belong to us by MMercurius · · Score: 1

    That is all

  125. In lack of... by Ben+Jao+Ming · · Score: 1

    ...a better human team they start building a robotic one. That's sad, Japan... real sad.

  126. The zeroth law by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In one of the later books in the Foundation series, R Daneel Olivaw, a robot, eventually comes to the conclusion that there is a Zeroth Law that supercedes the First Law, namely that a robot can do nothing through action or inaction that causes harm to come to "Humanity". The first law then is amended so that a robot cannot allow harm to come to a human, except when it is needed to obey the Zeroth Law.

  127. Robotic American spectators by ewg · · Score: 1

    Meanwhile American engineers are creating robots to watch soccer, an activity American sports fans consider too tedious for humans to perform.

    --
    org.slashdot.post.SignatureNotFoundException: ewg
  128. Sci-Fi Robots = Metallic, Real Robots = Plastic by KristoferP · · Score: 1

    Funny how Sci-Fi Robots tend to be these shiny metallic looking machines while real robots most often seem to be these plastic looking overgrown toys. I suppose it makes sense weightwise and such but why do they often chose to make them metallic in movies and comicbooks?

  129. You can just imagine ... by kbw · · Score: 1

    The robots with inadvertently break the legs of the human playes. These players will be replaced by a robotic team equiped with rocket launchers. Soon both sides will be armed and the team with the most robots with their heads still attached will win.

    I'm sure robots will make excellect footballers.

    1. Re:You can just imagine ... by yeremein · · Score: 1

      The robots with inadvertently break the legs of the human playes. These players will be replaced by a robotic team equiped with rocket launchers. Soon both sides will be armed and the team with the most robots with their heads still attached will win.

      So this is how the real-life Unreal Tournament will begin.

  130. nothing new by molotov02 · · Score: 1

    this is actually nothing new. I am a student working on a robotproject at TU Delft, in holland. there is a whole international competition for robotic soccer, with several competitions for different types of robots (we participate in the 4 legged AIBO league) http://www.robocup.org/ the goal of all this is indeed to have a humanoid team playing against the human world soccer champion team in 2050, and winning. but my point is; this is already going on for years, nothing new. but the extra ./ attention is nice though :)

  131. Re:Brazil by 808140 · · Score: 1

    Brazillian players get a lot of plastic surgery?

    I guess that explains Ronaldo. Plastic surgery gone wrong.

  132. Jetsons by scharkalvin · · Score: 1

    Reminds me of an episode of the Jetsons where
    George went to see a football game played by
    two robot teams. (The statue of Liberty play
    was rather interresting!)

  133. Shaolin by Fr05t · · Score: 1

    Team Shaolin will so kick their asses:
    http://www.apple.com/trailers/miramax/shao lin_socc er/

  134. why invest so much? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Surely it's cheaper and more intelligence-efficient to simply let humans such as Mike Owen and D Beckham play the game. Why waste all that intelligence when humans with virtually none can play the game well enough already?

  135. bzzzt by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sure, as long as it doesn't rain! ;)
    (just kidding)

  136. Key Quote by Torgen · · Score: 1

    "By 2050, our aim is to beat the winners of football's World Cup and we are very confident that we will be able to do that," said Shu Ishiguro, who heads Robot Laboratory in Osaka. "When we have accomplished that, we will have a society in which humans and artificial intelligence are completely in harmony." This quote shows that these scientists are obviously clueless, if he thinks the reaction of the fans in the stands will be completely harmonious when the robots beat their team. They'll burn every Toyota in the city.

  137. Futurism sucks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Prove it now, or STFU

  138. Endurance by Torgen · · Score: 1

    All the robots have to do is keep the ball moving at all times, and away from the human team, tiring them out until the last few minutes, then going for the win. They'll be able to compute the trajectory of the ball to never miss, track all players around them to avoid them, and have detailed dossiers on the playstyle of all players. Just run the humans into the ground, and once fatigue sets in, they have the upper hand. I easily see this happening in 5020! ;)

    1. Re:Endurance by OwnedByTwoCats · · Score: 1

      Where do the robots get their energy from? Batteries? Then the robots have to worry about energy management as well. The humans can just keep the ball moving at all times, and away from the robot team, making them burn fuel until they're out of gas, and then go for the win.

    2. Re:Endurance by Oktober+Sunset · · Score: 1

      can a robot kick a muddy ball through a puddle of mud inn the pissing rain with perfect accuracy? can they even move through mud? and most importantly will they be able to tell when the refs back is turned?

  139. they forgot one little thing by DrWhizBang · · Score: 1

    using a descendent of the 38cm tall VisiON...

    at 38 cm tall, I think the VisiON is more likely to be kicked than it is to kick.

    --
    Schrodinger's cat is either dead or really pissed off...
  140. Someone has to say it... by jetsfandb · · Score: 1

    I, for one, welcome our new soccer robot overlords.

    --
    It is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion, It is by the beans of Java that thoughts acquire speed, The hands acqui
  141. Is this in the Techmo league? by geoffrobinson · · Score: 1

    Or is this for a battlebot show?

    --
    Except for ending slavery, the Nazis, communism, & securing American independence, war has never solved anything.
  142. New Leadership by lbmouse · · Score: 1

    I, for one, welcome our new AI soccer playing robot overlords.

  143. I think the real question is... by aichpvee · · Score: 1

    Do these robot runs Linux?

    --
    The Farewell Tour II
  144. It's all perfectly clear now! by KlaymenDK · · Score: 1

    Aha! It's all perfectly clear now!

    We don't have those promised 21st century-things *because* the brains that were to develop them got sidetracked while doing research - on the Internet!

    If we kill the Internet I'm sure it won't be a decade before we have flying-car traffic jams all over downtown Luna Metro. Right?

  145. Re:Brazil by one_n_only_wildcat · · Score: 2, Interesting

    It was kind of an extrapolation, Brazil has the highest rate per capita of plastic surgery of any nation in the world. (I would link to some studies to back that up, but time is of the essence.)

    --
    "Something unknown is doing we don't know what." - Sir Arthur Eddington
  146. footerama? by elmurado · · Score: 1

    Bend It Like Bender....

  147. Mechanical Advantage by PingPongBoy · · Score: 1

    Humans are genetically limited to the form of their anatomy - two arms, two legs, etc. Machines don't have this limitation, i.e., a team of millipedes.

    I'm sure that a robot with ball possession and fast cpu can run around a team of people bounce the ball on the head, and no one can catch it. That won't make the robot intelligent since it's a far cry from ball bouncing to generic thought. A supervised training stint is all that is required to learn running, evasion, ball handling, goal scoring, goalkeeping.

    --
    Know your pads. One time pad: good for cryptography. Two timing pad: where to take your mistress.
    1. Re:Mechanical Advantage by Fringex · · Score: 1

      granted this is old news but... Now you are adding severe one ups on the machines in order to be superior. A team of millipedes with all their legs for mobility and speed to far outweigh human performance. Just like I stated with Deep Blue. Only way the machine could win is to calculate billions of moves ahead.