Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Robots to Watch Kids
Archangel Michael writes "Microsoft announced today that is testing a new toy / robot
to watch over kids. My question is, if the toy BSOD does it take the
kid with it? Now we are letting inanimate objects raise our kids! When
will it end?"
Awesomo loves you!
I find laziness to be an excellent motivator.
...until it gets viruses and spyware.
Hmmm.
Unless this "robot" is a block of cheese, it's probably going to be fairly animate.
I'll form my OWN solar system! With blackjack! And hookers!
Now we are letting inanimate objects raise our kids!
You mean "as opposed to the warm and healthy TV-education kids have been raised by in the past 15 years" ? At least this robot might create the opportunity to go play outside.
Stop seeing everything so negative
When will I end this grieving ? When will my future begin ?
The teddy bear sitting in the corner of the child's room might look normal, until his head starts following the kid around using a face recognition program
Does anyone else think that this could be the scariest thing ever? Especially if they make a clown version?
I'm not stressed. I'm just terribly, terribly alert.
I was wondering how long until a terrible BSOD joke, then I realized IT'S IN THE FUCKING POST! It's not funny anymore, folks! Let the dead horse rest in peace.
Since when has this country used intellectual elite as a pejorative term?
I give it two months before someone can boot Linux on it, and in 6 months they could do it without needing to solder...
Why are there always the inevitable jokes about BSODs? They're from like, Windows 95 or 98 which is now at least 7 years old. I've NEVER seen 2000 or XP produce a blue screen of death EVER - and use it all day every day in many different capacities as a software developer.
I know it's physically capable of a BSOD, but really, has anyone ever seen XP or 2000 SP3 actually BSOD on a regular basis. My experience is that XP itself is incredibly stable. Infinitely more so than 95 or 98.
Yeah, because they've augmented BSODs with C4 explosives now. Glad you caught that. Now we are letting inanimate objects raise our kids!
Yeah, this is new. Nevermind radios, TVs, arcades, game consoles, computers, the internet, Slashdot, etc....
Do you think Bill Gates will keep a universal robot remote control in her bra like Mom?
-73, de n1ywb
www.n1ywb.com
as a father of an amazingly cute 6 month old little girl, I have to say.
"If you dont want to watch your kids, you shouldnt have had them". there its said, its out, and thats it.
Personally the highlight of my day is coming home and spending the 5 or so hours with my wife and daughter. I spend the entire time playing with the little girl, its amazing what they do when you watch them, you can see their little outlooks forming, I really do think I have a good idea what she will be like in 3-4 years, as well as in 10-20 years. I really cant wait, but am enjoying every minute I have.
Some may say that robots could make life easier when you want to do little things like cook dinner, or take a shower, stick the kid in a bouncy seat, or exersaucer and bring em with you. My daughter loves to watch me cook (from a safe splatter free distance).
my $.02
#include sig.h
Now, am I really going to trust a Microsoft security system to ascertain that it really is the plumber, rather than some smackhead from down the street?
Using HTML in email is like putting sound effects on your phone calls. Just say <strong>no</strong>.
You've obviously never hired a teenage babysitter...
Not until society* changes. Too often children are as much a status symbol as anything. I have seen parents, both professionals (Doctor, Lawyer, etc.) with full-time careers who:
-have children
-raised by nanny
-in school at 3 years (pre-school)
How much time are they committing to this? Why not a robot, probably cheaper.
*By society here I am (sadly) referring to American society.
1) A robot may not use a non-Microsoft product or through inaction, allow a human being to use a non-Microsoft product.
2) A robot must obey orders given it by human beings except where such orders would conflict with the First Law.
3) A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Law.
Insert witty sig here.
I wonder; if the inanimate object had been driven by Linux it would make the independants happier?
In a sense, we've been letting inanimate objects help raise our children for a LONG time, from stuffed dolls to cradles.
Microsoft builds something that probably serves as a monitor, and suddenly this tool is evil.
If Microsoft develops a screwdriver, will people refuse to use it?
Michael Jackson announces a sudden decision to become a cyborg.
Slashdot: News for Nerds, Stuff that matters only to them
That job would belong to television thank you very much. Why every one of my 9 kids here in the trailor park wuz done raised good on TV. How many slashdotters remember the jingle sung by a cowboy on CBS, "After the messegez, weee'll be rigghhht back"... Inanimate objects have been raising our kids for 50 years.. and it shows.
meh
Are You Sarah Conner
Well Im here to babysit your child.
you can Download driver updates at MSky.net
Thank you for updating The babysiters web browser Please reboot me
Ill be back
The only things certain in war are Propaganda and Death. You can never be sure which is which though
We've been waiting 20 years for the 2005 equivilant of Teddy Ruxpin, who scared the shit out of kids everywhere back in the 80s. The day has finally come!
It would be cool if it didn't suck.
When you compare Slashdot to many geeks social lives it's alot less inanimate then you might think. We interact with hundredsd if not thousands of other people every week. On TV you just watch others interact.
It's like the community in "the real world", it's not really alive as a whole, but it's still there and evolving and developing.. and you get less dupes in the real world.
I like muppets.
"Except for any refund elected by Microsoft, YOU ARE NOT ENTITLED TO ANY DAMAGES, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES, if the Robot wrecks everything you own and KILLS YOUR FREAKIN' KID."
Insert witty sig here.
Heavens to mergatroyd!
Microsoft Parent 2086?
Just imagine the Slashdot posts by then:
"Thats what happens when you deregulate the robotics market. The fact they license by number of children is unfair!! What if one of my kids is a clone!?!? I want my kids to be raised by an open source father."
The parent poster makes a damn good point.
Technology is not a substitute for people and American culture is becoming so enamoured with technology to the point of forgetting what matters- family, values, and human contact.
Of course who's to say in the far future that we'll have robots that imitate humans so well that some robots are more emphatic and caring than some people that walk the earth.
Now we are letting inanimate objects raise our kids! When will it end?
What good is an inanimate robot?
What?
Ha ... and I wonder how many of them have "only told their teddy bears" where the bodies are?
Yell & scream & rant & rave... it's no use... you need a shaaaave ~ Bugs Bunny
I don't think this is a good idea. What happens if a kid bumps his head and knocks himself out. I guess the robot could quickly call someone. That's fine. What happens if a kid falls in a swimming pool. If the robot calls someone, by the time they arrive it might be too late where as a human might be able to do something else. Then again if you let your kids play by the pool I think you should ask yourself some questions.
The article just says Microsoft is showing a prototype, not that your own house will be filled with Microsoft robots this evening, so calm down.
Prototype != Product on Shelves
Look at car companies, they've been making prototypes for a long time, usually to see how the market responds to a design to test the waters so the vehicle doesn't dive when it's released. Plus, back in the '80's, remember when robots were supposed to be the "new thing", they had robots on display doing household chores, living up to the Jetsons ideal house. As far as I can see the only persistent robot presence is the prohibitively expensive Roomba vacuum cleaner which itself can't be too complex of a robot.
I guess people just want to regurgitate more BSOD jokes at Microsoft's undefensible expensive. Good job on the originality, guys...
Do you have stairs in your house?
Marques Johansson
allowing a parent talk to the child through a special phone, or monitor the child via a camera and wireless Internet connection.
Who else gets to monitor your child, or tell them what to do? "Teddy says go and open the door..".
Given the track record for home wireless security, and MS's own track record for security, it just seems like the wrong kind of opportunity for the wrong kind of people. Combining microsoft and wireless child monitoring gives a whole new and disturbing dimension to war driving...
Microsoft is talking with the state Department of Transportation about sharing its interface with the government,
Now that's reassuring. The US govn't would never abuse such a thing. George Orwell eat your heart out....
From the maker of Windows itself: How to use the CtrlScroll to crash Windows.
i imagine this is very, very helpful to some developers who work with data protection and need to test-crash junk all the time.
It doesn't work man! I did the registry entries, rebooted and I am pressing ctrl. Then I tap ScrLk once, then t[NO CARRIER]
All your child are belong to us.
I am defenseless. Use your button. Mod me down with all of your hatred.
"It looks like you are trying to go to the bathroom. Would you like help with that?"
- None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
Now we are letting inanimate objects raise our kids!
Whoa, whoa, whoa! Let's slow down here. This isn't some nannybot (a), and (2) the thing's just like a cuddly baby monitor with more features. Are parents who have normal walkie-talkie-esque baby monitors somehow letting radio waves raise their children?
Come on, Archangel.
During our discussion, important value and ethical issues arose in the design and use of such "relational robots." These robots are meant to create bonds and simulate "authentic" relationships. They react to voices, track their owner's eyes, respond and project emotions, and so on. Yet, they remain robots - all these actions and reactions are programmed - pre-determined. So, how do the designers decide what emotions to program and which to omit? In an effort to be realistic, My Real Baby gets happy as well as sad. If you bounce her when she's happy, she gets more happy; if you bounce her when she's fussy, her fussiness only increases. How should she react, then, if she is abused? It is not hard to imagine a child (especially one who is herself a victim of abuse) to violently shake, strike or otherwise "abuse" the doll. How should this evocative object respond? Should she show pain? Begin to cry? Eventually "pass out" or even "die" if the abuse continues? How "real" should the robot be in order to create an "authentic" relationship?
[In the end, the designers wanted the doll/robot to react as a child would, with pain and sadness. However, the company's lawyers stepped in and were concerned that any type of response by the doll might encourage further abuse (stimulus-response theory), and they didn't want to be accused of actually encouraging abusive behavior. In the end, the doll simply did not react to abuse.]
Other ethical dilemmas related to the design of such robots included whether they should be capable of deception or betrayal, two common features of human relationships. Or, should they "die." On one hand, the experience of death as part of the life cycle is an important part of psychological development and would add to the "authenticity" of the relationship. On the other hand, one of the benefits of these robots seems to be the avoidance of the emtional damage that can happen when a "real" companion (whether a human friend, or even a companion dog) dies.
Talk about misleading articles. The summary implies the thing watches your kids, gets up and shouts, "ur kid has been pwned!!" and continues to carry him off somewhere.
Then I RTFA and see it's a baby monitoring device. Everyone can simma down nah.
MICROSOFT ROBOT ATTACKS FIREFOX USER
(ap) A brief but violent incident between a new Microsoft 'nanny' robot and an Internet user was reported today.
"I had just activated the nanny robot and placed it next to my keyboard when I tried to access the Internet for further instructons" said the victim. "Suddenly the robot attacked me, biting my hands and trying to chew off my fingers. I just barely escaped. I had to beat the robot to death with my baseball bat. The only thing I can imagine why it attacked was because I was using the Firefox browser, and not Internet Explorer."
The visibly-shaken victim's injuries were treated at a local hospital, and he was released. Microsoft had no comment, other than to say there will be a patch issued soon.
--30--
The child has performed an illegal operation and will be terminated.
45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
The economy has gotten to a point where to be middle class, you need a two incomes. So many people end up in a situation where they have no time.
Quit frankly, this country need a big push to go back to a single income families.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
Harry Harrison beat you to it. Remember "I Always Do What Teddy Says" ?
Danger Will Gates, Danger DANGER!
This signature used to contain a cute kitty virus with ansii art. Please set the slashdot editors on fire. Thank you