Slashdot Mirror
Robot Pets Almost as Good as Real Ones?
Gallamine writes "Many people claim that pets are good for their owners. But, what about robot pets? Some scientists at the Center for the Human-Animal Bond at Purdue's Veterinary school say yes, robot pets can benefit humans. Petting an AIBO caused the human stress hormone cortisol to decrease in patients, much like a real dog, although the effects weren't as pronounced. Also, AIBOs sent to nursing homes caused the residents to be less depressed and lonely. Similar research is being done by Dr. Dr. Takanori Shibata with his robotic seal named Pero."
A real dog is devoted to its master and euphoricly happy to see him/her.
A robot dog is a pile of parts running a program.
After all, look at how much comfort and companionship a child can get from a simple teddy bear. Same concept, your imagination will create a personality for your little friend if necessary.
why should this effect not be understandable? when we were kids, we had plush-friends that helped us e.g. falling asleep. now having a moving, mechanic sounding fluffy battery-powered friend, that only seems to express the ongoing of industrialisation / techdom.
i really don't wonder =)
No robot can ever replace my pet rock!
I wonder how much an electric sheep would cost...
Good point, I wonder how a non-intelligent psuedo-pet compares to a more intelligent model so far as the benefits on the human psyche. Anything we associate with comfort and stability I imagine would have a strong bond with how we react to them.
For example a favorite pair of jeans or any similar item. We're not even associating them with a living being but we still tend to personify them and cling to them as something we'd miss even if we replaced them with an identical item.
At what price learning? At what cost wisdom? The price is a man's peace of mind, and the cost is his life.
And what happens when you give the patients brand new 60" LCD TVs instead? Is it really pets, or just the novelty of new toys?
A cool new thing might make sick and old people less bored. They are people after all. A new robot would make my day!
What happens when every institurion has its IBO? Will they be as interesting as a dog when the novelty runs out? I don't think so.
I'd really worry about a fleet of 'entertainment' robots looking after our sick and aged. Seems like a classic setting for a robot uprising story.
ls
Seriously, I love cats, but contrary to popular belief, they are the LEAST "spiritual" animals I know.
When I am king, you will be first against the wall.
Yes. Just the same. Owners show the same mentality here.
Ancient Greek Philosophers -18c Enlightenment Thinkers -Slashdotters
I do understand that not all can have a real animal.. but.. for the rest of you, theres alot of loney pets in diffrent shelters around your country, why not save one? I did, and I cant understand how attached I got to the little one, his now a part of the family. Amazing experience as I never had any animals before, and they dont require alot of maintainance either.. easyer then keeping a flower alive, as pets complain when they need food/water.. :-)
of course robot pets will work, just like teddy bear works. And is much cheaper.
#
#\ @ ? Colonize Mars
#
I once owned a drinking bird, but I can't say I noticed any health benefits from my robot pet.
I prefer plants instead as they are easy to care for and bring real health benefits.
Reduce, reuse, cycle
But there are some places where they can't live, such as nursing homes. So can a robot pet provoke the same reactions?
Not to nitpick, but this is not always true. I have an elderly relative in a nursing home, and the home itself has a canine companion. (However, I can see how it would be difficult/impossible for individual residents to have pets.)
Second, the effects of Animal Assisted Therapy are well known. It makes sense that a replicant (like the Aibo) that offers a subset of relevant canine functionality could offer a subset of the health benefits as well.
I want to drag this out as long as possible. Bring me my protractor.
in the future, sony's aibo will spy on it's owners for playing copied DVD's and CD's... it will then use it's wifi to connect to your access point and let it's evil master sony know what you are doing... but really, who has $2k to blow on some pice of crap, robosapien kicks ass anyday!
Excuses Are Like Assholes - Everybody's Got One
I, for one, welcome our robotic canine overlords
I change my sig often.
That's exactly what I would have called it. Yep...
Play with it long enough, and you get committed.
Every normal man must be tempted at times to spit on his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin to slit throats.
...by woody allen (in Sleeper)
"...and after you've moved into your permanent home, you'll enjoy mechanized servants. Until then, you can have a computerized dog."
[rags the robot dog, in computer voice] Woof. Woof. Woof. Hello, I'm Rags.
[woody allen] Is he housebroken, or will he be leaving little batteries all over the floor?
"Beware of bugs in the above code; I have only proved it correct, not tried it." -- Donald Knuth
I have yet to see a robot dog that can follow my kid down the stairs, eating every single potato chip he drops.
Why spend hundreds of dollars on a anthropomorphic toaster by Sony with a crap warranty when you can own a miracle of millions of years of evolution that will last up to 15 years for next to nothing?
They don't get sick, thus don't have vet fees amounting to hundreds a year (if not thousands). They don't pee, they don't shit. They don't cause lawsuits from the paper boy who just got his gonads chewed. And you can silent a yapping robot pet by taking out its batteries and not get the SPCA on your ass.
So hell yeah... robot pets are definitely better than those damn pesky biological ones!
Welley Corporation - SLM Scammers
How much stress relief is your robot pet going to give you when he gets the blue screen of death?
At one time, a toy store had a clearance sale on those Virtual Pets, those things with the little LCD screen you hang around your neck, and feed and take care of, for like $1 a piece. Cut little pixelated pandabear. I was like, whoa!, awesome bargain, I figured I could give them to little kids I saw and brighten their day. I bought 20 of them. Came with battery and everything, all you had to do was pull out a little piece of paper to make battery contact and the thing was off and running.
Let me tell you, those were the most ***!^@^#$^#$ annoying things in the world. Even though they had a clock built in, they had no concept of time. Would beep at you constantly, at random, 3 hours, here, there everywhere, all through the night. You wanted to smash the !@@##$$% hell out of them, and this was just with one running.
People are going to feel the same about robot pets. Like shut the @#$%%^ up, you piece of #$%%^^. Its absolutely a braindead idea. Geeks are such incredibly brilliant morons who are long short on common sense, and this is just another example.
Computers and people are a pain enough in this world. The less you have of both, the more stress free your life is. Notice how stressed out you get when your computer is not running absolutely optimal. Exactly. Or when friends are hitting you up to do something for them or bail them out of some bs? Get rid of them all.
Robot pets = more junk for the recycle bin
Robots that do useful but repetitive work over and over with zero maintenance or user input = golden
My microwave = a beautiful thing
My honda rebel motorbike, that cranks up everytime = a beautiful thing
An analog dial thermomenter on my wall, that always words and needs no batteries = a beautiful thing
The brick that holds up my house via compression, and will last for thousands of years and still work =
Aluminum, that is an excellent roofing material, because it never rusts (well not technically, but when it does, it makes a ruby hard surface when oxidized that protects it forever)
Glass, because if not shattered, lasts a million years
A beautiful thing
Whats not beautiful:
Windows computers, that crash and break when you overload them
Linux computers, that are buggery complicated and obtuse to configure or remember a long line of command line params for (nigh impossible if you are diabetic or hypglycemic), and whos man pages are total garbage
Mac comptuers, that you have to reboot everytime you pick a new set of extensions, and freeze with a rectangle and a bomb in them.
All cars, in general, that were never built with any study made by an engineer actually going into a junk yard, and seeing what lasts
Iron, steel because it rusts and turns to junk
Wood, because it rots
Rats, dirt, dust, lint, and spiders, because you always are having to clean up after them (in my computer shop)
You know, in 20 years in the comptuer business, the only piece of computer hardware I have ever had that has never become obsolete and turned to junk, is the ubiquitous standardized power cord. The POWER CORD! All other computer hardware, even keyboards and mice (switching from AT, to PS2, to USB) have become obsolete and crap. But these power cords, as humble as the are, are the only thing that have resisted obsolecene. Why, because its a !@#$ standsard that should never be changed. When you !@#$ with ANSI, you mess us all over.
I imagine now that I have posted this, the morons in the computer industry for no other reason are going to switch to different power cords, just to sell us all more power cords cause we have to buy them, because our old ones won't work anymore.
Call me when robot pets get realistic tongues and can lick peanut butter off stuff.
Let the commencement BEGINULATE!
When I come home I turn on my computer. I browse a bit. Read slashdot. Checkup on a few online strategic games to see how things are going, update my website, code a bit...
All these actions are to make me feel alive. To puzzle with tiny bits in my life. A dog, cat, fish etc. would be the same.
When I was a child I had an aquarium. I could look at it. I needed to feed the fish. Sometimes I had to clean it up. It usually took several hours but was quite fun. Other times I bought a new fish and put into the tank.
We also had a dog. It was always happy to see me. It greeted me when I came from school. I hated when it was my turn to go out with it, especially when the weather was bad, but that's a part of life.
And now I pet my computer. It do make me feel happy. Time goes by. I have something to do.
Maybe it's not about the pet... maybe it's about having something (slightly) useful to do when we come home from a long day at work. Something relaxing. Something to take our minds away from work and into idle mode... just maybe.
-:) Oh no - not again.
www.rednebula.com
Why, I still am rewarded with bleated beeps of love and affection from my faithful Petster each and every day!
~jeff
I robot pet could never replace my cats. Never.
A robot dog is a pile of parts running a program.
At least you won't feel guilty about vivisecting your robot dog... and it is alot less messy.
Only to idiots, are orders laws.
-- Henning von Tresckow
Sounds like the average "big robot defender" type of anime.
Substitute the troubled teenage pilot with a dog and you'r off.
"You superiour intellect is no match for our puny weapons" - The Simpsons
I have never seen a fixed cat hump anything.
And you forgot three important ones - play, purr, and cuddle. No dog is as cute as a playing cat. And my cats would be on anti-depressants if they didn't get to cuddle with someone at least once a day.
Wake me up when they build a cuddly robotic kitten, that will ride around on my shoulder being cute at people for the rest of eternity!
You can hit them, break them and throw them and they won't complain which is not possible with living pets,Living pets make you feel human and make you care about them.
They called me mad, and I called them mad, and damn them, they outvoted me. -Nathaniel Lee
Realdoll (not safe for work) just as good as real woman.
I too have felt the cold finger of injustice.
"Doctor! Doctor! I feel like a robotic pet!"
"Yes, yes, calm down. Aibo-leive you."
When I come home I get turned on by my computer. I browse a bit. Read slashdot. Checkup on a few online strategic games to see how things are going, update my website, code a bit... All these actions are to make me feel alive. To puzzle with tiny bits in my life. A dog, cat, fish etc. would be the same. When I was a child I had an aquarium. I could look at it. I needed to feed the fish. Sometimes I had to clean it up. It usually took several hours but was quite fun. Other times I bought a new fish and put into the tank. We also had a dog. It was always happy to see me. It greeted me when I came from school. I hated when it was my turn to go out with it, especially when the weather was bad, but that's a part of life. And now I pet my computer. It do make me feel happy. Time goes by. I have something to do. Maybe it's not about the pet... maybe it's about having something (slightly) useful to do when we come home from a long day at work. Something relaxing. Something to take our minds away from work and into idle mode... just maybe.
Dr. Dr. :>
You could replace it with a spy rock And you'd never need feel alone again
I hope I can get it in my apartment without the landlord seeing it. We aren't allowed to have pets, but the girl that lives next door has a goldfish, so wtf? I can just see me and my Dalek going out jogging through the park with the rest of the pet owners on a saturday morning. Seeing that cuddly Dalek with a big smile on it's face not knowing which poodle to exterminate first is just sheer joy I tell you. We live joyous lives through our pets.
Join the Slashcott! Feb 10 thru Feb 17!
From the PARO Q&A section:
Ai-ai-ai!
Something that will never be duplicated by a robot is a pet's personality and individual look.
Most all these robots look and act the same, its fun for a week and then it is just another gadget.
He who knows best knows how little he knows. - Thomas Jefferson
Honestly, bringing up the RealDoll is a valid parallel. How is this flamebait? The moderation in this joint get more dumbass every day.
Robots need love too, you know.
Per Aspera Ad Astra.
http://www.steelersfever.com/video/agpsc.wmv
Try getting your pet robot to do that! LOL
He who knows best knows how little he knows. - Thomas Jefferson
Are pet rocks as good as live pets too?
Some say he is made with ascii, others that he is eyeballed daily by millions. All we know is, he is known as the Sig
So Robot pets eh? I personally own 4 parrots. Now, how on God's green Earth is a Robot supposed to mimic the antics I see on a daily basis that I see in my birds? Now, the birds honking, screaming, talking, coming up with their own sentences, being fluffy, playing in water and stealing my food... can't be replaced by a metal pet that attempts to honk and learn to talk like my birds... I mean, how could I give up a pet that tells ME to goto sleep every night for a robot?!
-- Josh
"Whoopie! Man, that may have been a small one for Neil, but that's a long one for me!" - Pete Conrad
It sounds as though they are basically saying that a fake dog is a poor substitute for a real dog. Not much surprise there.
..... er ..... Staffordshire Bull Terrier Crossbreed lying alongside me. Her powerful, muscular jaws, packed with razor sharp teeth, were just millimetres from my face. Yet at no time did I feel any cause to be afraid. Not because she was programmed not to harm me, like some robot, but because she had chosen not to harm me. That was a great feeling, but it also made me aware of my own responsibilities to her. As she drifted off to sleep, her legs began to twitch and she gave out a few little high-pitched barks; no doubt she was dreaming her wolf-dreams, running with the pack. And with the light of dawn, she would lick me awake.
There is something about the relationship between human and dog that cannot quite be replicated artificially. It is a real two-way relationship: we are accepted into our dogs' homes just as much as they are accepted into ours. It's simply not possible to feel the same way about a piece of machinery, however pretty you try to make it. Artificial intelligence to date still looks very artificial; it's not so much that smart programs are passing the Turing test, but dumb humans are failing it.
Just the other night, I was lying in bed with my pit
No machine is ever going to replace that.
Je fume. Tu fumes. Nous fûmes!
"Honestly, bringing up the RealDoll is a valid parallel. How is this flamebait?"
/. had mod points and a lack of sufferance.
/. at -1 some time. You will see a bunch of posts like yours. Only those posts are not made in jest.
I suspect that it was the "just as good as a real woman" crack.
If you'd said, "Will they be telling us that the RealDoll is just as good as a spouse next?" then it might have been funny.
It's also worth noting that RealDolls come in both male and female versions. Talking about just the female version is a bit flamebaitish in and of itself. Maybe you just happened on the day that one of the female readers of
If your intent was to make a joke, then you need to let the readers in on your intent more.
If you were trying to make a statement...I still don't know what it was. Maybe some context? You know, at least include the statement that you are trying to make?
Try reading
If my robot catches a virus and bites the kid next door, does it get put down or do we blame Microsoft? As soon as computers are given mobility security really does become an issue. What if someone hacks your robodog to try and kill you. "Hi my name's Chucky, wanna play?"
The argument is that robot pets can generate some of the same responses as real pets, just at a much smaller degree. No one is arguing they are "Almost as Good as" real pets.
Mathematics is made of 50 percent formulas, 50 percent proofs, and 50 percent imagination.
That "pets" fake or real are good for you is without debate. From a teddy bear to a dog they make us feel secure and give us something to care for. Yet in a way these pets are still a replacement, you don't give a toddler a real pet to take off so you give them a teddy bear instead. If you cannot or do not want to have kids a dog can be used as a replacement.
So why is it stupid to use more robotic teddy bears for older people who need something that reacts. Sure there are well established projects that bring real pets into the lives of the sick or the elderely but this is still out of reach of some people.
Allergies are the simplest reason. What if the patient simply can handle real animals. Should they live in complete isolation?
What if a patient is mentally incapable of dealing with a real pet. A patient prone to uncontrolled rage or just uncontrolled movement in general would be hell on the pets. A robot doesn't mind being flung across a room or being severly beaten.
And what of the other way around? Pets bite. Do you really want a bleeder to be around a real bet wich bites and scratches?
I also seen some experiments where mentally disabled people dealt with robots better then with humans. A robot is never moody never changes it pattern. I forgot the name but one mental handicap makes it very hard for its sufferers to deal with emotion in other people. A robot cat would always react exactly the same making interaction a lot easier for them.
I see this as a very nice tech solution to a problem with no bad side effects. No real dogs and cats won't be replaced for those who can take proper care of them. Yet for those who can't because it would be bad for the human or the pet this provides an alternative.
On the other hand, we should not see this as an excuse to deny people real pets. Why exactly do a lot of homes for the elderly deny them their pets? Oh sure I know the reasons, they just don't seem very good ones. Then again I never vote for the guy offering the biggest taxcut.
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
Japan has it right with this. Their robotic technology is getting better all the time and robo pets are developing among a population which seems to be willing to accept them. If only for the mental health benefits this can only be seen as a plus. Companionship without the moral responsibility at least for those who are otherwise unable to take care of a pet any longer because of age or infirmity. People who are otherwise unable to maintain relationships for other reasons because of mental or development problems are another group this can actually benefit. There is a human need for companionship and interaction and this sort of thing seems to be a good evolution toward fulfilling that need.
Enjoy your Karma, after all you earned it. Feel your Karma Joe, feel it burn.
not to mention, they don't poop on the floor and eat your shoes!
The real question we have to ask is can they make robotic puppies as cute as these?
Is currently flashing its LED's furiously to the sound of Orbital. It clearly has good taste.
Task Mangler
Looks like a sponsered study by Sony. ;-)
They should have considered a control group with some other _interactive_ toy along with a group with a robot pet. I guess the results would have been same.
God created man in his own image, but somehow he evolved into a hairless monkey.
A robot != a living thing.
PERIOD.
If you think it does, then you are not sane.
Only today I had to hold my dog by the neck pressing it to the floor in order to prove that I'm in a higher position. Otherwise it would probably bite me all the time, take my things and not give them back, and growl me away from the best place for watching TV. And it's a MittelSchnauzer, not a giant wolfhound!
Robotic pets IMHO are soulless, even when they show emotions, because they're programmed to do that. They are also much more stupid and fragile (no regeneration!).
-Eric
SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
You believe the brain to be all of your mind.
I think science will prove otherwise with time. Physics include both relativity and quantuum physics, and there seems to be no end to the mystery in sight. String theory is dealing with what? 10-15 dimensions? How can you say it's all mechanical when science have been dealing with the mysterious the last 30-40 years?
Newton introduced the mechanical clockwork universe as a metaphor. He didn't even believe in it himself, it was just a model for calculating certain macrocosmic phenomena to him. Both Einstein and Newton respected and understood several concepts of God. Newton was christian to his death even.
This newfangled ignorance about it all, and calling it "science", is startling to me.
http://www.debunkingskeptics.com/
If you keep up with a good backup plan, your pet doesn't die and you don't need to suffer from it loss
A living pet is better. When I pick a puppy, I look for a feisty dog. My dog Molly was a boxer/pointer mix. Have you ever seen that movie Air Bud? She came pretty close to that.
She could play frisbee, she could catch tennis balls. My kids would hit tennis balls to her and she would catch them and bring them back to the kids to hit the ball out again.
Also, I taught how to be a soccer goalie by first securing here to the center of the goal and teaching her to block the ball. Eventuall she played with being tied to the goal.
She could easily manuver a soccer ball, molly was a 60lb dog, all muscle. Anypay Molly livedd to 7 1/2 years old,
Boxers are prone to several heart conditions. Molly was nver sick, her last day she just followed my oldest boy into his room at the end of the day, she went into her kennel, laid down and passed.
Four months passed and my wife and I got a new dog. Once again we were looking for a feisty dog, not a particular breed, just attitude. We ended findin a LasaPoo. At 13 weeks old she is playing getch. I'll be getting a small frisbee soon to teach her how to catch a freisbee. I've got a large ball and I'm going to teach her how to jump on a ball and roll it. She's pretty smart, I don't need to give her a treat to teach her a trick, all she wants is to hear "good girl" and a scratch on the belly.
I do write programs for my firefighting robot. But to replace a living , breathing, companion with a robot... no
I don't think so.
Clearly a post made by an android deviod of all love and emotion. I mean FFS are people here really that sad? Computing is great, but here, its taken WAY to far.
You feel sleepy. Close your eyes. The opinions stated above are yours. You cannot imagine why you ever felt otherwise.
Once I had a dog. One time I rolled off my bed while I was sleeping, and fell on my dog. I spooked him. He bit me (HARD), and he gave me four very nice holes in my head. Still have the scars. I wanted to crush my dog's head with a reverse jaws of life. I have a pond in my backyard. Once, my dog fell through the ice of the frozen pond. I had to jump in and save him, and I almost got stuck myself. I wanted to choke the doggy life out of him. These are the short versions, and I've had other dogs. These, however, are the things I remember most. It's probably why I loved this dog the most. Humans love imperfection. I think pets, and dogs in particular, are the only loving relationship some people have. A robot will never be that, no matter how advanced it is. We know it's not "real". Maybe this will change somewhere down the line. But, We love things like us. Things that have a good, bad, and ugly. This study is quite flawed in my opinion. All they are seeing are the effects of novelty.
Tune out.
Robotic pets are good and have a place in helping people when real pets cannot be used! ie, in hospitals where a pet might convey a disease to an immuno compromised person. So robotic dogs have a welcome and needed role to play.
That said...
go to Petfinder: http://petfinder.com/ or http://petfinder.org/
and look at all those Discarded pets who are waiting for adoption and face almost certain death, if they are not adopted!
Most of these pets are loyal, loving, adorable and fluffy. 40% are purebred. They deserve a home!
Thanks!
A living being is much more than a bunch of 'meat components' running some complex program.
Those who would have it otherwise seem to me like the early cosmologists who thought the solar system (and the universe in general) could be modelled by a cunning arrangement of brass cogs, spindles and gears.
Also, I wonder at those who could possibly feel the same degree of affection and empathy towards a machine as they could with a real, flesh and blood dog, cat, horse, gerbill etc. Something wrong there, surely.
I've known a lot of stupid dogs that also think you are playing with it. Some dogs, you just simply can't punish, because no matter what you do, they think you are trying to play with it. It's absolutely hopeless. That's why I think something like this robotic seal is an advancement. It actually learns!!! A robotic pet would be much easier to train, because it would have a more intuitive learning system, that works the way a human would think that a pet should learn.
While I suspect this is well intentioned, it has the potential to send the message that we are attempting to abandon our own interactions with the elderly and substitute machines instead. Someday technology may blurr the line between mechanical life and biological life, but it is so far from there at this point that the use of such tools outside the laboratory comes across as looking for a way to make the elderly less of a burden. Something about that doesn't sit terribly well. I understand it can be hard interacting with folks at the end of their physical health (it's a direct confrontation of mortality) but they are still people and want to interact with the world, as much as they are able to. I think once you reach that stage of life you understand that its people that are really important, and while robot dogs might be interesting in the sense of being something new their children have come up with I doubt it will be any kind of emotional subsitute for either people or a living animal in and of itself.
It's OK. It will just announce the time for Sam Waterston to jump into action.
We have two cats, brothers that we received slightly over a year ago. They, like most siblings, wrestle and chase each other around. They also clean each other, and make sure they are aware of their siblings condition.
They each have a distinct personality that makes our interaction with each unique. I fail to see how even a pair of seperately programmed robots could compete with these natural and random creations.
heres a synopsis from the dvd "The Lonely" (Ep. 7, November 13, 1959) - A convicted murderer (Jack Warden) incarcerated on a distant asteroid is dying of loneliness. Then a supply ship captain leaves him a female robot even though he knew it was a robot, eventually he treated it as a human and wouldnt leave it
After all, look at how much comfort and companionship a child can get from a simple teddy bear. Same concept, your imagination will create a personality for your little friend if necessary.
Well the same is done with most dogs, we tend to project our human traits onto them. They probably do feel emotions, such as the instinctual fear. But we tend to make them into "little humans" that are just as fragile, picturing them crying over us not being around when more likely they are licking their butt and wondering what that smell is.
But this type of argument is clearly a philisophical one. What is life. What is spirit? etc etc. Much more deep and hard to answer than the technical side which is much clearer.
But given how humans can project human traits onto dogs I don't see what the same won't be done with robots, especially ones created in a form that is familiar, such as a robot dog.
If you make a robotic dog that looks real, and acts all happy when it sees it's owner. What makes it less real than an organic dog?
That's the exact demographic that http://www.realdoll.com/ is looking for in a customer.
Live forever, or die trying.
I have a five-month old baby who has had three ear infections so far. Every time, two days before he showed outward symptoms, one of our dogs (who sees herself as his "mommy") has started to incessantly lick the ear that was infected. I don't think that the robotic pets are going to do that!
I was looking forward to being a pet for our new robotic overlords, now a robot will do the job. I guess i will now have to join the resistance
When a dog wimpers or barks, its actions are probably a mixture of learned behavior and instinct. Instinct is nature's genetic programming, if you will. Arguing over whether a behavior is more 'real' because it was learned or programmed strikes me as a little pointless... the real metric should be how closely the machine mimics life, and what are the fail-conditions or boundaries of that minicry.
If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck...
Procrastination Man strikes again!
I don't know if your post was meant to be humorous, or not, but I do therapy dog work, and there is really no comparison. TV is really a passive, dull activity, and the commercials are demeaning. In time, it becomes so monotonous, I think it actually contributes to depression -- no matter how large or spiffy the equipment it is displayed on.
When I show up at the hospital with my dog, the TV goes off, and the patients really enjoy the novelty of interacting with a well-behaved, friendly animal. The therapists tell me that the change in some patients after a visit is remarkable, and long-lasting.
Naturally, I prefer real animals, but I can imagine that the interactivity of a robotic pet could also be beneficial.
Proverbs 21:19
Forget flicking the dog's nose; with a robotic pet you could kick as hard as you like, all without worrying about causing pain to a 'real' thing. Just like some people who post flames online would never dream of saying the same things in a face-to-face conversation, there are probably many who would welcome the consequence-free disconnect from reality offered by a non-living, fully repairable dog.
Procrastination Man strikes again!
I can see we are going to have a problem with people discriminating agianst robots, robot abuse, etc. I think that is the biggest issue we are going to have. Robots that can prefectly immitate or even improve on animals? That will happen, when it happens. All animals are programmed to have emotions. This programming was implemented by evolution. Conversely, animals can also be programmed by people through genetic motification.
I can visualize now, protests for 'rights for robots' and 'robot shelters', because of the violent, competitive nature of people who feel threatened by robots. People always want to feel superior, and they will immediately feel threatened and lash out at robots when they see their potential to out-do people. People will never be able to accept robots with advanced emotions and feelings for fear of being replaced!
Robots can be unique. A big part of what separates animals from one another and what can separate robots from one another is that their personality develops differently depending on their interactions with their environment. They learn to react differently to their environment by their experiences. The whole human body, everything reflective of a human being, stems from one hard-coded algorithm, 'the human gene'. Scientists have shown, that this algorithm varies only slightly from one species of animal to another, and even less so, of course, from human to human. So clearly, our interactions with our environment play a very significant role in defining our personalities, instead of the fact that our genes vary ever so slightly. We are pretty much all the same hard-coded algorithm at the beginning of our lives. If this wasn't the case, then how else could you explain reproduction? Passing a small, refined algorithm from generation to generation seems to be the only plausible explanation.
To extend on this, scientists are finding that they can manually alter genes to bring about quick improvements; although, this of course has implications do to our limited knowledge of the genetic algorithms. There is no reason why robots couldn't be built to evolve at an ever expidited rate if they were given the ability to analyze and refine their own algorithms over time. The improvement algorithm that would be used to improve the robots main functioning algorithm could be built for a specific goal independent of nature. Of course all of these algorithms would again be controlled by the algorithm of natural evolution if the robots began to compete.
hmmmm, it seems to me that where this all leads to is that the supremasy of one algorithm (or gene) is just the way of the universe and an impossible fate to escape. Natural evolution works this way. If somebody was to start an althorithm that was able to improve/refine some gene or other kind of algorithm for some other cause (knitting really well?), eventually, a species whose evolutionary path is supremasy would wipe out the knitters (or enslave them, which is what we would be doing from the beginning).
Also, it seems to me that if people where to try and suppress the use of a higher level of evolution (evolution by analyzing the environment and making changes to our genes directly, to give us advantages over the environment), eventually something like this would develop somewhere in the universe and humans would quickly become obsolete.
I don't know how I ever got to talking about this, but my conclusion is that humans can evolve much faster by understanding and altering their own genes. If they don't do it, something else eventually will.
Also, after all this rambling, I'm still not sure whether genes are supperior to electronic algorithms. Will life forms always be carbon based? Will the 'gene' always be the programming language of life? Or will another gene equivilent be developed and eventually replace the gene? ????
So I don't need Relacore?
Oh, say does that Star-Spangled Banner entwine / The myrtle of Venus with Bacchus's vine?
Good to see seniors embracing new technology instead of fearing evil robots that feed on their medicine.
This is great! Maybe there is hope for us yet. Maybe our new robot overloards will prefer biological pets. Maybe for the novelty. I always thought that my pets have it made. Now you've given me hope for myself.
That is: from my personal experience with people who claim this, I have this huge suspicion that no actual fact would dissuade you from the belief that the brain is a "computer." If I asked you to define "computer," and then I managed to get you to agree that some particular fact about the brain was incompatible with your claim that the brain is a "computer," I really believe you would not abandon your claim; rather, you'd redefine "computer" to fit the fact. This, of course, would beg the question, since, in effect, it is a form of assuming the conclusion.
Searle has made a related argument (which IIRC he regards as better than the Chinese Room, but nobody seems to have listened to): there is no natural fact of the matter as to whether something is a "computer." I could in principle, given some arbitrary mapping between the atoms that make up my wall and some Turing machine (or lambda term, or whatever), claim that my wall is a computer. Calling something a "computer" is just an interpretation that we impose on it.
Are you adequate?
I'll be surprised if they ever create a robot cat that can barf on the rug as realistically as my dear old Andy!
And stealing food off the table? It'll never happen!
Ah ha! So *he's* the one they were talking to in those songs! I always wondered about that.
Fucker. Modded down for stealing someone else's post and posting it 22 minutes later (without proper formatting, either...simply copy and paste without previewing, eh?). Maybe I should've used "Redundant", but you get the -1 either way.
Animals are just food and cheap labor for the human race. At most, toys for old people or children. A robotic pet is just ok for the latter purpose.
Yep, that's the future: artificial, plastic, inorganic stuff devoid of emotions to please the empty souls of a huge mass of individuals in a faceless society. Tigers, horses, dogs and cats will be just stuff of legend, perhaps their DNA stored in some database for some instant food device...
I don't feel like it...
... is my stuffed monkey sitting on top of my LCD monitor. He just sits there and rules over his domain while trying to rid his small world of coding errors and fuzzy logic.
A computer, quite simply, is any device that computes. You can't get much more of a basic definition than that. It's not as if I'm claiming that the brain is an iMac running Tiger. Doh.
At what price learning? At what cost wisdom? The price is a man's peace of mind, and the cost is his life.
I have this huge suspicion that no actual fact would dissuade you from the belief that the brain is a "computer."
Considering "computer" used to be a job title, before we invented transistors and integrated circuits, I'd be pretty interested to hear arguments that claim the human brain is not a computer. I'm expecting a lot of hand-waving and metaphysical mumbo-jumbo, but I'd be thrilled to be proven wrong.
Recursive: Adj. See Recursive.
I agree. On one hand, pets that are hard to train, can be annoying, on the other hand, this trait can provoke other emotions that make the whole experience more stimulating. I'm sure it would be just as easy to program stupid/annoying robots though, if you wanted some emotional excitement, instead of programming pets that think like people. It just depends on your preference.
"You know, put another way: What if we were all just robots? Not actually aware of ourselves or our surroundings? What would be the point of the Universe with nothing around to experience it? Just a bunch of machines carrying out their preprogrammed destinies, and no one would ever know... Yuck, what a waste."
It's easy for you to simply state that you are aware of yourself, without actually understanding what you are saying. I would say that how aware you are of your existance is dependent on how deeply in tune you are with your environment. Some species out there in the universe who understand their environment 100 fold better than we do, may view us as just that (simple, unsophisticated machines.) I think it is very possible that a human could build a machine that would have the abilities to extend its awareness beyond our own, do you have any reason to doubt this? Please explain yourself and your definition of awareness in order to clarify your position.
Thank you.
So because we don't have a full understanding about a subject there must be some mystical reason to explain it?
l , just a quick Googled link since I've pondered this before..)
;*)
If something explains it, it is no longer mystical is it.
It seems the more science uncovers, the more mystical the universe gets and harder to uncover "the rest of it". That there might not be an end to the complexity of the universe, and its secrets. Then what?
From everything we understand about science (and admittedly there is a great deal that we still don't) the human mind is just a chemical process. A rather advanced and complicated one compared to other ones that we have encountered but simply that.
There is a difference between observation and the potential reality. We observe chemical reactions in the brain, and these seems to be connected with sight, thoughts, inner pictures, feelings and emotions to some crude degree.
However, to draw the conclusion that that is all these are, chemical reactions, is a logical fallacy. Just because A is observed in B, does not mean B is nothing but A.
It is a wishful short-circuit, without any conclusive evidence. To stick to that hypothesis is not being open minded, but cutting off potential explanations and models of our minds.
The total information processing activity of the brain is hard to estimate because the current knowledge in this area is fragmentary. However, it is possible to get a general picture of the electronic pulse exchange activity within a couple of orders of magnitude. The activity of the brain is equivalent to that of 1000 kHz processor with 40 Gbits of states. The corresponding processing power (channel capacity) is C=4*10^13 bit/s. (Source: http://vadim.www.media.mit.edu/MAS862/Project.htm
The brain is amazing isn't it?
It seems to me that most of us are to arrogant or scared to admit that we simply don't have all the answers.
That's what I'm saying, except for the arrogant-thing.
It ticks my buttons that everybody on here seems to "know" how the mind works. I really hope none of those saying that are really scientists, because it doesn't sound like it. It's cool to have faith in science, but to jump to conclusions this early in the game is not wise. If you think you know, never studying other material than those you believe in, then you lose out of potential findings.
Science is not reiteration of facts or observations.
Science is investigating and researching, questioning everything we know. Those I see doing that, I will applaud no matter what their preliminary conclusions are.
http://www.debunkingskeptics.com/
Be all mystical if it makes you feel better. There is no reason the brain needs to be as complex as you make out but even if it is that makes it no less a computer. A very powerful computer in many regards but still a computer. The human brain is probably the most complex machine we've yet discovered and no doubt it'll be quite a while until we've figured it all out (willingness of test subjects to have their brains experimented on being as limited as it is) but there is no evidence that there is anything as complex or mystical going on as you seem to want to believe.
;*) I have no idea how to create 1 kg of anything, maybe not even nothing. This world is entirely mystic to me.
l :
I think it's pretty mystical that I'm sitting here reading your post
Even smart people are sometimes religious. All of us have our little quirks and failures.
Funny that you see it as something negative. I see it as broadening perspectives and having more dimensions to the mind. You don't even have to become religious, just not dismiss what you have not investigated..
If it makes you feel better to believe the world has things about it that are so mystical that we cannot solve their mysteries then go right ahead. For me, religious though I am not, I am much more amazed by the power of our Creator for having created something where everything runs in an orderly fashion and can be explained and manipulated if you are smart enough and work hard enough. No the Universe isn't as simple as clockwork but it is just as orderly. We may never have enough time and mental capacity to unravel all the secrets but that doesn't mean the secrets could not be unraveled.
To stick with fixed ideas how things operate, slows down our progress in many areas. To mistake the map for the world is just silly.
A computer is any machine that calculates. The brain is a machine that calculates. Therefore by definition a brain is a computer. You can replicate that behavior in part in today's computers and maybe all in the computers of the future. You don't even have to duplicate the exact functionality - you just need to create functionality on the level that does what you need. As I pointed out emotions are not hard to replicate and can be done in a fairly low powered computer. Every living thing with any brain at all has some form of emotions so there is no reason a computerized pet can't.
Emulation is not the real thing though. Simple minds might be fooled, for a short period.
From http://vadim.www.media.mit.edu/MAS862/Project.htm
The total information processing activity of the brain is hard to estimate because the current knowledge in this area is fragmentary. However, it is possible to get a general picture of the electronic pulse exchange activity within a couple of orders of magnitude. The activity of the brain is equivalent to that of 1000 kHz processor with 40 Gbits of states. The corresponding processing power (channel capacity) is C=4*10^13 bit/s.
Good luck with that!
The brain, like the world is utterly amazing to me.
http://www.debunkingskeptics.com/
I'm not surprised. Remember the tamagotchi? But what's next? I already have robot pet insurance if I bought the thing, er Fluffy, with a credit card. I foresee a Honda Hybrid Robot Dog in the near future that poops oxygen and doubles as an MP3 player.
It remains to be seen whether robots that "pet" you have similarly positive results...although my impression is that they might do the job better.
Yes. We can eventually make a robotic pet that would be just as good as the real thing. Of course if we do this we'll still have a zillion homeless cats and dogs. Isn't it chaper and easier to give a person one of these zillion cats and dogs than start up a robotics program?
You didn't spot the subtle change I made. Compare the first sentance.