Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Robotic Ecologies

Posted by ScuttleMonkey on from the rise-of-the-machines dept.

Roland Piquepaille writes "The University of Virginia (UVA) School of Architecture has started a new program about 'robotic ecologies' which wants to answer the question: Will robots take over architecture? As said the program leader, 'This research is not just about architectural machines that move. It is about groups of architectural machines that move with intelligence.' Apparently, buildings tracking our movements and adapting their shape or texture according human presence are not far fetched. Maybe one day, we'll talk to our homes and they'll answer."

6 of 80 comments (clear)

  1. Flaws by biocute · · Score: 4, Interesting

    What if you could talk to a building and it could talk back?
    Then what about the wife we already have?

    What if a building could adapt its shape, texture, light, sounds, and heat to your presence?
    Only if it can also read our moods. How would it know if I am in the mood to read a book (good light source) or to watch TV (dimmer)?

    And most importantly the question every slashdotter wants to know -- What if we want to have sex on the kitchen bench, instead of cooking? Would the building turn down the lights and maybe warm the bench a little?

    I'm not expecting a machine to figure things out themselves, but its ability to learn on circumstances is important to serve us appropriately.

    I guess it's human's unpredictability that makes robots imperfect.

    --
    Virtual Betting on Facebook for non-geeks.
    1. Re:Flaws by Eddi3 · · Score: 1, Interesting

      "Only if it can also read our moods. How would it know if I am in the mood to read a book (good light source) or to watch TV (dimmer)?"

      We already have basic mind reading devices, what makes you think these technologies won't advance? After all, brain waves are really just electric impulses, and once we figure out how to decode them, electric impulses could (very likely) be read with extreme accuracy.

    2. Re:Flaws by Ltar · · Score: 2, Interesting

      ""Only if it can also read our moods. How would it know if I am in the mood to read a book (good light source) or to watch TV (dimmer)?""

      How about this- if we turn on the TV, the lights dim. if we are holding a book (probably with an imbedded RFID tag) and stop moving for a bit, it'll focus a light on us.

      Why does it need to read our minds, when our actions are so much more easily observable?

  2. Metropolitan Living Homes by Corvus9 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    There was an Alternate Reality Game created for the A.I movie that involved "living homes" going insane, murdering, and being murdered. This game was arguably more creative and involved than the movie.

    The ARG site is gone, but there are still some notes on the living homes at the Cloudmakers site.

  3. Re:My big fat house by drgonzo59 · · Score: 4, Interesting
    I think that bigger houses = more isolation among its inhabitants. Back in the day when people would built a bigger house it was quite often to accommodate extended family (parents, in-laws, brothers, cousins, aunts etc...). Today I see 2 or 3 member families that have houses with 4+ bedrooms. They can go all day without seeing each other and would probably have to IM each other when the dinner is ready.

    I grew up in a small two room apartment (that's just two rooms, they are both bedrooms and living rooms and study rooms and offices) in the Soviet Union and sometimes I had my cousins stay over as well. Looking back I would consider my childhood one of the happiest times in my life. We'd all gather in our small kitchen, family members (aunts, uncles and even neighbors!) would drop by unexpectedly for dinner and it was great -- I never though "gosh I need another 4 rooms to live comfortably".

    There is a level of intimacy and closeness that is lost as families move into huge mansions and never see each other for days.

  4. Re:My big fat house by vux984 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The reason for this, at least around here, is the disproportionate rise in property value.

    At one point, the 'mega home' was dramatically more expensive than a more modest building. In a world where the plot of land is worth 10k, a 100k building costs nearly half as much as a 200k building that's twice the size.

    Today, those plots of land aren't 10k, they're 400k. After you put a 100k building on it its 500k. Or for 600k you can get build a house twice the size. As a result it just doesn't make sense to build a small house on such expensive property.