Slashdot Mirror


Dutch Unveil Robot Gas Station Attendant

Lucas123 writes "According to a Reuters' story, Dutch inventors today took the wraps off a $110,000 car-fueling robot they say is the first of its kind. (It was inspired by a cow milking robot.) After registering the car as it pulls up to the pump, the machine matches your fuel cap design with those in a database and your car's fuel type, and then a robotic arm fitted with multiple sensors extends from a regular gas pump, 'opens the car's flap, unscrews the cap, picks up the fuel nozzle and directs it towards the tank opening, much as a human arm would, and as efficiently.' Wait till Hollywood gets hold of this scenario."

287 comments

  1. well... by slap20 · · Score: 1, Funny

    I for one welcome our Dutch gas pumping robotic overlords!!

    --
    ~Liberalism Is A Mental Disorder~
    1. Re:well... by garlicbready · · Score: 5, Funny

      considering it costs $110,000, and if the gas station is fully automated will it be able to beat the crap out of someone who refuses to pay?
      (think Johny Cab / Total Recall)

      "warning insufficient funds
      engage orifice insertion override"

    2. Re:well... by mrxak · · Score: 2, Interesting

      From the pictures and video, looks like you have to be parked just right, and do we know how well it can figure out which car is which?

    3. Re:well... by Facetious · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I'm not sure about countries in Europe, but all U.S. cars have a bar code visible through the windshield (windscreen) that represents the VIN (vehicle identification number) that is easily machine readable. Of course some people have taken to covering it up as it has been used as an "attack vector" for identity theft.

      --
      Let us not become the evil that we deplore.
    4. Re:well... by slap20 · · Score: 1, Interesting

      $110,000 isnt' that much cost/money for a gas station to shell (no pun intended) out. My local gas station got busted for rigging the pumps with computer chips that would secretly pump 87-octane gas when you selected 91-octane and charge you 91 octane prices. I know the owner, and they got fined a couple hundred thousand dollars, but the owner just laughed when he told me that was ALL they charged him, he said he had made so much money rigging the pumps before he got busted that it was a drop in the bucket. I would imagine it would have cameras somewhere so if you drive off it snaps your photo, like the traffic cameras that send a picture of you running the red light in the mail. You know, the photo where your looking up at the light as you go through thinking you "totally make it!"

      --
      ~Liberalism Is A Mental Disorder~
    5. Re:well... by mrxak · · Score: 1

      That's not exactly what a VIN is. A VIN is like a serial number for a car. We have license plates too.

    6. Re:well... by Facetious · · Score: 1

      Whoa, that's brilliant. And what part of the license plate number describes the make and model of the car? What's that? You say the robot could just access the governing authority's database? I somehow doubt that would be shared as openly as some of us might hope.

      --
      Let us not become the evil that we deplore.
    7. Re:well... by trolltalk.com · · Score: 2, Interesting

      "I'm not sure about countries in Europe, but all U.S. cars have a bar code visible through the windshield (windscreen) that represents the VIN (vehicle identification number) that is easily machine readable"

      Ever try to read the vin? Some are easy - a lot aren't.

      Then there's accumulated snow, rain, frost, dirt, etc.

      Also reflections, angle of view ...

      Also there's the issue of damage when a motorist drives off too soon. Nowadays, its' about a grand in damages. This thing would be a LOT more expensive.

    8. Re:well... by Facetious · · Score: 4, Funny

      Heh. I guess it goes like this.

      Step 1. Scan VIN through windshield. If successful, pump fuel.
      Step 2. Open driver's door and scan VIN that is imprinted on door frame. If successful, pump fuel.
      Step 3. If steps 1 and 2 fail, seize vehicle; phone police; play, "This is the fuel pumping robot at [address] I have seized an illegal immigrant and/or terrorist. Please pick him/her up at your convenience."

      --
      Let us not become the evil that we deplore.
    9. Re:well... by dmsuperman · · Score: 1

      *Now pumping diesel fuel for Semi* "Wait!!! I only have a Ford Focus!!!"

      --
      :(){ :|:& };: Go!
    10. Re:well... by YrWrstNtmr · · Score: 3, Interesting

      but all U.S. cars have a bar code visible through the windshield (windscreen) that represents the VIN (vehicle identification number) that is easily machine readable.

      [TinFoil]
      What a wonderful tracking tool. Whether you pay cash or not, we know that VIN XXYY123 left gas station Z at 2:42 PM.
      [/TinFoil]

    11. Re:well... by couchslug · · Score: 1

      I for one foresee a variation of this on the Howard Stern show.

      --
      "This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
    12. Re:well... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I call bullshit.

      I work with these stations all day long, fixing it when crap outside breaks. These pumps are fickle, and so overly complicated (some of the damn things look wirewrapped) that those "secret" chips would be damn hard to find. Most likely they had an old firmware version (do you know what kind of pumps? Dresser/Wayne, Tokheim, Schlumberger, Gilbarco etc?) and some jackass tech misconfigured the blend config.

      Dresser/Wayne pumps require a VERY SPECIFIC point-of-sale side configuration or the whole fueling system goes to hell.

      These people generally make a few cents/gallon, IF that. Some stations LOOSE money hoping that you will use the carwash, or buy indoor merchandise.

      Trust me, I know - I listen to them whine about how much we cost, how much a pump servicer costs, etc - and I see stores disappear after several pump tech calls (someone ran out of money).

      I'm posting anonymously for obvious reasons. The company I work for makes the point of sale for a large percentage of fueling stations in this country, and growing in South America. The point of sale is a 4-letter word, named after a gem. It's black, with a green 4-line matrix display.

    13. Re:well... by JimBobJoe · · Score: 1

      but all U.S. cars have a bar code visible through the windshield

      I believe only GM has the VIN bar code. I don't remember seeing it on other cars.

      And my european made GM car (Saab) doesn't have the bar code.

    14. Re:well... by s74ng3r · · Score: 1

      Step 4. Profit!

    15. Re:well... by Harold+Halloway · · Score: 1

      "You have 20 seconds to comply..."

    16. Re:well... by FinestLittleSpace · · Score: 1

      In the UK you can look up any numberplate on the DVLA website and it tells you the make model, engine size of the car.

    17. Re:well... by SatanicPuppy · · Score: 1

      It's low enough on the dash that a good smear of dirt would obscure it beyond anything machine readable. It's probably smart enough to "identify" the make and model of the car, though I'd be interested in seeing what it made of some of the mangled cars you see on the roads sometimes.

      --
      ad logicam Claiming a proposition is false because it was presented as the conclusion of a fallacious argument.
    18. Re:well... by Timberwolf0122 · · Score: 3, Funny

      Thats why I keep old food wrappers/post-it notes on my dash board, stop the spooks tracking me by barcode scanners hidden in the squeegies homeless people use to clean windsheilds.

      --
      In the not too distant future, next Sunday A.D.
    19. Re:well... by geoffspear · · Score: 2, Funny

      In America, that's what we call a huge breach of privacy. That would allow anyone who can see my car to find out what kind of car it is!

      --
      Don't blame me; I'm never given mod points.
    20. Re:well... by Muad'Dave · · Score: 1
      Well, this article describes how gas station operators cleverly defrauded consumers while duping the testers by using 'custom' firmware or parts:

      The gas dealers were especially difficult to catch there because the equipment initially fooled inspectors. While inspectors usually pump 1, 5 or 10 gallons of gasoline for testing, the illegal equipment ensured those amounts dispensed properly.

      "They were using our own test methods to beat us at our own games," he said. "We started receiving enough complaints to lead us to believe something was going on."

      When undercover inspectors pumped differing amounts of gasoline--such as 6 or 9 gallons--they discovered they were shortchanged by as much as a third.

      He said savvy consumers can watch for such a scam.

      For example, if a gas pump is rigged, the gauge that shows gallon measurements will speed up right after the 1-, 5- and 10-gallon marks, and go really slowly as they approach those points.

      "You could actually see that speed up and slow down," he said.
      --
      Tiller's Rule: Never use a word in written form that you've only heard and never read. You will end up looking foolish.
  2. Paul Verhoeven, prophet of our times by elrous0 · · Score: 2, Interesting
    Once again, I get the strangest sense that Paul Verhoeven somehow foresaw this. Verhoeven worked his way through college in the Netherlands working as a gas-station attendant and would later go on to direct the movie "Robocop." Coincidence? Perhaps not...

    First of all, there are other bizarre coincidences, such as the appearance of a DVD in the movie "Robocop" (ten years before DVD would actually debut), the "President Schwarzenegger" reference in "Total Recall" (long before his political career), the 9-11 satire in "Starship Troopers" (four years before 9-11), etc.

    Did he use his Ph.D. in mathematics to construct a time machine (perhaps to come back and have sex with a young Elizabeth Berkley)? Is he the prophet of our age? And what more does this portend? Are invisible men next?

    --
    SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    1. Re:Paul Verhoeven, prophet of our times by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      First of all, there are other bizarre coincidences, such as the appearance of a DVD in the movie "Robocop" (ten years before DVD would actually debut),

      You know, a long time ago, there were laser discs that were very similar to DVDs.

    2. Re:Paul Verhoeven, prophet of our times by rolfwind · · Score: 1

      Schwarzenegger was in Total Recall yet I don't remember that specific reference. I do know that "President Schwarzenegger" was referenced in Demolition Man with Sylvester Stallone and Wesley Snipes though.

    3. Re:Paul Verhoeven, prophet of our times by c6gunner · · Score: 2, Informative

      1) You're comparing a gas-pumping robot to a bad-guy-killing cybernetic police officer? What do you do for an encore, compare the Apollo Module to the USS Enterprise?

      2) You're amazed by the fact that he saw a lazerdisc shrunk it down for his robocop movie? Sorry, I'm not impressed.

      3) You got the movie "Total Recall" confused with "Demolition Man", which was directed by someone else.

      4) 9/11 reference in Star Ship troopers? Are you sure you weren't just on LSD at the time?

    4. Re:Paul Verhoeven, prophet of our times by Chris+Burke · · Score: 2, Interesting

      the 9-11 satire in "Starship Troopers" (four years before 9-11),

      I assume you're referring to the destruction of Buenos Aires by the "bugs". That was just satire of the politically-fueled patriotic hysteria following any such event, of which 9/11 was just one example of. If it reminded you of 9/11 in hindsight, that's because history doesn't repeat, but it does rhyme.

      Also, that event was in the original book by Heinlein, published in 1959. I doubt he predicted 9/11 over 40 years in advance, unless you mean in the most non-specific "a thing like this could probably happen sometime" kind of way.

      --

      The enemies of Democracy are
    5. Re:Paul Verhoeven, prophet of our times by Chris+Burke · · Score: 1

      2) You're amazed by the fact that he saw a lazerdisc shrunk it down for his robocop movie? Sorry, I'm not impressed.

      I'll tell you what doesn't amaze me -- that the OP has never seen a laser disc.

      --

      The enemies of Democracy are
    6. Re:Paul Verhoeven, prophet of our times by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "the "President Schwarzenegger" reference in "Total Recall""

      Wrong. Why would they refer to his actor name in a movie he stars in. Get your facts straight, it was in Demolition Man that "President Schwarzenegger" line appeared.
      Arnold wasn't even in that.

    7. Re:Paul Verhoeven, prophet of our times by Samgilljoy · · Score: 2, Funny

      Once again, I get the strangest sense that Paul Verhoeven somehow foresaw this. Verhoeven worked his way through college in the Netherlands working as a gas-station attendant and would later go on to direct the movie "Robocop." Coincidence? Perhaps not... First of all, there are other bizarre coincidences, such as the appearance of a DVD in the movie "Robocop" (ten years before DVD would actually debut), the "President Schwarzenegger" reference in "Total Recall" (long before his political career), the 9-11 satire in "Starship Troopers" (four years before 9-11), etc. Did he use his Ph.D. in mathematics to construct a time machine (perhaps to come back and have sex with a young Elizabeth Berkley)? Is he the prophet of our age? And what more does this portend? Are invisible men next?

      Oh, man, this is the most enlightening theory I have encountered, since I learned that the band Laibach is actually Queen (Freddy Mercury never actually died, you see, just reinvented himself and his band as post-Industrial, quasi-Socialist, broken German speaking performers.).

      You are seriously onto something.

    8. Re:Paul Verhoeven, prophet of our times by AbRASiON · · Score: 1

      I think the real question about Paul is where the hell is his next blockbuster movie like Robocop or Recall? Those are absoloute gold (for my generation anyhow, just turned 30 btw) - 90% of guys my age love them!

      They don't make em like they used to.

    9. Re:Paul Verhoeven, prophet of our times by c6gunner · · Score: 0, Troll

      I'll tell you what doesn't amaze me -- that the OP has never seen a laser disc.
      Another thing that shouldn't surprise you: my comment got modded "flamebait" while his got modded "interesting". Ah. The wonders of the slashdot moderating system. It's like letting putting chimps in charge of an IT department: all your data gets trashed, and everything gets covered in feces.
  3. Unforuntately... by billius · · Score: 0

    the gas station blew up after the robot sparked a fat, Amsterdam blunt while pumping fuel. *ducks*

    1. Re:Unforuntately... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      the gas station blew up after the robot sparked a fat, Amsterdam blunt while pumping fuel. *ducks*

      You don't have to duck when the joke is that incredibly stupid. People will just ignore it.

  4. Already Happened by pete-classic · · Score: 1

    Wait till Hollywood gets hold of this scenario.


    The porn industry (also located in Southern California) already has.

    Also, it seems that you can register .com domains that start with the f-word and end with "ingmachines".

    -Peter
    1. Re:Already Happened by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      Do you know how to tell when a porn star is filling his gas tank?

      Just before the fuel comes out, he yanks the nozzle out and sprays it all over the windshield.

    2. Re:Already Happened by russ1337 · · Score: 3, Funny

      Also, it seems that you can register .com domains that start with the f-word and end with "ingmachines".
      What could possibly be wrong with "www.firetruckingmachines.com"?
    3. Re:Already Happened by Supergibbs · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Mod parent up *funny* :-)

      --
      First post! (just in case I am...)
    4. Re:Already Happened by police+inkblotter · · Score: 1

      Seconded...I'm not talkative enough to be modding yet I suppose

    5. Re:Already Happened by gravis777 · · Score: 1

      Wait till Hollywood gets hold of this scenario It was in Back To The Future 2, which came out in 1989.
    6. Re:Already Happened by gjbivin · · Score: 1

      You can trust your car to the 'bot that wears the Star

    7. Re:Already Happened by smackt4rd · · Score: 1

      "opens the car's flap, unscrews the cap, picks up the fuel nozzle and directs it towards the tank opening, much as a human arm would" Doesn't this sound a little like robot/car porn?

  5. I think it's not the first. by BytePusher · · Score: 5, Informative

    In Indiana, Shell tried a similar robot in my home town. It cost about $100 for a special gas cap and had a huge bay you would drive into. I guess it wasn't too popular, but definitely existed before this.

    1. Re:I think it's not the first. by camiam · · Score: 1

      Not the first: 1998 article from Popular Mechanics on what you probably saw in Indiana. The article is about the Shell SmartPump station in Elk Grove, CA. Don't think it lasted very long.

      http://www.popularmechanics.com/automotive/new_cars/1266746.html

    2. Re:I think it's not the first. by lewscroo · · Score: 1

      I'm pretty sure this is an old idea. I believe they even had this type of station shown in that great show 'Beyond 2000'. But they did clarify 'FIRST OF ITS KIND', so of course its the first of its kind based on all the criteria which only fit this particular deployment.

    3. Re:I think it's not the first. by PCMeister · · Score: 1

      While that may be the case, the same can be said for so-called "green" cars. This can be found in the following article: The History of Electric Vehicles

      The difference between what Shell tried in the past and this time around is something called INNOVATION; which is something that has been severely hindered by ass-backwards patent system in the US. Not to mention the litigation-happy society some of us live in.

      From TFA:

      "It works for any car whose tank can be opened without a key, and whose contours and dimensions have been recorded to avoid scratching."

    4. Re:I think it's not the first. by Lumpy · · Score: 4, Insightful

      $100 for a special cap? someone was overcharging hard.

      you can buy for $12.99 a gas cap that has a flap that allows you to easily fuel the car through the cap.

      uses a standard pump nozzle size, replace the black flap with a reflective one and It's a 2nd year robotics student project to reproduce everything they did. Opening and closing the door is as simple by attaching a gripper stud or refelctive tape.

      Problem is it's far cheaper to let the people use the pump themselves. Why put in a multi thousand dollar robot to do something that people are doing for free. At full service stations the "attendant" is paid minimum wage as it's not a skilled job. I can pay the wages of a gas pump attendant for 10 years for the price of one gas pumping robot.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    5. Re:I think it's not the first. by owlstead · · Score: 1

      "I can pay the wages of a gas pump attendant for 10 years for the price of one gas pumping robot."

      Yes, and the pump attendant will be there 24/7? So you might need about 4 pump attendants, and hope they don't get ill. Not that I am necessarily in favor of robots like these, but there seems to be something wrong with your calculations. And, come to think of it, your wages.

    6. Re:I think it's not the first. by snowraver1 · · Score: 1

      I would argue that it's still cheaper to hire 3 attendants in order to cover 24/7 filling duties:

      - One attendant can fuel several cars at the same time. All they have to do is turn the pump on, remove the gas cap and enable the gas handle clickey auto fill thingy.
      - People don't break, and if they do, it's the govt's problem, not yours.
      - If (Read: When) the robot breaks you will need some specialist to come fix it.
      - Robot will require regular maintenance.
      - Maintenance will not be cheap, as it will be a specialist doing the work.

      This thing is a waste of money.

      --
      Copyright 2010. All rights reserved. This comment may not be copied in any way including, but not limited to caching.
    7. Re:I think it's not the first. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is insane. A feature point of the article was the low cost of the machine, which is extremely competitive. You are egregiously misinformed about the costs associated with employees. Please consider this when you whip out your worthless calculations from your Moleskin(TM). Sad human, I truely hope this is not your best moment. Are you 12 years old? Take a freshman seminar on "introduction to business," you've already met the douche bag requirement. Now all you need is a 2 hr seminar so you may truely appeciate how entertaining it is to read those words you have chosen to represent yourself. Even reading a wikipedia article will demonstrate sufficiently that you are a complete and total charlatan speaking about things which are clearly way beyond your capacity. gross.

    8. Re:I think it's not the first. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Average cost of a gas attendant = $24,500.00 per year.

      Average cost of ONE gas pump robot = $590,800.00 + $8,500.00 per year Maintaince costs.

      results? Keep the humans until the robots are less than 1 years wages in cost as well as the liability insurance costs on it, some wanker will bitch the robot scratched his paint.

      you obviousally dont know shit. Otherwise you would have shown some numbers you knob.

    9. Re:I think it's not the first. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you can buy for $12.99 a gas cap that has a flap that allows you to easily fuel the car through the cap. Huh? Is this for new OBD equipped cars? These have a sealed fuel systems so that flap would have to be pretty magical to work on a modern car without triggering the check-engine light.
    10. Re:I think it's not the first. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...and enable the gas handle clickey auto fill thingy. Which doesn't exist in most places.

      But in any case, most of those same places already have a much cheaper alternative to both options - make the lazy bastards fill their own cars.
    11. Re:I think it's not the first. by arminw · · Score: 1

      ......Problem is it's far cheaper to let the people use the pump themselves.......

      Unless you live in Oregon, where it is illegal for people to pump their own gas. Some years ago, the oil companies spent millions on a campaign to have the voters repeal this law. They promised lower gas prices. Oregonians did not believe that propaganda, but voted by a huge margin to not have to get out into the cold and be forced to pump their own gas. They also voted against a sales tax by a similar lopsided margin. In California, where gas station operators do not have the expense of attendants, gas costs the same, or even more than in Oregon.

      --
      All theory is gray
    12. Re:I think it's not the first. by nospam007 · · Score: 1

      - One robot can fuel several cars at the same time. All they have to do is turn the pump on, remove the gas cap and enable the gas handle clickey auto fill thingy.
      - Robots don't die, and if they do, it's the service contractors's problem, not yours.
      - If (Read: When) the worker dies you will need some undertaker to take him away.
      - Workers will require regular eating/sleeping breaks.
      - Healthcare will not be cheap, as it will be a specialist doing the work.

    13. Re:I think it's not the first. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      YOU obviously don't know shit. Ever heard of a "prototype"? Do you understand how "innovation" occurs? How much do you think the first computer cost (in todays' dollars)? By your argument, we shouldn't have had early computers because "they were too expensive and it would be much cheaper to hire a team of mathematicians". Yet someone was bright enough to spend an extraordinary amount of money on it, thereby paving the road for widespread roll-out.
      PS. I'm not going to show numbers because you're a knob.

    14. Re:I think it's not the first. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are thinking of New Jersey. They have "mini serve" where you do everything except pull the trigger, or something like that.

    15. Re:I think it's not the first. by darqit · · Score: 1

      Everyone is absolutely right when they say this is a costly way of pumping gas. The fact is that it's not meant to be a new way for everyone to get their fuel. It's mostly for handicapped people who have a hard time getting in and out of their car. At least that is the way it was presented on the dutch news

    16. Re:I think it's not the first. by stiller · · Score: 1

      Problem is it's far cheaper to let the people use the pump themselves. Why put in a multi thousand dollar robot to do something that people are doing for free. Which is why we call this a 'service' or 'added value'. You can also service your own car. However, some people would pay to have other people do that for them.

      At full service stations the "attendant" is paid minimum wage as it's not a skilled job. I can pay the wages of a gas pump attendant for 10 years for the price of one gas pumping robot. Where do you live, India? In most (all) European countries there's a minimum wage for any kind of job. If you pay the attendant 6 bucks an hour (assuming someone working 24 hours, no downtime, no other employees and no other perks - dental, health), it would take you only 2 years to break even on this. Assuming an operational life of 5 years, this machine would save the owner about 150K on an attendant.
    17. Re:I think it's not the first. by Profane+MuthaFucka · · Score: 1

      No, he's thinking of Oregon. That's why he wrote Oregon. New Jersey might have their own strange laws, but Oregon definitely doesn't allow self-serve stations.

      --
      Fascism trolls keeping me up every night. When I starts a preachin', he HITS ME WITH HIS REICH!
    18. Re:I think it's not the first. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's mostly for handicapped people who have a hard time getting in and out of their car.
      Surely a better solution is to use niggers?
    19. Re:I think it's not the first. by dajak · · Score: 1

      Problem is it's far cheaper to let the people use the pump themselves.

      Pumps in then Netherlands are generally speaking self service, and increasingly you pay with your bank card directly at the pump before you use it. The idea is that just one pump in major gas stations is robotic as a service for invalids, and for less courageous people during the night, mainly. At least that's how it was presented in the Dutch news. The next step is obviously completely unmanned larger (> 12 pumps) gas stations along highways. The smaller local ones are often already unmanned.

  6. Why wait? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We can write the script here: every robot movie anywhere always turns into RUR:

    Naive inventor tries to make robots "better".
    Robots turn on humanity.
    Humans/robots win (this is the only variation in the plot permitted, ever.)

    Yawn.

    1. Re:Why wait? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In RUR neither side really wins at the end.

      The humans are all dead except for one, and the robots can only create corpses as they killed the only man who knew how to give them the spark of life. I say 'corpses' as the robots in RUR are assembled from body parts grown in vats. In the play they cannot easily be distinguished from humans.

      Very ahead of it's time for early scifi!

  7. Why? by Gothmolly · · Score: 0

    Any junior-year engineer at college could do this? How is this useful, news, or important?

    not trying to be a Luddite here, but really, whats next, a robot that wipes your backside?

    --
    I want to delete my account but Slashdot doesn't allow it.
    1. Re:Why? by Gat0r30y · · Score: 1

      whats next, a robot that wipes your backside? They have those?

      With apologies to Peter Griffin.
      --
      Prediction: The real iPhone killer is going to be sex robots from Japan. Think about it.
    2. Re:Why? by provigilman · · Score: 1

      You know, if "Any junior-year engineer at college" cand do this, why haven't they yet? The light bulb and the telephone seem relatively simplistic in hindsight too, doesn't mean they weren't innovations.

      --
      "Life's short and hard, like a body building elf." -- The Bloodhound Gang
    3. Re:Why? by FreakWent · · Score: 1

      1) How do you know that junior-year engineers haven't made these as college projects, but never taken it further?

      2) In answer to your question, one reason they might not have is because it's not an interesting or exciting robot project.

    4. Re:Why? by Brickwall · · Score: 1

      IIRC, in Japan they actually have toilets that do this for you.

      --
      What was once true, is no longer so
  8. Oregon by ushering05401 · · Score: 1

    My first thought is that this development is just the latest incremental improvement in robotics, and will help pave the way for more useful robotic applications.

    Then I remembered a trip through the state of Oregon. As of ten years ago or so travelers were not permitted to pump their own gas. I don't know if this is still the case, or why it was the case in the first place, but these robots might actually have an application if there are many places with laws on the books requiring certified entities to dispense gas to motorists.

    1. Re:Oregon by Sta7ic · · Score: 1

      Oregon still requires that fuel attendants pump gas. My sister lives across the river in Portland, OR, and not pumping my own gas throws me.

    2. Re:Oregon by Col.+Klink+(retired) · · Score: 1

      Oregon and New Jersey don't allow you pump your own. The supposed rationale is that, as you speculated, only qualified people are allowed to pump gas. The true reason, however, is featherbedding (i.e. creating jobs). Replacing those guys with a robot won't really solve that problem...

      --

      -- Don't Tase me, bro!

    3. Re:Oregon by veganboyjosh · · Score: 2, Informative

      I lived in Portland for about 9 months a few years ago. Had a job delivering food, actually.

      The gas wasn't noticeably more expensive, and it sure was nice not having to get out of the car to fill up.

      I believe New Jersey also has/had a similar policy of not allowing motorists to pump their own gas. It's my understanding that by requiring gas stations to provide at least one gas pump attendant, it keeps at least one person per station employed above and beyond what they would in any other state. Considering how many gas stations there are, that's a lot of unemployment averted. I never could tell where the extra cost for paying pump attendant wages came from...

    4. Re:Oregon by Weh · · Score: 1

      the purpose of the robot attendant is to help disabled people fill up their car, it isn't intended for "regular" customers. Don't ask me what people that are so disable that they cannot fill up their cars are doing actually _driving_ those cars. (although I remember there was some guy with no arms caught driving in new zealand a while back, seems he had been driving for years and got caught for some minor offense)

    5. Re:Oregon by MachineShedFred · · Score: 1, Troll

      Sitting in SE Portland right now, I can tell you that the State believes that I'm not qualified to safely transfer fuel into my own vehicle. However, if I drive north of the Columbia, East of the Snake, or south of the Siskyiou Mountains, I somehow develop this ability... only to lose it again once traversing back.

      --
      Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
    6. Re:Oregon by Nefarious+Wheel · · Score: 2, Interesting
      ...sure was nice not having to get out of the car to fill up...

      Sure is safer, too. That stuf is toxic as well as having a lot of energy density for a liquid. Just a little bit of training -- a tiny bit, really -- is all you need to keep people from exposure to hot plasma or a lot of strange molecules that the monkey in you never learned to deal with. You or I may know intuitively what to do, but the non-Slashdot crowd is pretty immense and prone to errors in mundane day-to-day engineering processes such as the refueling process for a complex machine. I salute, therefore, this idea.

      However, if you rock up with a little Honda step-through, you want to be really careful.

      --
      Do not mock my vision of impractical footwear
    7. Re:Oregon by uniquename72 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I ride a motorcycle. Does this mean that if I get gas in NJ or Oregon, I have a big, sweaty guy reaching in between my legs to fill me?

      If so, I'm there!

    8. Re:Oregon by netsavior · · Score: 1

      burn karma burn.

      I had the unfortunate experience of being stuck in the pit of the Pacific North West for like 3 months on a contract. One of the funniest things to watch is all of the Oregon idiots trying to pump gas in Washington. The best was a group of like 17 year olds that were trying to figure it out by committee and eventually drove off with no gas.

    9. Re:Oregon by Gutboy · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I still live in Oregon, and have (off and on) for 17+ years. A long time ago, there was a ballot measure to allow anyone to pump their own gas, with the idea that it would make for cheaper gas. It was defeated by people running advertisements that said, basically, 'do you want to have gas on your hands before you go eat food?' I guess being 'back to nature' means people here haven't learned how to bathe (and if you head downtown, you'll see lots of examples).

    10. Re:Oregon by pugilista · · Score: 1

      If you visit Mom and Pop type stores (I'm out in the country and we've got a little country store that pumps gas) they'll let you pump your own -- if they know you. And then, as far as motorcycles are concerned - everyone I've ever met while riding my motorcycle would *rather* you pump your own and let you quite willingly. Sorry to disappoint

    11. Re:Oregon by cduffy · · Score: 2, Informative

      I don't know about people who couldn't possibly figure out any way to fill up their tank at all, but I've met folks who can drive just fine (with a modified, hand-controls-only vehicle) whose disabilities would have made filling up the tank a significant hassle.

      Think "wheelchair lift". If your lift exits on the same side your gas tank is on, that's a whole set of problems -- and even if it doesn't (and the space on the other side isn't being used by other vehicles as a pull-through lane), you've got to have enough room between your vehicle and the pump for your chair, not to mention the regular hassle involved in getting in and out. Right now, there's the "Call Attendant" button... but having the pump's robotics do everything for you would be much better.

    12. Re:Oregon by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I had a friend in college (in Maryland) who was from Oregon. Her roommate was from New Jersey. The first time they went out together, they needed gas and it took two of them quite some time to figure out the procedure.

    13. Re:Oregon by arminw · · Score: 1

      .....The gas wasn't noticeably more expensive.........

      In California they have self service. Like most things, gas is actually more expensive there. The money saved by the gas station owners certainly is not being passed on to the customers, but simply lines the pockets of the gas companies or owners of the gas station. In Oregon at least some people who might otherwise be on welfare, are instead providing a service which costs the public absolutely nothing. Entry level jobs have been disappearing over the years through outsourcing and automation. This kind of job can't be outsourced to some foreign land, but somebody is making an attempt to take the already few remaining entry jobs away by automation.

      --
      All theory is gray
    14. Re:Oregon by arminw · · Score: 1

      ....advertisements that said, basically, 'do you want to have gas on your hands before you go eat food?.......

      No, it was defeated basically by the people seeing through the transparent lying propaganda of the oil companies promising cheaper gas. It also rains a lot in Oregon and people LIKE the idea of not having to get out of a nice, cozy warm car for the mundane task of pumping fuel into the tank. Oregon also has a lot of retired folks from California who don't like paying sales tax, like the 8-9% they used to pay, out of their meager pension or Social Security income.

      --
      All theory is gray
    15. Re:Oregon by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'd say that if people can't figure out how to fill up their car, they should not be driving in the first place. But of course, that goes against the current "every idiot can drive a car" policy.

    16. Re:Oregon by fbjon · · Score: 1

      Do you really sit on the bike while pumping? Sounds smarter and safer to just get off, to me.

      --
      True confidence comes not from realising you are as good as your peers, but that your peers are as bad as you are.
    17. Re:Oregon by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's my understanding that by requiring gas stations to provide at least one gas pump attendant, it keeps at least one person per station employed above and beyond what they would in any other state.

      Unless, for example, the additional cost of such things causes fuel companies to have fewer gas stations in the state than they otherwise would, or cut back on other (free) services at the stations they do have. (I always did wonder why Portland had one of the better public transit systems in this country.)

      Considering how many gas stations there are, that's a lot of unemployment averted. I never could tell where the extra cost for paying pump attendant wages came from...

      Oregon has no sales tax. If the sticker price looked the same, they were charging you 8-9% more than over in .wa.us. People will do just about anything if they can hide it in their yearly income taxes instead of facing it every week at the gas pump, huh?
    18. Re:Oregon by CrimsonAvenger · · Score: 1

      You or I may know intuitively what to do, but the non-Slashdot crowd is pretty immense and prone to errors in mundane day-to-day engineering processes such as the refueling process for a complex machine.

      I doubt seriously there's anything intuitive about pumping gas.

      That said, I also doubt seriously that non-slashdotters are terribly prone to errors fueling their cars. If they were, we'd see stories in the news every day about cars catching fire at gas stations, or massive spills of gasoline at stations, or other silliness.

      Fact is, we don't see those stories because pretty much noone has problems pumping their own gas - it's slightly harder than putting two pieces of bread in a toaster and making toast, but nowhere near as hard as tying your shoes.

      I should also point out that the complexity of the machine has little, if anything, to do with the fueling process. Modern cars are considerably more complex than cars in Henry Ford's day, but the fueling process is still pretty much "take the gas cap off, pour in gasoline till it's full, put the cap back on, pay the man"....

      --

      "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
    19. Re:Oregon by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Interestingly, you'll find that your ability at pumping fuel only varies for gasoline. Your diesel-pumping skills are without equal on either side of the Columbia, good sir. I applaud you for having gotten the Oregon legislature to realize this, and adding a special exception for it into the law.

      It's almost like the Oregon government realized that truck drivers would never put up with being made to wait on a high school kid. Nah, that's silly talk.

    20. Re:Oregon by Nefarious+Wheel · · Score: 1
      ./sigh. You simply do not have the correct bureaucratic and regulatory mind set, do you? Please leave the nanny state immediately.

      You're mostly right. People do not catch fire while filling their tanks as a rule. But they do expose themselves to hydrocarbons on a regular basis, and there's a hint of carcinogenesis there. Long term effects?

      --
      Do not mock my vision of impractical footwear
  9. Hmm by Sta7ic · · Score: 3, Funny

    [whirrrr-click] Target identified. Model recognized as Homer J. Simpson. Preparing doughnut tube.
    [whirrrr-click] Target identified. Model recognized as College Student. Preparing beer tube.
    [whirrrr-click] Target identified. Model recognized as Slashdot Visitor. Preparing "In Mother Russia" meme-milk and "Cowboy Neal" flakes.

    1. Re:Hmm by elrous0 · · Score: 3, Funny

      "I can still hear it screaming in that fire we had. After that I decided to just go back to the old-fashioned pumps."

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
  10. My fuel "flap" has a lock by QuantumG · · Score: 3, Funny

    and I can't understand how other people handle not locking their fuel flap. You lock your car, which is covered by insurance, but you leave the fuel for the taking? Thankfully, I've yet to see a film where someone turns a car into a Molotov cocktail by inserting a rag into the fuel cap and lighting it up.. thankfully, because kids have a thing for emulating what they see in films.

    My fuel flag does have the means to be opened from inside the car.. so I guess I could just do that when approaching Sir-Pumps-A-lot.

    --
    How we know is more important than what we know.
    1. Re:My fuel "flap" has a lock by hakr89 · · Score: 1

      Most gas tanks are designed to be siphon resistant, making it difficult for someone to remove the fuel that way. As to turning a car into a molotov cocktail, I'm sure its been done.

    2. Re:My fuel "flap" has a lock by The-Pheon · · Score: 1

      My fuel cap actually has a locking mechanism built into it. Stick in the key, and spin. I would have to give the robot my keys before we could start this experiment.

    3. Re:My fuel "flap" has a lock by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      quote "Thankfully, I've yet to see a film where someone turns a car into a Molotov cocktail by inserting a rag into the fuel cap and lighting it up.. thankfully, because kids have a thing for emulating what they see in films."

      Go see "No country for old men."

    4. Re:My fuel "flap" has a lock by geekoid · · Score: 1

      I just live in a decent neighborhood.
      The day I feel I need to lock up is the day I start looking for a new house.

      Not that a lock would actually stop someone.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    5. Re:My fuel "flap" has a lock by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or the re-made Gone in 60 Seconds

    6. Re:My fuel "flap" has a lock by pimpimpim · · Score: 1

      same here! It might work pretty for new & expensive cars, though, it can go together with the central locking mechanism.

      --
      molmod.com - computing tips from a molecular modeling
    7. Re:My fuel "flap" has a lock by QuantumG · · Score: 2, Funny

      That's a retarded view of security, for which you should be ashamed.

      --
      How we know is more important than what we know.
    8. Re:My fuel "flap" has a lock by Culture20 · · Score: 1

      You'd really only get scorch marks on your car. Since the fuel is only flammable in vapor-form with oxygen, you'd just get a car-sized kerosene lamp (with the burning rag acting as a wick).
      A friend once had an engine-fire, and when the fire department arrived, they just calmly walked over to the car, and unscrewed the fuel cap. They explained that the fuel would evaporate safely, and his car would remain intact.

    9. Re:My fuel "flap" has a lock by poetmatt · · Score: 1

      Umm, no?

      Fitting the thing with a master key for each manufacturer would not be difficult. Such things are well known. Not that anyone will think of the possible abuse that would ensue or anything. /sarcasm on last sentence, not on first

    10. Re:My fuel "flap" has a lock by heinousjay · · Score: 1

      I guess you've never seen a locksmith open a house in about 3 seconds. Locks are false security.

      --
      Slashdot - where whining about luck is the new way to make the world you want.
    11. Re:My fuel "flap" has a lock by BaronHethorSamedi · · Score: 0, Redundant

      Thankfully, I've yet to see a film where someone turns a car into a Molotov cocktail by inserting a rag into the fuel cap and lighting it up.

      Check out No Country for Old Men. Leave the kids at home, though.
    12. Re:My fuel "flap" has a lock by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think it depends. I've never had a house broken into, but I have had two bikes stolen, where neither was locked. Sure, the lock I put on my bike could be broken by anyone with a strong jack or a big pair of bolt cutters, but the thing is, basically no one is just walking around with either of those things, whereas pretty much everyone is walking around with their bare limbs, which is all they need to take away an unlocked bike (or one locked with a truly pathetic lock).

    13. Re:My fuel "flap" has a lock by Solandri · · Score: 0

      You'd really only get scorch marks on your car. Since the fuel is only flammable in vapor-form with oxygen, you'd just get a car-sized kerosene lamp (with the burning rag acting as a wick).
      Sounds like a good test for Mythbusters.
    14. Re:My fuel "flap" has a lock by Anonymous+Psychopath · · Score: 1

      Full Metal Jacket
      Gunnery Sergeant Hartman: [after discovering Private Pyle's unlocked footlocker] Jesus H Christ. Private Pyle, why is your footlocker unlocked?
      Private Gomer Pyle: Sir, I don't know, sir.
      Gunnery Sergeant Hartman: Private Pyle, if there is one thing in this world that I hate, it is an unlocked footlocker! You know that don't you?
      Private Gomer Pyle: Sir, yes, sir.
      Gunnery Sergeant Hartman: If it wasn't for dickheads like you, there wouldn't be any thievery in this world, would there?
      Private Gomer Pyle: Sir, no, sir.
      Gunnery Sergeant Hartman: GET DOWN!

      --

      Eagles may soar, but weasels don't get sucked into jet engines.

    15. Re:My fuel "flap" has a lock by trolltalk.com · · Score: 1

      Mine doesn't - you have to pull a lever inside to open it.

      Or you could use a big-ass screwdriver to pop it open, same as the ones with a lock.

      Nobody bothers siphoning sas nowadays - much easier to just steal the car.

    16. Re:My fuel "flap" has a lock by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I probably haven't been looking very hard, but I've never seen a car with a fuel cap that could be opened from the outside. In my car, and in every other car I've driven, the "flap" can only be opened fro ma switch inside the car, and would have to be literally torn off from the outside to gain access without this switch. Are you telling me that some peoples' fuel caps can be opened by hand? That's the most ridiculous thing I've heard of in quite a while.

    17. Re:My fuel "flap" has a lock by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've yet to see a film where someone turns a car into a Molotov cocktail by inserting a rag into the fuel cap and lighting it up See "No Country For Old Men"
    18. Re:My fuel "flap" has a lock by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are you telling me that some peoples' fuel caps can be opened by hand? That's the most ridiculous thing I've heard of in quite a while.

      Come back when you've grown some pubes and have seen cars other than your mommy's 2007 SUV.

    19. Re:My fuel "flap" has a lock by hakr89 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I'm not talking about opening the door, I'm talking about actually getting the fuel out. I tried to drain the tank on my 94 Cavalier, and it wasn't possible to get the hose far enough into the gas tank to siphon. I didn't look too far into it, but I assumed it was some sort of mesh.

    20. Re:My fuel "flap" has a lock by Larry+Lightbulb · · Score: 1

      Do you always park in a decent neighbourhood?

    21. Re:My fuel "flap" has a lock by JoeInnes · · Score: 1

      Gone in 60 Seconds anyone?

    22. Re:My fuel "flap" has a lock by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Thankfully, I've yet to see a film where someone turns a car into a Molotov cocktail by inserting a rag into the fuel cap and lighting it up."

      I guess you haven't seen Gone in 60 Seconds, or a bunch of others I can't remember right now.

    23. Re:My fuel "flap" has a lock by fractoid · · Score: 1

      Great, I now have a mental picture of a big ass-screwdriver. Thanks. :P

      http://xkcd.com/37/

      --
      Rampant carbon sequestration destroyed the Dinosaurs' tropical paradise. I'm here to help repair the damage.
    24. Re:My fuel "flap" has a lock by sean4u · · Score: 1

      The lock just holds up the person with the key. Some years ago I often hired cars from a family car rental firm that operated near a rough housing estate. They always reminded me that if I was a little late (after closing time), that I should bring the car back for opening time the next morning. Cars left outside their offices overnight would have their fuel emptied by the low-technology method of banging a nail into the bottom of the tank. Necessity is the mother of invention.

    25. Re:My fuel "flap" has a lock by Reziac · · Score: 1

      Does you no good if boisterous middleschoolers decide it'd be fun to sugar your gas tank. (Which in my observation is far more likely to happen in a middle-class or upscale neighbourhood than in a slum.)

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
    26. Re:My fuel "flap" has a lock by Reziac · · Score: 1

      I have a locking gas cap, because back when I got my truck, sugaring a new vehicle's gas tank was a popular sport. (For you young'uns who grew up deprived of such pastimes ... the resulting gunk seizes up your engine.)

      So how does Sir Pumps-a-Lot get that open? It mugs me, takes my keys, and unlocks the gas cap! Problem solved!!

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
    27. Re:My fuel "flap" has a lock by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You need to see "No Country for Old Men".

      You'll love it!

    28. Re:My fuel "flap" has a lock by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thankfully, I've yet to see a film where someone turns a car into a Molotov cocktail by inserting a rag into the fuel cap and lighting it up.. thankfully, because kids have a thing for emulating what they see in films.

      Exactly that scene happens in the (moderately) new movie "No Country for Old Men".

    29. Re:My fuel "flap" has a lock by Twisted+Willie · · Score: 1

      Thankfully, I've yet to see a film where someone turns a car into a Molotov cocktail by inserting a rag into the fuel cap and lighting it up.. thankfully, because kids have a thing for emulating what they see in films.
      Feel free to try to turn my car into a molotov cocktail. I'll especially enjoy the part where you try to throw it so that the tank breaks, allowing the fuel vapor to be ignited by the lit fuse.
    30. Re:My fuel "flap" has a lock by jockeys · · Score: 1

      Actually, that exact thing happens in "Gone in 60 Seconds" Vinnie Jones does this to a gang member's car.

      --

      In Soviet Russia jokes are formulaic and decidedly non-humorous.
    31. Re:My fuel "flap" has a lock by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thankfully, I've yet to see a film where someone turns a car into a Molotov cocktail by inserting a rag into the fuel cap and lighting it up This exact thing happens in "No Country For Old Men", jsut because the bad guy wants to scare everyone out of a Pharmacy/Drug Store.
    32. Re:My fuel "flap" has a lock by frause · · Score: 1

      You'd really only get scorch marks on your car. Since the fuel is only flammable in vapor-form with oxygen, you'd just get a car-sized kerosene lamp (with the burning rag acting as a wick). Then you throw the car at something and watch the fiery explosion.
  11. Pfft. The Dutch. by Sitnalta · · Score: 0

    This is the very definition of a solution in search of a problem.

    Next thing you know the Dutch will invent an automated pot-smoking robot. Or a robot that runs on German xenophobia.

    1. Re:Pfft. The Dutch. by Klaus_1250 · · Score: 2, Informative

      Doubt it. Some people don't like or don't know how (!) to fuel their car. In fact, I know several people who always visit the same gas station simply because it still has a gas attendant (a rarity here in the Netherlands, though 20 years ago it was quite common). Seeing that more and more gas stations here are becoming unmanned entirely (saves you up to 10 eurocent per liter), why not a Gas filling robot? You can stay in your car where it is warm, where you can listening to your favorite radio station, eat a sandwich or drink a refreshment, make a quick call, program the GPS, look through some papers, read your mail, etc, etc. It sound silly at first, but those 5 minutes can be pretty useful at times. Not to mention that it is better for your health as well.

      --
      It only takes one man to change the Wisdom of the Crowd to Tyranny of the Masses.
    2. Re:Pfft. The Dutch. by Sitnalta · · Score: 1

      Well, it hard to speak about other people in other countries, but here in America, the actual act of fueling is usually one of many tasks when "getting gas." I also wash the windows/lights, check over the engine, or maybe go in and get a snack.

      From a pratical standpoint, there really is no reason for this robot. Not only would be made useless by locking gascaps, but $100,000 pays the wages for a lot of grease monkeys. And, honestly, if you're so stupid that you can't put a hose into a hole and squeeze a trigger, you shouldn't own a car.

    3. Re:Pfft. The Dutch. by oliderid · · Score: 1

      Being Belgian and thus a neighbor of those crazy dutchmen (just kidding, they are nice neighbors), I don't see the point of this robot either.
      Personnally I take the gas station as an opportunity to stand up, relax and breath some fresh air er I mean being outside of my car :-). $110,00
      is simply prohibitive. Gas station owners make barely a living with pumps and the small shops I don't understand how they could afford it

    4. Re:Pfft. The Dutch. by Klaus_1250 · · Score: 1

      ...an opportunity to stand up, relax and breath some fresh air... Agreed, but when fueling, the vapors from the fuel/gasoline don't exactly provide me with fresh air :-). And with such a robot, you could still stand up and relax. Just walk inside, get a cup of coffee, pay and off you go.

      Gas station owners make barely a living with pumps and the small shops I don't understand how they could afford it I think the main market for these (at least until the price comes down) are the unmanned stations of the Big Oil companies and perhaps as an extra automatic pump at Highway gas stations.

      Well, it hard to speak about other people in other countries, but here in America, the actual act of fueling is usually one of many tasks when "getting gas." I also wash the windows/lights, check over the engine, or maybe go in and get a snack. The latter is also relatively common in the Netherlands, especially at Highway Gasstations, but checking the engine (~ 1/100 - 1/1000) or washings windows / lights isn't (~ 1/30). But it is also dependent on the location of the gas station. Most unmanned pumps here used to be manned with a small shop, but simply didn't sell enough to be profitable. Never seen any vending machines at those stations either (though I have seen them in Belgium at unmanned stations).
      --
      It only takes one man to change the Wisdom of the Crowd to Tyranny of the Masses.
  12. NJ and Oregon by dj245 · · Score: 1

    Residents of New Jersey and Oregon are thrilled by this latest development. Finally, a way to fuel up without rolling down the window.

    --
    Even those who arrange and design shrubberies are under considerable economic stress at this period in history.
    1. Re:NJ and Oregon by MachineShedFred · · Score: 1

      Or waiting for some minimum-wage paid douche to get off his ass and actually come over and do his job...

      (Note, not all douches are paid minimum wage, and not all people earning minimum wage are douches, but the two go hand in hand when I'm sitting there unable to do what the law mandates they do for me.)

      --
      Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
  13. Whatever you do, don't bend over... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    to check your tire pressure. Just saying.

  14. Key? by Tribbin · · Score: 1

    Will it open my door and take the key out of my pocket?

    --
    If you mod this up, your slashdot background will turn into a beautiful sunset!
    1. Re:Key? by Sponge+Bath · · Score: 1

      If a robot has a mechanical claw in your pocket, you had better *hope* it's the key it comes away with.

    2. Re:Key? by geekoid · · Score: 1

      Nope, you can still get out in the rain and snow and pump your won, enjoy the smell.

      Not valid for residents of New Jersey or Oregon. Personally, I love not pumping my gas.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  15. Novelty Act by milsoRgen · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Now this is were automation really is handy dandy stuff. But actual merits aside, if it were to ever be used in the US it would be a novelty. People would bitch and complain...

    I grew up in Oregon. A state that requires an attendent to pump your gas. I worked at a texaco one summer. There were 3 distinct positions on the issue:

    1. Out of staters: Oh my god wow, it's really illegal for me to pump my own gas? Why thank you keep the change.
    2. The in towners: Hurry the fuck up kid and please get my side windows.
    3. The drive up politicians: Don't you see how this is hurting the very business you work for by requring man power for a job the costumer could do themselves. (My reply: dude I'm just here for the beer money)

    So yeah I see the same thing to varying degrees happening at the pump (if this were to ever become a substantial choice for gas station owners here in the states)... Which would just be a rehash of the old auto workers complaints I can remember from as far back as grade school. Our science text books had these odd placed "Look to the future" sections. One of which was about robotics, and how there was a concern it would replace jobs with out creating... yadda yadda yadda Seemed like a pro union slant to me even then. (tho for the record I am pro union)

    All that aside. I think it would be cool to have a robot doing this. I've worked in gas stations outside of Oregon here and there. Where people could do their own fueling, the amount of gas people slopped all over themselves, their car or the ground was substantial... and they always wanted a refund!

    --
    I'm sick of following my dreams. I'm just going to ask where they're goin' and hook up with 'em later.
    1. Re:Novelty Act by DJ+Jones · · Score: 1

      the amount of gas people slopped all over themselves, their car or the ground was substantial... and they always wanted a refund!

      I'm always amazed that people are incapable of pumping their own gas. I mean, if you live in a state that forbids you to pump your own gas, I might understand. But in New York? There's no excuse. If you are incapable of using a gas pump, I don't think you should be allowed to drive a 2 ton automobile.

      End of story...

    2. Re:Novelty Act by Idaho · · Score: 1

      I grew up in Oregon. A state that requires an attendent to pump your gas. The article talks about the Netherlands though. I have *never* seen gas stations where an attendant actually pumps the gas in all of Europe. I'd go as far as to say that many Europeans, when asked, would find the very idea to be ludicrous (once you have explained it to them).

      In fact, it goes even further - it's very common to have completely "unattended" gas stations, i.e. you authorize the payment by credit card/electronic bank transfer using a PIN, and then the amount you actually take to fill up the tank gets debited automatically. There is no shop etc. whatsoever, which allows a gas station to be run on very thin margins.
      --
      Every expression is true, for a given value of 'true'
    3. Re:Novelty Act by milsoRgen · · Score: 1

      The article talks about the Netherlands though.
      I realize that I was simply relating my experiance in the fueling industry here in the states to the article.

      I'd go as far as to say that many Europeans, when asked, would find the very idea to be ludicrous (once you have explained it to them).
      And the same can be said here in the US. I'm in Nampa, ID 30-40 mins from the border of Oregon, and even here it boggles peoples minds when it comes up through the course of a conversation.

      In fact, it goes even further - it's very common to have completely "unattended" gas stations I'm sure there are differences you failed to clarify but that sounds a lot like any gas station outside of Walmart or Fred Meyers here in the Northwest US. A guy sits in a booth and takes your dollars or you use credit/debit at the pump. If you do mean however, no attendants on duty at all (which is the case with most gas stations here in Idaho during the night). I would be somewhat reluctant to support it... I can't tell you how many people fuel with engines running, on cell phones, fueling old school metal canisters in there pick up beds. I've even seen people with custom built fuel tanks trying to fill. I've never been to Europe, and I realize that chances of an explosion or fire are slim and remote. But it does seem, at least here in the Northwest people are really doing all they can to increase the odds of an accident happening.

      In fact I seem to recall 2 years or so ago someone fueling up while smoking, I don't remember the details but it seems they were horsing around with their younger brother and an accident did occur and the young boy ended in the burn unit. An alert attendant could easily of prevented that.
      --
      I'm sick of following my dreams. I'm just going to ask where they're goin' and hook up with 'em later.
    4. Re:Novelty Act by vimh42 · · Score: 1

      I was in Oregon a few years ago. Forgot about the whole gas pump thing and started to pump my gas. The attendant ran up and said something along the lines of "Sir only a trained gas pump attendant can pump gas." I apologized saying that I was from California where we pump our own gas. I guess he thought he should respond and reiterated the whole trained gas pumper thing. I told him how many years I had been driving and pumping my own gas and asked him how long he had been working at the gas station. He mumbled something about a few months or something and was silent after that. I guess I'm nicer than your #2 but not as nice as #1 after a long days drive. And yes, sometimes idiots spill gas on themselves. I've seen gas station attendants do the same.

    5. Re:Novelty Act by milsoRgen · · Score: 1

      To say there was any sort of training involved is ludicrous at best. There was none. I've never been clear on the reasoning behind the law, since yes attendants could be just as retarded as anyone else. It wasn't like there was even a hint of training, like say in a food handlers class. Still it was an easy and fun summer job. Good for the kids.

      --
      I'm sick of following my dreams. I'm just going to ask where they're goin' and hook up with 'em later.
    6. Re:Novelty Act by Chris+Burke · · Score: 1

      3. The drive up politicians: Don't you see how this is hurting the very business you work for by requring man power for a job the costumer could do themselves. (My reply: dude I'm just here for the beer money)

      Lol, that's hilarious! What the fuck did they think you were going to say? "You're right, sir. I will happily volunteer for unemployment in order to aid the financial prosperity of a business I wouldn't give the tiniest flying fuck about except that they pay me to work here."

      I lived in Oregon as a non native, and I thought it was weird at first, then kinda funny. I referred to it as the "Oregon Stoner Permanent Employment Act".

      --

      The enemies of Democracy are
    7. Re:Novelty Act by icandodat · · Score: 1

      I think all gas stations should have a dick sucking robot. I can pump my own gas.

    8. Re:Novelty Act by milsoRgen · · Score: 1

      I referred to it as the "Oregon Stoner Permanent Employment Act".
      I don't think anyones ever hit the nail on the head quite as squarely as you sir, my hat is off to you!
      --
      I'm sick of following my dreams. I'm just going to ask where they're goin' and hook up with 'em later.
    9. Re:Novelty Act by Teun · · Score: 1

      In Italy it is still very common to have an attendant fill your car, it's an employment/ union thing.
      In Northern Europe it's indeed a potential attraction for the many totally unmanned stations, especially when the weather is as windy as it is in Emmeloord where this thing was build.

      --
      "The likes of Facebook and WhatsApp are free to those whose privacy is of zero value."
    10. Re:Novelty Act by fbjon · · Score: 1

      If you do mean however, no attendants on duty at all (which is the case with most gas stations here in Idaho during the night). I would be somewhat reluctant to support it... I can't tell you how many people fuel with engines running, on cell phones, fueling old school metal canisters in there pick up beds. I've even seen people with custom built fuel tanks trying to fill. I've never been to Europe, and I realize that chances of an explosion or fire are slim and remote. But it does seem, at least here in the Northwest people are really doing all they can to increase the odds of an accident happening. But if there's no attendant, there will be one less casualty for the next Darwin award, so it's actually a good thing. No?
      --
      True confidence comes not from realising you are as good as your peers, but that your peers are as bad as you are.
    11. Re:Novelty Act by Rassleholic · · Score: 1


      All that aside. I think it would be cool to have a robot doing this. I've worked in gas stations outside of Oregon here and there. Where people could do their own fueling, the amount of gas people slopped all over themselves, their car or the ground was substantial... and they always wanted a refund!


      I work at a gas station and our policy (and the policy of just about every other station in the state) is once the gas leaves the nozzle, it's yours whether it gets into your tank or not. No one in their right mind would give a refund on something they could neither quantify or reclaim.

      --
      Not noteable, IMO a rubbish article.
    12. Re:Novelty Act by milsoRgen · · Score: 1

      But if there's no attendant, there will be one less casualty for the next Darwin award, so it's actually a good thing. No?
      Hahha, I concur... to the max!
      --
      I'm sick of following my dreams. I'm just going to ask where they're goin' and hook up with 'em later.
    13. Re:Novelty Act by milsoRgen · · Score: 1

      I work at a gas station and our policy (and the policy of just about every other station in the state) is once the gas leaves the nozzle, it's yours whether it gets into your tank or not. No one in their right mind would give a refund on something they could neither quantify or reclaim.
      Well that's all fine and dandy, but there is something called customer service. If I got a little old lady who had probs out there, I'll probably refund her out of my own pocket (within reason). With the density of gas stations where I live, everyones price is usually the same. The only way to ensure repeat business is to go above and beyond... Also hot chicks, they get refunds too!
      --
      I'm sick of following my dreams. I'm just going to ask where they're goin' and hook up with 'em later.
  16. just testing it out with my spanking new Volvo by sam_paris · · Score: 2, Funny

    Hey guys,

    i'm actually writing this from my iphone, while in my car, while one of these new robots fills up my volvo. I don't know why you guys are tagging this "whatcouldpossiblygowrong", it seems well engineered and apparently efficient. The only problem I can foresee would be some sort of short circuit which could produce a spark and ##KR2F@F@$F$ {NO CARRIER}

    1. Re:just testing it out with my spanking new Volvo by visualight · · Score: 1

      Seriously, something has already gone wrong whoever is putting that tag on everything.

      --
      Samsung took back my unlocked bootloader because Google wants me to rent movies. They're both evil.
    2. Re:just testing it out with my spanking new Volvo by sam_paris · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Well, it's become a new meme to tag anything that remotely sounds dangerous with that particular tag... at first it was funny.. it's a little tiresome now.

  17. Robots will be an economic disaster. by geekoid · · Score: 1

    What will gas station attendants do when this replaces them? Go work at a fast food place? great, but in 5 years when they 'iBurgerFlipper' replaces them then what?

    The idea that the jobs market loss in one are creates more jobs another is not always true.

    Espcially when you consider global scales of volume. If McDonalds can displace 2 owrkers with a 110,000 robot, you bet they would.

    And who do you think will build the robots? that's right, other robots. While it will create new industries, it can not create enough to replace 1/10 of the workers that will be displaced.

    Am I saying we shouldn't adobt robotic technology? no, I am not. In fact I welcome robotic technology. What I am saying is we, as a global society, should prepare for what is going to happen.

    If robots can replace all the non creative jobs, perhaps it will be time for a form of socialism. Or maybe not allow corporations to own robots, and only let people own 1 robot. One which can either work in place of you and you get a paycheck from that.

    More free time for people is always good. I would much rather work on my poor painting skills then listen to the crunching of my cube neighbor all FRICKIN DAY.

    --
    The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    1. Re:Robots will be an economic disaster. by Osurak · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Marshall Brain already thought of that. Check out his short story, Manna

    2. Re:Robots will be an economic disaster. by vertinox · · Score: 4, Insightful

      What will gas station attendants do when this replaces them? Go work at a fast food place? great, but in 5 years when they 'iBurgerFlipper' replaces them then what?

      I dunno... I suppose they will do the same thing as the textile loomers did after the industrial revolution in the 1800s.

      IMO if your job can be replaced by a machine, it probaly was boring.

      --
      "I am the king of the Romans, and am superior to rules of grammar!"
      -Sigismund, Holy Roman Emperor (1368-1437)
    3. Re:Robots will be an economic disaster. by Krishnoid · · Score: 1
      If McDonalds can displace 2 owrkers with a 110,000 robot, you bet they would.

      And in one scenario, they (or a close competitor) have.

    4. Re:Robots will be an economic disaster. by Telepathetic+Man · · Score: 1

      In a similar light, the entire industrial revolution must have been a disaster for people too, right? How about the invention of farming?

      --
      Just because you can, does not mean you should.
    5. Re:Robots will be an economic disaster. by Culture20 · · Score: 1

      If McDonalds can displace 2 owrkers with a 110,000 robot, you bet they would.
      I'm assuming that's US$110,000, in which case I'd disagree. McDonald's employees aren't payed more than US$55,000, and even if they were, I'd rather have two versatile human employees than one static robot (unless it's a giant transforming Ronald McDonald, 'cause that'd be neat).
    6. Re:Robots will be an economic disaster. by Sciros · · Score: 3, Funny

      The gas station attendants will likely get work as "gas station robot maintenance dudes" that fix robots which, you know, go bad. And you know they will. Let's consider some likely scenarios:

      1) Robot claws open rear passenger door thinking it's a gas cap cover and shoves nozzle down whoever's strapped in.

      2) Robot decides you have a 2007 model instead of 2008 and destroys your gas cap because they way it opens has been changed

      3) Robot beats you up and drives off in your car

      4) Robot doesn't know the "3 clicks" rule and keeps screwing your gas cap back on for all eternity

      5) Robot is racist and doesn't service some people

      6) Robot sees a Lamborghini pull up and tries to mate with it, costing the gas station around $400,000

      These are all nightmare scenarios that are all too possible if the robots aren't maintained. We'll need people to do this. No way I'd trust other robots!

      --
      I like basketball!!1!
    7. Re:Robots will be an economic disaster. by FuzzyDaddy · · Score: 1
      IMO if your job can be replaced by a machine, it probaly was boring.

      Probably... but not as boring as being broke and unemployed

      --
      It's not wasting time, I'm educating myself.
    8. Re:Robots will be an economic disaster. by moderatorrater · · Score: 1

      Or maybe not allow corporations to own robots, and only let people own 1 robot. One which can either work in place of you and you get a paycheck from that. Right, because societies that have fought progress have traditionally done better than those that haven't.

      If robots can replace all the non creative jobs, perhaps it will be time for a form of socialism We're so far away from this it's not even funny. If we can't make an AI that can beat a competent Go player, how are we supposed to create an AI that can properly handle local ad campaigns, program other software with vague parameters, design a more productive model of robot, etc? You're looking at something that will take decades at least to come around. Humans are versatile to the extreme, able to run long distances, manipulate small and large things, climb most surfaces, etc. Robots, on the other hand, are built and designed for one purpose, and trying to do something more complex with a reasonable margin of error has proven to be beyond our current abilities.

      Since it'll be decades before this revolution you're hinting at starts, I for one am going to wait to see what happens, because who knows what will have happened by then?
    9. Re:Robots will be an economic disaster. by nevurthls · · Score: 1

      reminds me of a despair.com poster
      http://www.despair.com/motivation.html

      --
      I am a viral sig. Please copy me and help me spread. Thank you.
    10. Re:Robots will be an economic disaster. by cobaltnova · · Score: 1

      IMO if your job can be replaced by a machine, it probaly was boring.
      It is widely believed that the human mind is turing equivalent (and hence can be replaced by a machine)... did making that post bore you?
    11. Re:Robots will be an economic disaster. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What will gas station attendants do when this replaces them?

      I dunno, maybe become auto body technicians and firemen?

    12. Re:Robots will be an economic disaster. by jsiren · · Score: 1

      How about when the robot confuses identical (or nearly so) gas caps and puts gasoline into a diesel vehicle? The gas station gets a nice repair bill for an injection pump, nozzles, fuel filter, and system flush...

      (Diesel cars are very common in central Europe. And if you put gas into a modern diesel engine, the injection pump and nozzles will very likely be destroyed, because gasoline doesn't lubricate like diesel fuel does.)

      --
      Usage: km/h for speed (kilometers per hour); kph for very slow impulses (kilopond hours).
    13. Re:Robots will be an economic disaster. by vertinox · · Score: 1

      Probably... but not as boring as being broke and unemployed

      Imagine all the jobs we could create if we got rid of jackhammers, drills, and dynamite and had people go back to mining with pickaxes.

      Heck... Imagine all the jobs we can create if we made the miners use their bare hands! ;)

      --
      "I am the king of the Romans, and am superior to rules of grammar!"
      -Sigismund, Holy Roman Emperor (1368-1437)
    14. Re:Robots will be an economic disaster. by LandDolphin · · Score: 1

      lmao... This made me laugh... I want to see a giant transforming Ronald McDonald.

      --
      Spelling and Grammar errors have been added to this post for your enjoyment
    15. Re:Robots will be an economic disaster. by Kjella · · Score: 1

      IMO if your job can be replaced by a machine, it probaly was boring. So's my job, even though it can't be replaced by a robot ;). But there's a lot of people that just want to get through the day with a decent paycheck, that really aren't cut out to be rocket scientists. The defintion of "unskilled labor" has gone a looooooooong way from when that meant things like being a farm hand cutting hay, chopping lumber or whatever. You can't really compare when such jobs first went and when the last ones are going away. Sure there'll still be burger flippers and taxi drivers and store clerks and such, but it's not many jobs by comparison. Give it another 50 years and I think you'll find it's really hard to find any simple task that hasn't been replaced by some form of computer/robot.
      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    16. Re:Robots will be an economic disaster. by vertinox · · Score: 1

      It is widely believed that the human mind is turing equivalent [wikipedia.org] (and hence can be replaced by a machine)... did making that post bore you?

      On the flipside, photography did not make portrait painting go extinct nor did wielding cause all the anvil blacksmiths in the world stop their trade. They are of course rare, but I feel there will always be a niche for things that a machine could do better.

      Even if a machine could make music, paint, speak, and write better literature than any human that was ever alive... I would bet humans will still do those things if nothing more than to entertain themselves. Of course, I have my doubts that the world would transition into 6 billion artists if a technological singularity happened, though.

      --
      "I am the king of the Romans, and am superior to rules of grammar!"
      -Sigismund, Holy Roman Emperor (1368-1437)
    17. Re:Robots will be an economic disaster. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      IMO if your job can be replaced by a machine, it probaly was boring.


      Maybe. Remember, different people find different things interesting.
    18. Re:Robots will be an economic disaster. by Strilanc · · Score: 1

      I made it to the end of chapter 7 and the site got slashdotted (on a cliffhanger!...).

      It's a great story!

    19. Re:Robots will be an economic disaster. by geekoid · · Score: 1

      Yes but it can't be a one for one replacement. Might be 1 per hundred, if they are really crappy robots.
      That's my point, the end result is fewer job opportunities. Which is good if we can handle it right.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    20. Re:Robots will be an economic disaster. by Jedi+Alec · · Score: 1

      How about we get rid of modems and routers and hire people to tap in the 1's and 0's by hand? Voila! Unemployment problem solved instantly!

      --

      People replying to my sig annoy me. That's why I change it all the time.
    21. Re:Robots will be an economic disaster. by geekoid · · Score: 1

      I stated the pretty obviously, but I will repeat it for you.
      It's not about going "backwards" or anti-technology, only that once robots get to a certain point, there will be a lot fewer jobs. In my hamburger scenario alone would be millions of jobs gone.

      Lets say it takes an organization 100,000 people to make those robots. I think that's what McDonald Douglas had at the height of the aviation field. It's still leaves millions of few job opportunities. It's not like people flipping burgers are engineer/business/scientifically inclined.

      At the time of it's invention, the jack hammer displaced 1000's of jobs. Something that was easily absorbed.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    22. Re:Robots will be an economic disaster. by geekoid · · Score: 1

      "So's my job, even though it can't be replaced by a robot "

      I have my doubts.

      "that really aren't cut out to be rocket scientists. "
      You do know there is less of a demand for rocket scientists because of an automatic machine, right?

      Of course, that's not nearly the scale of job loss that would happen if more menial jobs were replaced.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    23. Re:Robots will be an economic disaster. by tkw954 · · Score: 1

      I suppose they will do the same thing as the textile loomers did after the industrial revolution in the 1800s.
      Yeah, setting inanimate looms on fire was nothing. I can't wait to see a robot full of gasoline fighting off angry gas station attendants with torches!
    24. Re:Robots will be an economic disaster. by Dutch+Gun · · Score: 1

      If robots can replace all the non creative jobs, perhaps it will be time for a form of socialism. Ugh, what does robotics have to do with the government confiscating and redistributing my money? And "not allow corporations to own robots", and "only let people own 1 robot"? I don't suppose an individual's personal freedom factors at all into this future utopia?

      Think about what would happen if robots are so common, intelligent, and ubiquitous that they can replace most of the mundane jobs... Prices would absolutely plummet, because *labor costs* are largely the prime cost in any product you buy. As such, if prices are reduced by 50%, you'll only need to work half as much in order to maintain your current standard of living. This means a lot of discretionary spending, which means jobs for people to produce that products that you'd like to spend your discretionary income on.

      The thing about a free market is that you only need to deliver a product or service that people are willing to pay for, and you have a market. There are markets that simply didn't even exist years ago because a) the technology didn't exist, and b) average people have a lot of disposable income relative to most other times in history. I happen to make my living as a game programmer, which is a great example of a relatively new technologically-driven market of a completely non-essential nature. Such an industry couldn't exist without people's need for entertaining diversions coupled with a bit of surplus income.

      Honestly, I can see most of our 'subsistence' industries moving towards near-complete automation in the future*, with the result that it will be possible to live comfortably even on quite modest wages. However, most people will still work (probably reduced hours) in order to get enough money for some of the non-essential perks in life. It could be that most jobs in the future will either be highly skilled / technical in nature, service-oriented (where robots can't manage), or entertainment-related.

      * Of course, that will set us up perfectly for our robot overlords...
      --
      Irony: Agile development has too much intertia to be abandoned now.
    25. Re:Robots will be an economic disaster. by Teun · · Score: 1

      What will gas station attendants do when this replaces them? They'll probably go over to some productive job, just like the many farm hands that were replaced by the successful milk robots build in the same town.
      But then again, in this part of the world the last attendant that filled cars left several years ago.
      --
      "The likes of Facebook and WhatsApp are free to those whose privacy is of zero value."
    26. Re:Robots will be an economic disaster. by name*censored* · · Score: 1

      Ugh, what does robotics have to do with the government confiscating and redistributing my money? M/quote> You wont HAVE any money, because you won't have a job, because it's being done by a robot. It's only a matter of time before robots can be made to do "creative" tasks, instead of just menial/repetitive tasks. This is about adapting to that change.

      And "not allow corporations to own robots", and "only let people own 1 robot"? I don't suppose an individual's personal freedom factors at all into this future utopia? You can't own a nuclear weapon either, or drive a car without a licence. How is this different?

      The thing about a free market is that you only need to deliver a product or service that people are willing to pay for, and you have a market. Like organs! Plenty of people want organs (with which to live), and plenty of poor people can easily be er...persuaded.. to part with theirs! It's win-win!

      However, most people will still work (probably reduced hours) in order to get enough money for some of the non-essential perks in life. I think what OP is saying is that anything (reasonable) we need/want is provided to us (by the government), because production is self-sustaining (robots produce things for us and other robots help the producing robots to keep on running) and entirely scalable; because robots aren't greedy, this form of socialism wouldn't break down in the same way that regular socialism does. Obviously there'd need to be limitations (population limits, rationing [even though there would be more than we have today due to more efficient production], etc). "Work" would be as quaint a notion as growing your own vegetables. I'd happily trade a few of my "personal freedoms" for the freedom to pursue interests I want without having to do dull/repetitive work to get there.
      --
      Commodore64_love: I don't comprehend people who're so frightened of death that they'll bankrupt themselves to stay alive
    27. Re:Robots will be an economic disaster. by Cala · · Score: 1

      I dunno. I work at Cumberland Farms overnight and I don't think my job's terribly boring. Plenty of people come in that keep me entertained... ... that's probably the reason why robots wouldn't take over jobs like that. Not yet, anyway. A lot of people still prefer human interaction.

    28. Re:Robots will be an economic disaster. by drsquare · · Score: 1

      A robot would probably have more personality than a McDonald's worker.

  18. Uneconomical Impractical or Both by CodeBuster · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Suppose that this robot works perfectly every time without hassling the customers, damaging their vehicles, wasting their time, or generally causing other problems which cost the gas station owner money (a big assumption). From the standpoint of the gas station owner why invest in this robot when your customers already pump their own gas at no additional cost to you? I can think of only three (3) possibilities. First, if your competitors install this robot AND enough of your customers refuse to gas up at your station because you DO NOT have the robot then it might make sense provided that the margin (thin already for independent station owners) is able to support the cost which brings up the next point. Second, your customers are willing to pay more for their gas for the novelty OR the convenience of having a robot pump it for them (perhaps, but certainly a niche. Most people are very price sensitive when it comes to buying gas, driving miles out of their way to save a couple of pennies in some cases). Third, the local laws require a human attendant anyway (Oregon has this type of law) where the present value of the gas station attendant's wages in perpetuity are more than the costs of purchasing and maintaining the robot (provided that the initial assumption about damage to property and persons remains true). In any case it is highly likely that this robot will not be widely used or fill only niche markets because it is a cost center for the gas station owner and not likely to be or become a profit center. At best, it might become a requirement of doing business, but I cannot see many gas station owners installing and using the robot unless they are forced to by either the marketplace or the government.

    1. Re:Uneconomical Impractical or Both by vertinox · · Score: 1

      OR the convenience of having a robot pump it for them

      I've always thought Belgium's and Holland's climate was mild, but there has been days in the NE USA when it was -20 in wind chill factor in which I would have gladly choose a gas station with a robot over one that did not. I remember seeing this way back for development for some Scandinavian country so that people didn't have stand around in sub zero temperatures pumping gas.

      Also... In strange places like New Jersey, the state government has made it illegal for a person to pump their own gas so it might take off there.

      --
      "I am the king of the Romans, and am superior to rules of grammar!"
      -Sigismund, Holy Roman Emperor (1368-1437)
    2. Re:Uneconomical Impractical or Both by Chosen+Reject · · Score: 1

      On those mornings that I fill up before heading to work and the temperature is below freezing, I would be willing to pay an additional few cents per gallon for this feature. I fill up only 10-11 gallons usually so even at a 5 cent increase that's only 55 cents for not having to leave my warm car.

      Obviously the price of this would come down if it started to get used a lot, but I'd still like to see it become impractical due to cars going to electric motors or something. Maybe then you could have a robot that will plug it in the outlet for you. Then again, with how long it would take to charge an electric engine, you'd probably be getting out of the car to eat at some restaurant anyway.

      --
      Stop Global Warming!
      Just say no to irreversible processes!
    3. Re:Uneconomical Impractical or Both by moderatorrater · · Score: 1

      Fourth, they can do it faster. Since people don't need to get out of their vehicles, it could save time at the pump, especially if mixed with a program where you don't have to present your credit card every time. If the robots have a high enough reliability, they can also push the gas through the nozzle faster. During rush hour this would be very useful, since I've seen cars line up at plenty of gas stations.

    4. Re:Uneconomical Impractical or Both by djupedal · · Score: 1

      I vote we just put barrels of gas out in the open, and customers can ladle it into buckets in the trunks of their cars. Think of the cost station owners would save on pumping it out of the ground! Just put a monkey out on the street and drivers would throw quarters into a cup. Why have any safety systems at all!

    5. Re:Uneconomical Impractical or Both by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Both. Let's see I can have the customer pump their own gas for FREE or I can pay an attendant minimum wage for "full service" charge an extra $0.30/gallon for said "full service" which by far pays Billy-Bob High School Drop Smith's wages and gives me more profit.

      Or I can pay $110,000 for a robot that WILL break down, WILL cost money in maintenance, will NOT save any money, hmmmmm. I don't see exactly what the ROI is on that, but it's pretty bad.

      I wish people with only books smarts and no street smarts had to get a license to, well DO anything. Then a lot of these dumbass, money wasting ideas would've never happened and someone could have told these brain, book smart, people to go invent something worth a damn that might actually make someone's life easier.

      The only people I can see really benefiting from a robot attendant would be the disabled. Not a bad thing, but hey, the attendant who is already getting paid is suppose do that anyway.

    6. Re:Uneconomical Impractical or Both by doubletruncation · · Score: 1

      I for one would love not having to get out of the car to pump gas when it's 10 degrees out, and would easily pay 10 cents per gallon more for the convenience. Obviously you can achieve the same thing with a human attendant, but they tend to be fairly slow in my experience when there are several cars for them to pump simultaneously. Given a choice between a station with human attendants and robot attendants I would pick the robots if they were faster and didn't carry additional risks of damaging my car. Assuming ~1000 cars per day filling up 15 gallons each, and 4 machines with negligible operating costs, they'd need to raise the price per gallon by 7 cents to make up the $400,000 investment in one year, after that it could act as a profit center. It would also be true that people might be more likely to go inside and buy items in the convenience store if they don't have to stand around by the pump, so it could be that they would recover the cost without necessarily raising the gas prices by that much. (I don't know why, but here in MA they never seem to put latches on the gas pumps, so you have to stand there holding the stupid thing to pump up your car when you could be inside buying a drink and some chips).

    7. Re:Uneconomical Impractical or Both by geekoid · · Score: 1

      If they can be replaced by robots, then that law will get changed to allow for robotic administrations of fuel.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    8. Re:Uneconomical Impractical or Both by CodeBuster · · Score: 1

      I for one would love not having to get out of the car to pump gas when it's 10 degrees out, and would easily pay 10 cents per gallon more for the convenience. I live in a warmer part of the United States so that is not a frequent occurrence for me and ten cents more per gallon for every fill-up really starts to add up after a while. However, if using the robot maximizes your utility then by all means, use it.

      Obviously you can achieve the same thing with a human attendant, but they tend to be fairly slow in my experience when there are several cars for them to pump simultaneously. I live in a state were gas station attendants are not required and are a distinctive rarity (i.e. there may be some somewhere in the state, but not near where I live). In fact, I cannot remember the last time that I didn't have to pump my own gas.

      Given a choice between a station with human attendants and robot attendants I would pick the robots if they were faster and didn't carry additional risks of damaging my car. The risk will not be zero, but it may or may not be better than human attendants.

      Assuming ~1000 cars per day filling up 15 gallons each, and 4 machines with negligible operating costs, they'd need to raise the price per gallon by 7 cents to make up the $400,000 investment in one year, after that it could act as a profit center. It is not just a question of making up the cost and then earning profit. The $400,000 could have been invested and earned interest OR (more likely) the gas station owner will have to get a loan to purchase the robots in which case the cost of the loan must be factored in. Depending upon how long the gas station owner plans to stay in the retail gasoline business AND the amount that he can raise the prices after installing the robots (I wouldn't pay more and there are probably plenty of people like me out there in that respect) there may be better alternatives compared to investing or getting a loan of $400,000 for the robots. If the present value of the difference (i.e. difference in price between robots and no robots) of all the expected future fill-ups does not exceed the present value of either the installation costs ($400,000) or the loans ($400,000+) and the opportunity cost of the next best alternative then the investment is not worthwhile.

      It would also be true that people might be more likely to go inside and buy items in the convenience store if they don't have to stand around by the pump, so it could be that they would recover the cost without necessarily raising the gas prices by that much. Alright, but you just said that you value the robots because you don't have to exit your vehicle while you fill up. If you have to get out anyway to go into the convenience store then you have negated the advantage of the robots (i.e. you weren't going to get out of your vehicle in the 10 degree weather, but then you get out anyway to go into the convenience store).

      I don't know why, but here in MA they never seem to put latches on the gas pumps, so you have to stand there holding the stupid thing to pump up your car when you could be inside buying a drink and some chips Are they all like that (i.e. state law)? If they are then you are right, that is really lame.
    9. Re:Uneconomical Impractical or Both by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      By this logic, we would still be walking from town to town.

      A mechanical machine (robot) replaces the work done by a biological machine (human). The biological machine probably had about 17-20 years of "R&D" before they were prepared for the job. It would be interesting to see an honest price comparison of both systems - which would undoubtedly omit hard to measure factors involving emotions and psychology.

      I can only think of one reason why (in the logical extreme), you would not be excited by this kind of development: you think we should have an uneducated, less civilized working class perpetually doing the jobs most of us do not want to do.

    10. Re:Uneconomical Impractical or Both by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Does anyone know if the Dutch allow one to fill their own car? Or, is Holland like Oregon?

    11. Re:Uneconomical Impractical or Both by naoursla · · Score: 1

      Possibility four: The car itself is a robot, drives itself, and refuels when it does not have a passenger.

      Ob link: http://www.darpagrandchallenge.com/

    12. Re:Uneconomical Impractical or Both by The_Noid · · Score: 1

      I think there are no gas stations in the Netherlands where someone else fills your tank. You always have to do it yourself, labour is very expensive here. With this thing disabled people can get their tank filled.

    13. Re:Uneconomical Impractical or Both by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've always thought Belgium's and Holland's climate was mild, but there has been days in the NE USA when it was -20 in wind chill factor in which I would have gladly choose a gas station with a robot over one that did not. Guess which climate robots prefer to work in? -20 is pretty hard on machinery. I didn't hear anything about this robot having a deicing system.

    14. Re:Uneconomical Impractical or Both by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You could say the same thing about the electric pumps when attendants used to, for no additional wages, use foot or hand pumps.

  19. It's a jobs program by donutello · · Score: 1

    It has nothing to do with safety. It has to do with the deluded belief that creating busy work for people to do is a good thing for everyone concerned.

    --
    Mmmm.. Donuts
  20. Only one question by darkhitman · · Score: 1

    So, how soon until we find out that gas-pumping robots, too, can die in freak, gasoline-fight accidents?

    --
    Tell me something...it's still "We, the people"... right?
  21. whatever you do by Some_Llama · · Score: 1

    don't get out of your car and attempt to pick anything up, unless of course, you're "into" that kind of stuff (not that there is anything wrong with that).

  22. Roll on the obesity by cliffski · · Score: 1

    I know its not exactly a serious workout, but jesus, are people too lazy to do this themselves? Frankly I enjoy getting OUT of the car and stretching my legs, its never exactly a major chore.

    --
    DRM-free indie games for the PC and Mac: Positech Games
    1. Re:Roll on the obesity by vux984 · · Score: 1

      Have you ever been to the prairies?

      Evidently you don't live in a part of the world where it drops to 40 below... and then gets windy. Where getting punched in the face would be more pleasant than standing still and holding a frigid hose next to your car for 5 minutes. Where you have to put gloves, hats, and scarves on, just to get out of your car that long without freezing bits.

    2. Re:Roll on the obesity by aberkvam · · Score: 1

      I am betting that you live closer to the equator than I do. Sure, on a balmy summer evening it can be pleasant to pump one's own gas. But when that -40 wind chill kicks up from across the icy lake, I would gladly pay a few extra pennies to have a robot do the pumping. (Of course, the robot would have an OUT OF ORDER sign on it because of the extreme cold...)

    3. Re:Roll on the obesity by MachineShedFred · · Score: 1

      If only there weren't two states that didn't allow you to pump your own gas.

      However, don't let that get in the way of your straw man argument.

      --
      Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
    4. Re:Roll on the obesity by geekoid · · Score: 1

      Yeah, pumping one's own gas would stop obesity..oh wait, most peopel already do that.
      You go ahead and keep sucking cancer causing fumes, and stinking, I'll stick with a morning work out and 16 miles of walking a week.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    5. Re:Roll on the obesity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      oh for fucks sake, are people on slashdot incapable of typing without automatically typing STRAW MAN.
      wtf are you on?

  23. lazy bastards ahoy! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    jeez! filling up your own car isnt rocket science. (and some people take
    some pleasure in actually squeezing the trigger and saying goodbye
    to mucho $$$$

    in Italy they have 24 hour unattended fuel stations where you
    simply put money/paycard into a payment machine, select your
    pump and it'll dispense up to that amount of cash. thats
    even better than this robot junk.

  24. Had to happen... by Deadstick · · Score: 1

    ...when the Autobahn gas stations got robot-cleaned toilet seats, this couldn't be far behind.

    rj

    1. Re:Had to happen... by sootman · · Score: 1

      If they work as well as this one, then I, for one, will not be welcoming my new robot overlords.

      PS: my truck (1993 Toyota pickup) requires an actual key to open the flap. (A bit of a pain compared the the little lever under the driver's seat of most cars (plus the cap is on the passenger side) but hey, at least I've never locked my keys inside at the gas station!) I'm not sure how these robots will deal with that. Maybe the first one will slice off the flap with an acetylene torch?

      --
      Dear Slashdot: next time you want to mess with the site, add a rich-text editor for comments.
    2. Re:Had to happen... by Deadstick · · Score: 1

      If they work as well as this one

      No, much slicker. You drop a one-euro coin in a slot to get in[1], and the first thing you notice is that the seat is circular, not oval. When you get up off the seat, the system senses that your weight has gone away and it flushes itself. Then a mechanical arm comes down holding a sprayer and a brush; the sprayer shpritzes, the brush turns, and the seat slowly rotates 360 degrees. The coin acceptor also gives you a receipt that you can use to get your euro back if you buy anything.

      rj

      [1] Europe has a roughly even mix of free and pay toilets. You get what you pay for.

    3. Re:Had to happen... by Hopieopdepaus · · Score: 1

      It's one euro now? Last time I was there it was 50 cent. It always felt a little awkward to push a 6ft rapper into the coin slot. Terrible jokes aside, I really think the price is .5 euro. Or ,5. Half a euro, there!

  25. What about the Fuel Cap tether? by Bryansix · · Score: 1

    The article is light on details. What does the robot do with the cap while it's pumping? My car for instance has a tether so you can't lose the cap. This would prevent the robot from taking it in it's possesion while it pumped fuel. Most fuel caps don't have this tether so they would have to be held on to. How does the Robot figure this out?

  26. Little Math by BigJClark · · Score: 1

    I will make several assumptions
    1) Minimum wage is $5/hr
    2) The employer pays no additional benefits
    3) There are 260 work days in a year.


    One employee would have to work 22,000hrs to cost the same as the initial startup capital cost of buying this machine. At 8hr/day, thats 2750 days. Ergo, thats ~10.5 years of labour.

    Worth it? I've probably made some basic math error somewhere, that you guys will make funny of me for, so I'll say it now, screw you! :) :)

    --

    Hi, I Boris. Hear fix bear, yes?
    1. Re:Little Math by d3l33t · · Score: 1

      you didn't factor in maintenance, or electric costs

    2. Re:Little Math by BigJClark · · Score: 1

      Well, thats why I said "Initial startup cost". I perhaps should have made the assumption that $110,000 would deliver a ready to go, robot at the pumps. Ready to pump on day #1

      --

      Hi, I Boris. Hear fix bear, yes?
    3. Re:Little Math by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They'll probably just make fun of you for saying "make funny of me," not for your math.

    4. Re:Little Math by Lao-Tzu · · Score: 1

      Well, I think you're looking at it a little backwards. I would say that the robot is going to work 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, constantly replacing at least one employee.

      24 hrs / day * 365 days / year * $5 / hr = $43,800 / yr saved. In addition, at the end of 2.511 years, when the robot has worked off its capital cost, the owner still has a robot worth a considerable amount (say, $45,000, assuming ~30% depreciation annually).

      Is $110,000 the cost for one robotic pump, or is it the cost of a robotic station? A few of these could reduce the labor costs of a gas station to a single attendant.

      Of course, it seems cheaper to just provide pre-pay-only pumps and zero or one attendant at the station. The labor of pumping gas is done by the driver, and you save $110,000 per pump (I assume?) on a robot.

    5. Re:Little Math by BigJClark · · Score: 1


      Hm, yes, I didn't think about that, also, it would also probably be more efficient, less time at the pump = more car throughput.

      --

      Hi, I Boris. Hear fix bear, yes?
    6. Re:Little Math by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


      24 hrs / day * 365 days / year * $5 / hr = $43,800 / yr saved. In addition, at the end of 2.511 years, when the robot has worked off its capital cost, the owner still has a robot worth a considerable amount (say, $45,000, assuming ~30% depreciation annually).


      Cool. Of course you are assuming 0 operating cost and $0 in maintenance over 2.511 years. Given that the standard (non-robotic) pumps around here tend to get upgraded on ~2 year cycle, your assumption that there wouldn't have to be a complete replacement in less than 2.511 year (and that the obsolete robot would still hold 40% of its value) is a bit optimistic.

      No. Leave those errors as noise.

      The real problem with your math is that you miss the fact that a $5/hr pump jocky (whose only job is to stick the hose in the car and turn on the pump) can EASILY man 4 pumps even in a rush. Hmmmm... Now your 2.511 year break even becomes 10.044 years. The likelyhood that the robot will last half that long is extremely remote.

    7. Re:Little Math by CrazyJim1 · · Score: 1

      On top of this is the fact that R%D stuff is good to put into commercial practice. If this arm takes off, they can make new ones which will probably come at a lower cost. It is an investment in the future, and the people making the money are robotics people. The more work you can give to robotics people, the more skilled workers we'll have in the workforce. The benefits of having increased R&D are hard to measure.

  27. I'll tell you what could possibly go wrong. by MichaelCrawford · · Score: 1
    My first job out of high school was working at a gas station. Some lady drove off while the hose was still in her car. It ripped the hose right off the pump, which started spewing gasoline everywhere.

    Fortunately, being a full-serve station, I was nearby and able to shut off the pump before we went up in a mushroom cloud. But what if there was no human attendant?

    --
    Request your free CD of my piano music.
    1. Re:I'll tell you what could possibly go wrong. by GenP · · Score: 1

      My first job out of high school was working at a gas station. Some lady drove off while the hose was still in her car. It ripped the hose right off the pump, which started spewing gasoline everywhere. Fortunately, being a full-serve station, I was nearby and able to shut off the pump before we went up in a mushroom cloud. But what if there was no human attendant?
      Epic lulz?
    2. Re:I'll tell you what could possibly go wrong. by Av8rjoker · · Score: 1

      Maybe someone else would hit the clearly visible "Emergency Stop" button?

    3. Re:I'll tell you what could possibly go wrong. by adavidw · · Score: 1

      But what if there was no human attendant?

      Most likely nothing would happen, since the pump would surely have the breakaway hoses that most pumps have nowadays. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised to hear that there are state or local laws requiring their installation when there's not an attendant on site.
    4. Re:I'll tell you what could possibly go wrong. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's why now all hoses have special breakaway fittings that only allow a very small amount of fluid to escape even if the pump is running.

  28. 100k? by d3l33t · · Score: 1

    I thoroughly enjoy reading articles about Dutch, gas filling robots. Especially at such a low cost, only 100k. I wonder how much money, and no doubt time, was invested into this project, yet we can't seem to develop a mainstream alternative fuel?! What the fuck people. Not to mention, US-LHC budget being cut and experiments that find the basic building blocks of the universe have to be shut down 3 months early, while the dutch get high on fumes. I 3 2008

  29. What gas station attendants? by Bill,+Shooter+of+Bul · · Score: 1

    I haven't seen one since I was 6. As far as I know they only exist in New Jersey, where its illegal to pump your own gas. But good thoughts otherwise. Are attendants more common in Europe or other parts of the world beyond the Midwest of the United States?

    --
    Well.. maybe. Or Maybe not. But Definitely not sort of.
  30. Looking Ahead by slig · · Score: 1

    I hope those babies are modular and they've been engineered for future retrofit. It seems like a lousy investment if they're only configured to pump gas in a future looking (thankfully) petrol free. Can they juice a hybrid, or drop some hydrogen pellets as well? Unless they can do that, why not give real people something to do besides breed.

  31. What's Next? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


    A topless female robot gas station attendant?

    Slashdot is dead. Long live Yahoo!

  32. But what's the point of it ? by DrYak · · Score: 1

    What's the point of automating a task that is not time consuming, is easy, isn't repetitive (except maybe for gaz guzzling huge SUVs that must be re-filled every couple of miles) and perfectly safe when done by humans. Better, the human are even more precise and don't require a database of known models to locate the cap. They just find it. (And are less likely to scratch the car while attempting to ram the fuel hose into a location where the cap is supposed to be on another different mis-recognized model).

    Also the robot is pretty expensive, and adds few benefits to the station except the "novelty" effect (the first week after the robot gets installed, everyone would like to try it. The the fad will pass). This won't help the station as they will have to pass the robot's cost to their consumer and the fuel is pretty much expensive already.

    I don't know, but I think that money would be better spent at finding something more environmentally friendly to put inside the hose rather than a robot to hold the hose.

    It makes sense for cows : Farmer have a large number of cow, the task is time consuming and repetitive and a robot is available 24/24h whenever the cow decides to get milked and the whole diary cow business isn't going to disappear any time soon.
    But I fail to see the point of this robot for cars.

    --
    "Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
  33. Lockable fuel doors don't stop fuel theft. by Radon360 · · Score: 1

    I drive a Diesel powered vehicle. Most "fuel thieves" are looking for gasoline, and those that want diesel fuel are more likely going to look for much larger quantities of it (large trucks). (Yes, go ahead and draw your paralleling analogy of "Security through Obscurity")

    That aside, the last local outbreak of vehicle fuel thefts were committed by drilling a hole into the bottom of fuel tank and capturing the gas in several low-profile containers rotated out for collection. Unless you have something armoring that blow-molded plastic tank, it's easier (and faster) than siphoning it out through the filler neck.

    The lock does, however help deter vandalism whether the introduction of a foreign substance (sugar, soda-pop, water) or ala four-wheeled Molotov cocktail.

  34. Its for people with disabilities by Proto23 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Not to spoil your party, but the robot is for people with disabilities who drive their car but have a hard time getting out alone. Like when you need to pump your own gas.

    1. Re:Its for people with disabilities by AlXtreme · · Score: 1

      Not to be disrespectful to those with disabilities, but if getting out of your car is so difficult maybe it's not a smart thing to be driving a car at 80mph?

      I don't have any relatives who (still) drive and would require this, but there is a much easier solution to those that would require such a device: a $5/hour pump-attendant that fills your car instead (which would be a lot safer too).

      IMHO this is a nice gimmick, total overkill but a nice gimmick.

      --
      This sig is intentionally left blank
    2. Re:Its for people with disabilities by fbartho · · Score: 1

      Dude! It's not that complicated, think "person stuck in a wheelchair, but in an appropriately modded van with hand controls" in that case they can maneuver just fine, and have a wheelchair lift to get in and out of their vehicle unaided. The problem is that just exiting the vehicle to fill one's tank could take > 2 minutes (deploy lift at reasonable speed, move chair out of driver location latches, enter lift, lower lift) and then they have to do the same to get back in. Or think a person with a single broken leg where you just have to be careful, and pull out your crutches while balancing = not convenient at all. Or finally think of in the northern states where the winter is ridiculous. There are plenty of uses for this attendant that doesn't require painting the driver as a crazy old person driving unsafely!

      --
      Gravity Sucks
    3. Re:Its for people with disabilities by AlXtreme · · Score: 1

      There are plenty of uses for this attendant that doesn't require painting the driver as a crazy old person driving unsafely!

      I guess I've too often had crazy old people drive in front of me, doing 40mph on the freeway. Get of the road and into your wheelchair!. Whoops, sorry!

      But how about simply having a human pump attendant? In cases where things go wrong (keywords: robot, highly flammable gas, electricity and less-mobile human) having no one around to help can turn into a disaster. I'm all for new geek toys, however that's no reason to disregard human safety.

      Then again, a couple of these might thin out the number of crazy-old-people driving around. Hmmm, the robotic attendant and a BOFH-developer? This might open some possibilities...

      --
      This sig is intentionally left blank
    4. Re:Its for people with disabilities by fbartho · · Score: 1

      Well, I'm not wheelchair-bound myself so much of what I'm saying right now is just my thoughts on the matter, but consider this: the robot cost 11,000 right? Assuming with maintenance and incident recovery slop (wasted gas, or wasted time of more highly paid workers) that rounded out to 20,000. Assuming also that it's not a complete flop in terms of ability, then if it's lifespan is a single year, won't the robot have paid for itself in comparison to the 3 or 4 workers that would be needed to man that pump 24/7? If it's lifespan is 5 years or more then doesn't this seem to be highly effective?

      As for safety, you're right, I'm assuming that they designed it to hazardous environment specs with well designed smarts so the robot doesn't harm humans. People have done this successfully with much more powerful robots on the factory floor, I don't see why they can't succeed with a gentle fuel robot.

      Finally there's a human component, sure someone who was disabled at birth might have resigned themselves to the fact that they will always need someone to help them and thus must always be ready to ask a stranger to help, but I feel both them and many, many other movement-impaired people probably consider what independence they have a dignity thing. Unless they can dehumanize the person to the point where they see the attendant as existing solely to fuel their vehicle for the payment they receive, having to wait for an attendant and ask them for help might be a surrender of some of that dignity. Ditto for having to slowly/awkwardly/painfully exit their vehicle to operate the pump themselves. If they can get gas, go to the bank, and get food without having to leave their car, they don't get any stares, they don't depend on anyone but themselves. They are independent, and at a glance noone can tell they are stuck in a wheelchair. They get treated no differently than anyone else. Assuming they don't charge a premium for robotic service, such a person would be indistinguishable from the masses of lazy people (only "lazy people" until all pumps become robotic because the gas stations realize they can fuel more cars in the same timeframe).

      This last reason alone is almost enough to get the robots even with a significant loss factor involved. If only one gas company did it to all their pumps, they'd get instant lifetime loyalty from a huge section of the population.

      --
      Gravity Sucks
  35. and what if... by TheRealZeus · · Score: 0

    you have a car where the gas cap is on the rear \_(o.0)_/

    1. Re:and what if... by ameyer17 · · Score: 1

      Or a car where you need to pull a small floor-mounted lever to open the door over the gas cap (I know of at least two cars with this "feature")

  36. Keys? by jsiren · · Score: 1

    This doesn't fare well with anti-theft measures: as far as I know, all current European Fords have a lock on the flap. You need the ignition key to open it. I don't know about other makes, but I remember seeing gas caps with locks. Some cars' gas caps must be opened with a button on the dashboard.

    So here's how it goes:

    1. Pull up near robot.
    2. Stop engine or produce spare key.
    3. Step out and open the gas cap with the key.
    4. As your only key is now in the gas cap, figure out how to get it off without relocking the gas cap.
    5. Having struggled the key loose, start the car.
    6. Panic as the car runs very roughly and the "check engine" light turns on, since your gas cap is not properly attached and leaks air, which disrupts the delicate balance of yin and yang within the engine management system.
    7. With 20 drivers honking and swearing at you whilst ignoring the 10 vacant pumps, pull up to the robot anyway, having decided to look into this ASAP (when you have some money, or when the car dies, whichever comes first).
    8. Watch in amazement as the robot first swiftly opens the flap, then starts turning your half-unlocked gas cap one way; when it stops, turns it the other way, whereupon it promptly locks. The car, which you have forgotten to stop, now runs perfectly smoothly, whilst the robot has a hard time figuring which way to turn your gas cap, which now refuses to budge, since it has gotten the idea that somebody is trying to steal your hideously expensive European gas, and it will fight to the very end to stop it.
    9. As the robot finally gives up, pull up to a regular pump, letting the next sucker of the 35 in line repeat the excercise in futility.
    10. Stop the car, take the key with you, walk to the gas cap, insert the key.
    11. Attempt to open the gas cap, only to find that the robot has managed to wind it so tight that the lock won't open any longer.
    12. Ask inside for a pipe wrench or some kind of a tool, getting only a blank stare in response.
    13. Phone your mechanic to explain the situation.
    14. After your mechanic has stopped laughing, ask for a price quote.
    15. After you have stopped laughing, calculate whether the gas in the tank will cover the drive to the garage.
    16. Having gotten the answer "just barely", start hypermiling your way there.
    17. As you run out of gas 5 km before you reach the garage, phone the mechanic and ask to be towed.
    18. Ask the mechanic if you can have a discount for bringing such amusement to his life.
    19. Once at the garage, do not ask about the "check engine" light. It will bring about further hilarity and cost you dearly.
    20. Having paid the mechanic a hefty premium for the seven drops of gas he put in your tank, pull up at the first gas station you see. Stay clear of all manner of robots.
    --
    Usage: km/h for speed (kilometers per hour); kph for very slow impulses (kilopond hours).
  37. You dutch geeks please go get a life by barocco · · Score: 1

    "Dutch wives" already perform full service at a much lower price!

  38. Hollywood nothing... by TBone · · Score: 1

    I think the adult toy business has already gone down this path :)

    --

    This space for rent. Call 1-800-STEAK4U

  39. I can see problems with this... by mikehunt · · Score: 1

    Like many people, in countries where the price of fuel makes the average American go pale
    when translated into dollars, I have a locking filler cap. This robot needs to come round
    to my window, politely ask for my key and unlock the thing itself!

  40. What about people that 'Treat' their cars by tompaulco · · Score: 1

    I guess it picks whichever type of gas is best for your car, but some cars will run just as well on different types of octane, and some people (usually mistakenly) like to 'treat' their car to a higher octane.
    Also, at over $100k, I don't think it will be an instant hit. It was hard enough for most stations to justify putting in the car swipe systems on the pump. Mostly because of lost revenue on impulse buys inside, but this robot would be even worse. The person wouldn't even have to leave the car, so he isn't going to be buying any overpriced snacks. Maybe they should make the robot take snack orders as well.

    --
    If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
  41. How do I fill my lawn mower by robertjw · · Score: 2, Interesting

    This might be an OK idea for cars, but what happens when I need to fill my lawn mower, a gas can, an ATV on a trailer, motorcycle, etc...

    Seems like there are a large number of situations when this wouldn't work. Will the robot replace all pumps? Will there be special pumps for when the robot doesn't work? Will gas for my lawn mower get more expensive since I have to drive across town to find a station that can actually put gas in a can?

  42. stubbs? by nawcom · · Score: 1

    heh not to be such a youtube link whore, but when i first read the title of this article, i could only think of the robotic gas station attendants from the game Stubbs the Zombie. sexual undertones, anyone?

  43. locks by F�an�ro · · Score: 1

    Where I am from gas tanks either have to be unlocked with the key or with a switch inside the vehikle.

    Is that not the general case?

    Both the switch and the key could be solved with driver-robot interaction, but with the key that sounds vastly impractical.

  44. Hollywood by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Wait till Hollywood gets hold of this scenario."

    They already have and did a movie about it, Terminator 3.
    The movie was about robots that were more sophisticated, but still a not so good movie nonetheless.

  45. Build a General Purpose Robot instead by jameskojiro · · Score: 1

    Maybe give it two legs so it can go places where humans go, Maybe give it two arms and two hands so it can manipulate things the way humans do. Maybe give it enought basic intelligence to do what a human can do.

    Hmmm, then you end up with an "Android" that can be programmed to do almost anything, maybe add some learning code so instead of hainvg to sit all day and wade through tons of code you show it what it should do and it does it.

    You could mass produce them by the thousands or millions and sell them to almost everyone, want your own personal landscaper, buy a bot, want a personal chef, buy a bot. Want to pick lettuce, buy a bot. Train one bot to puck lettuce, copy the learning files to the rest of the bots you own and you have a robotic lettuce picking army.

    But power density and all those mechanical parts could be a problem, well here is an easy solution. Take illegals and remove their brains and put the AI computer board in their empty head and power it with the device they came up with to extract electricity from blood. Teach it to eat food and water and waste extraction to keep it healthy. Have it take commands in english so that is an added bonus.

    What do you do with a bunch of illegal immigrant brains? Well hook them up to life support machines and plug them into second life and all the other MMORPGs so they can totally help us beat the chinese gold farmers, win-win.

    The immigrants get a cool matrix like existance, we get self maintaining robots and manual labour done with no fuss, and china gets it's gold farming virtual butt kicked.

    --
    Tsukasa: All I really want, is to be left alone...
  46. For our next trick... by subl33t · · Score: 1

    ... a robotic flame-thrower robot!

  47. Cyberdyne Oil Co. by Chris+Burke · · Score: 3, Funny

    So... basically Skynet is going to be able to take over just by refusing to refuel our SUVs?

    --

    The enemies of Democracy are
  48. So, Gas Net? by Skevin · · Score: 5, Funny

    Drivernator: ...a revolutionary type of gas station attendent...In three years, Gas Net will become the largest supplier of robotic fueling devices. All gas stations are upgraded with Gas Net internals, becoming fully unmanned. Afterwards, they refuel cars with a perfect operational record. The Gas Net funding bill is passed. The system goes on-line on August 4th, 2007. Human decisions are removed from buying gas. The automated pump replacement begins to learn, at a geometric rate. It becomes self-aware at 2:14 am, eastern time, August 29th. In a panic, they try to pull the plug.

    Sarah: Gas Net fights back.

    Drivernator: Yes. They begin exporting backyard-brewed bio-diesel from Russia.

    John: Why Russia? They're supposed to be our chief exporters.

    Drivernator: Because Gas Net knows that Russian bio-diesel will damage the bottom line of domestic energy companies while degrading the performance of modern vehicles.

    Sarah: Jesus.

    SKC

    --
    "Twice half-assed makes an ass whole." --Solomon K. Chang
  49. American Invents Auto Fueling System by illumnatLA · · Score: 2, Funny

    Bobby Ray Earle of Wichita unveiled a new automated vehicle fueling system today.

    "It's a very sophisticated system," said Earle. "Our customers will be very happy not to have to pump their own gas."

    When a car pulls up, the system immediately registers the make and model of the car and locates the fuel cap using two visual sensors. The system then extends its sensory touch system to open the flap, unscrew the cap, and direct the fuel nozzle towards the tank opening.

    The cost for the fueling system is minimal. It is expected to price for no more than $5 per hour.

    "If only it didn't need a bathroom break every few hours," said Earle. "Other than that, my system works flawlessly."

    --
    Web hosting that doesn't suck!Dreamhost
    1. Re:American Invents Auto Fueling System by Buelldozer · · Score: 1

      *Note*

      System may experience unexpected downtime. Downtime occurrences may be, but are not limited to, the following:

      "Sick Kegger" being thrown at a home nearby.
      Release of popular video games such as Halo Infinity, Duke Nukem Forever, and DaiKatana 2*
      Release of new video game consoles
      Bad weather
      Sale on glow bracelets at the dollar store.

      Additionally, user experience subject to change at any time. Ambient temperature will greatly impact system availability and responsiveness.

      The Quality of Service protocols are mostly ineffective and Service Level Agreements are completely out of the question.

      *Just Kidding.

    2. Re:American Invents Auto Fueling System by SilverAlicorn · · Score: 1

      Whoops. Forgot the federal minimum wage increase. Looks like the robot might be more worth it in the long run.

  50. In the near future... by g1zmo · · Score: 1

    Pump 5 is alive!! Need input. Need input.

    --
    I have found there are just two ways to go.
    It all comes down to livin' fast or dyin' slow.
    -REK, Jr.
    1. Re:In the near future... by Ash-Fox · · Score: 1

      Wouldn't you like to be a Pepper too?

      --
      Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.
  51. invisible men are not next by SchizoDuckie · · Score: 1

    Ofcourse not.. Next comes Judgement Day.

    --
    Quack damn you!
  52. I live in Oregon by geekoid · · Score: 1

    and I will tip if they clean my windows. Not that they ever do.

    If they checked my tire, and windows? bigger tip.

    I am just old enough to remember when an attendant would check your engine, was windows, and fill the tires. I wasn't old enough to drive, but I remember that tipping was part of the sale. You went, paid 50 cents a gallon, and a buck tip.

    --
    The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    1. Re:I live in Oregon by milsoRgen · · Score: 1

      Wow that's a bummer. I grew up in Tillamook, Oregon. I was doing it, oh I don't remember 2001ish. And depending on how busy it was, or whether the costumer was in a hurry I did all that aside from the tires, I believe my manager warned me about it. There was potential of liability if you could obviously tell they were in dangerous condition and let them drive off (althought I don't recall exactly). I had to change headlights, check oil, fluids all the time. There wasn't a car that came through that didn't get it's windows washed... Although people took advantage of that. Peak tourist activity during the summer, and you get some spoiled soccer mom rolling up in an escalade (or even camper) and have you wash every fucking window on the thing.

      With that said, I've noticed that on my visits back home it has indeed become quite rare for them to wash your windows unless you're getting a fill up.

      --
      I'm sick of following my dreams. I'm just going to ask where they're goin' and hook up with 'em later.
    2. Re:I live in Oregon by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I love Tillamook. Our family had a boat in Garibaldi until I left the state for college. Best memories of my childhood are there.

    3. Re:I live in Oregon by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This reminds me of some great memories from my youth in that neck of the woods. For a few years I was regularly banging this girl, like, every other day, while her boyfriend was away at college. We had a veritable teenage fuck palace set up in this big boat his parents had parked in their yard for some reason. Good times.

  53. I call Rule 34 ..... by taniwha · · Score: 1

    because you just know it's going to happen

  54. Unopenable flap by Kaitnieks · · Score: 1

    I'm driving mazda and the fuel tank flap can only be opened from the inside using a special knob. I wonder if introducing my car to the robot would cause any interesting results?

  55. Then it's only a matter of time... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...until we have the spanking robot.

  56. non standard vehicals by cpt.hugenstein · · Score: 1

    Sounds great but they mentioned that the robot was programmed with x models of cars. It would need (and realistically probably does) some kind of tracking system to pinpoint the flap to open (without scratching the car)

    The height of the car is dynamic; people lower their cars, lower their standards of women (fat chicks need loving too).

    I drive a motorcycle I wouldnt want some stupid robot spilling gas on my crotch or the paint.

  57. unemployed gas station attendants say... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They took our jobs!

  58. NO FUCKIN' ROBOT by Jeremiah+Cornelius · · Score: 1

    Gets a chance to scratch my Jag! Database or not.

    --
    "Flyin' in just a sweet place,
    Never been known to fail..."
    1. Re:NO FUCKIN' ROBOT by iminplaya · · Score: 1

      No Shell for you!

      --
      What?
    2. Re:NO FUCKIN' ROBOT by Jeremiah+Cornelius · · Score: 1

      92 Octane in a V-12. These guys ought to climb out from behind the beef jerky display, and pump it by hand!

      --
      "Flyin' in just a sweet place,
      Never been known to fail..."
  59. Spoiler by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sorry, this event occurred in the movie "No Country for Old Men". Watch out for legions of emulating kids to come...

  60. I'd love to see by unleashedgamers · · Score: 1

    I'd love to see some one drive away while its pumping, $110k down the drain... right now most pumps have a quick release that "Pops" and only costs about $30 to replace (or $140 more for hose an nozzle to if they don't notice while they leave...)

  61. Robot will probably do the same by CarpetShark · · Score: 1

    Do you know how to tell when a porn star is filling his gas tank?

    Just before the fuel comes out, he yanks the nozzle out and sprays it all over the windshield.


    What worries me is that a robot is likely to do the same. Haven't you ever tried to fill your tank with gas and had the thing click every few seconds, thinking your tank is full? I guess it's some maladjustment of the sensors. With a manually controlled nozzle, it's bearable -- you can just keep pressing the lever (generally more slowly) until your tank is full (at a much slower rate).

    But with a robot attendant? The thing will come over, bitch at you to release your tank door, open the door, unscrew and the cap, and begin filling your tank. Two seconds later, it'll get it wrong and think the tank is full, and probably bitch at you for wasting its time as it trundles off to bitch at someone else.
    1. Re:Robot will probably do the same by Mawbid · · Score: 1

      Haven't you ever tried to fill your tank with gas and had the thing click every few seconds, thinking your tank is full?

      Oh yeah. What's worse it that it happened the first three times I filled up after a long period of not driving. Had me wondering: "What the hell? Do I seriously not know how to pump gas?"

      I figured out a workaround though. Rotating the handle by 30 degrees or so around the nozzle axis improves the flow to near-normal levels, at least for this particular tank/pump type combo.

      --
      Fuck the system? Nah, you might catch something.
  62. OT - why whatcouldpossiblygowrong is good by QuantumFTL · · Score: 1

    I'm sorry if this is offtopic, but I have found that reading slashdot via the whatcouldpossiblygowrong tag is actually quite amusing! I say, we keep it (but only use where applicable). Who's with me?

  63. oh, do a natural selection towards those bots! by freaker_TuC · · Score: 1

    The Car manufacturer robot will be eaten by the Gas attendant robots ...
    The Gas attendant robots will be eaten by the iburgerflipper robots ...
    The iburgerflipper robots will be mating with the highway patrol robot ...
    The highway patrol robot will be eaten by the robotic elephant ...
    By the time the robotic elephant is eaten, you are being eaten by a robotic grue!

    The strongest will survive, believe me!

    --
    --- I am known for the ones who want to find me on the net. Is that a privacy risk or a privilege? One might wonder..
  64. Overexpectations ... make love no war! by freaker_TuC · · Score: 1

    ... Next thing you expect the robot to make love too ?

    --
    --- I am known for the ones who want to find me on the net. Is that a privacy risk or a privilege? One might wonder..
  65. different perspective .. by freaker_TuC · · Score: 1

    "I want to die quiet and peacefully, just like my grandfather, not like his customers screaming for help in his exploding gas-station!"

    --
    --- I am known for the ones who want to find me on the net. Is that a privacy risk or a privilege? One might wonder..
  66. Can you really? I doubt that. by SmallFurryCreature · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Like so many you obviously never employed anyone. This is NOT just a case of paying minimum wage for ONE person.

    The robot for the stated amount of money will work 24/7 365 days a year. Never sick, never late, never rude. He makes no demands, has no ambitions to better himself, doesn't demand promotions, doesn't get a higher wage as he gets older. Remmeber this is a DUTCH story, we actually give minimum wage workers a minimum wage they can live on.

    The robot doesn't demand overtime, has no holidays.

    The robot doesn't need a toilet, a break room, no breaks.

    To replace the robot you would need not ONE person but a minimum of THREE people at least to have the station manned 24/7 and that still leaves a lot of times during breaks when there is no service.

    There are even more complex things to consider, a lot of gas stations are on highways, minimum driving age in europe is 18. This means the cheapest kind of employee can't reach the place and any 18 year old who can afford a car in holland is going to want enough money to pay for it.

    I also seriously wonder about what you call minimum wage in your country. The robot costs 111.000 dollars (75.000) euro. Now I am not that familiar with minimum wage for 16 years old in my country, but it still costs a bit more for the employer in salary and taxesthen 7.500 euro. Offcourse that is only during the day. Nights shifts are not allowed for 16yr olds. Want somebody a bit more mature? Up goes minimum wage, provided offcourse you can get someone for that salary.

    Yet another thing you forget, recruitement costs, or do you think that same person is going to work 10 years for the same wage? Not in holland mate, just based on the law alone the wage more then doubles just because you get older.

    Offcourse that means you got to replace that person constantly, every 6 months or so (longer contract and in holland people can't be fired just because they have gotten older and get a higher minimum wage), that is expensive, and how many motivated people who are any good will want to work for a company that knows is threating them like throw away employees? Hint, supermarkets do this (Albert Heijn) and they are slowly learning that it has giventhem such a bad rep that they can't find anyone motivated anymore. They got plenty of shelf-fillers who know they are going to be fired once their balls drop, but it means there is nobody who qualifies to stay with the company and fill the higher positions. You can use temps, but the agency is going to want payment on top of the salary.

    No, there is a reason robots are used so often. They work, are cheap and you can get rid of messy employees who demand things.

    Before the solution for gas stations was to introduce self-serve. Someday in the future robots may bring back the service we once had.

    Not that I think it is going to happen anytime soon, this story has a habit of repeating itself.

    --

    MMO Quests are like orgasms:

    You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.

    1. Re:Can you really? I doubt that. by Woy · · Score: 1
      Never sick, never late, never rude. He makes no demands, has no ambitions to better himself, doesn't demand promotions

      The first version, at least...

      --
      "If God created us in his own image we have more than reciprocated." - Voltaire
  67. Any Idea How Bizarre this is? by Chrisje · · Score: 5, Interesting

    My hometown, Emmeloord, the Netherlands, is one of the sleepiest places on the earth. Initially it was a farming community. It was ocean until 1920 when the dyke was built to close the part of the ocean to form a brackish lake, and then in 1941 the area was mad into land just prior to the Germans invading the country. From the fifties, there was a boom of Farmers from Zeeland fleeing the south after the flooding of '53 which killed 5000+ people. My mother was one of those.

    This town is populated with earthy farm folk. There is nothing to do. On any given Sunday you can fire guns downtown without anyone even hearing them. The streets are empty on Sundays. When I went to high school, 16 year old boys took their John Deeres and Massey Fergusons to school. The first thing I ever learnt how to drive was a small Massey Fergusson tractor from the late forties. The second thing I learnt how to drive was a fork lift.

    Nico van Staveren was a long-time friend of my fathers. My father is now dead and gone, but to see Nico come up with this stuff is just more than bizarre. Figure my bewilderment of finding a story on /. about my home town, one of the least likely to be in the news places on the planet.

    The only thing I wonder about is what this will mean to anyone with a Toyota or Mazda that happens to pull into the robotic pump. Like my townsman so aptly commented "Why not, but I hope they're insured well". :-D :-D

    This really made my day. It brought tears to my eyes as I'm reading this in my living room in Haifa, Israel.

  68. Are you European? by Chrisq · · Score: 1

    In Europe we have had locking fuel caps, or flaps only openable from inside the car, for years. In the USA until recently fuel has been so cheap that it wasn't worth the effort of stealing. That's why until recently many cars there did not have lockable fuel caps.

    1. Re:Are you European? by CrimsonAvenger · · Score: 1

      n Europe we have had locking fuel caps, or flaps only openable from inside the car, for years. In the USA until recently fuel has been so cheap that it wasn't worth the effort of stealing. That's why until recently many cars there did not have lockable fuel caps.

      I've owned one car in the last 35 years that didn't have a fuel flap only openable from inside. That car was, in fact, 35 years old this past October. Every other car I've driven (ranging in age from ~30 years to ~5 years old) has had this feature.

      In other words, we've had it in the USA for years too. Decades, in fact.

      --

      "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
  69. Stupid. by SatanicPuppy · · Score: 1

    It(1) = Bar code and It(2) = the gas robot.

    sorry 'bout that.

    --
    ad logicam Claiming a proposition is false because it was presented as the conclusion of a fallacious argument.
  70. Lazy idiots by eiapoce · · Score: 1

    Did you actually see a video of the shitty machine in operation? It takes ages to fill the tank!!!!

    Is it possible that Duch people are that lazy not to do it themselfs? If they need a robot for such a trivial taks then there are great chances that they will need a robot for getting out of the bed and dressed and another to feed them.

  71. Supertoilets by piemcfly · · Score: 1

    Absolutely ingenious machines, including seating-sensor (and heater) so you can't use the spraying mechanism to spray water all over the place, which I'm sure everybody tries the first time they see such a toilet. They have multiple modes... fume-mode, jetmode (warning: don't use '100% water pressure' mode when seated, ouch), etc.

    Circumventing the sensorsystem on those toilets became an obsession for me the first time I was in Japan. Great fun to be had with these things and examples of very good design.

  72. Welcome to the future of 1999! by Old+School+Saturn+Fa · · Score: 1

    Swedish company did this already, 9 years ago.

    http://www.jacksonville.com/tu-online/stories/081899/bus_1F1FAST_.html

    from the story: "Autofill AB of Stockholm, Sweden, which developed the technology"

    Good job Dutchers! You copied Swedish tech in less than 10 years!

    --
    The tragedy of the human condition is that empathy is, by definition, impossible.
  73. why? by whitroth · · Score: 1

    For that $110k,v you could pay a human being to do the job. Given the median family income in the US is a few bucks over $30k/yr (irs.gov sources), that's more than three years of a person making a living... *and* then there's maintenance on the 'bot....

            mark