New Robots Developed To Climb Walls

An anonymous reader writes "SRI International, a nonprofit research and development organization, has developed a new technology that enables some robots to scale walls. The wall-climbing robots could be a boon for the US military, which could use them on reconnaissance or other missions in war zones, said Philip von Guggenberg, director of business development for SRI International, adding that the independent group has received some funding from DARPA, the technology research arm of the Pentagon. Von Guggenberg said that the new electrical adhesive technology called compliant electroadhesion, provides an electrically controllable way to stick machines to a wall. So what can they do? That adhesion lets the robots, using either feet or tracks, scale a vertical wall. They can even climb walls covered in dust and debris, or made out of concrete, wood, steel, glass, drywall, and brick. Good news is that regular robots, especially those with tracks, can be retrofitted with the technology and turned into wall climbers. Maybe if the kids are good, they'll get one for Christmas."

Comments

Electroadhesive robots

[$RANDOMLUSER]

Never mind the military uses, how about using them for construction purposes?

Re:Electroadhesive robots

[Frosty Piss]

Never mind the military uses, how about using them for construction purposes?

Indeed. It's pretty sad that most (or just a lot? It seems like most...) new technology comes about for "military needs". Imagen if all this effort was devoted to developing technology whose actual purpose was peaceful applications to benefit a peaceful society... The money we spend on war prevents a renaissance of humanity.

Re:Electroadhesive robots

[Haoie]

Afraid that human labour will be far, far more cost effective, and will remain so for probably our entire lifetime.

Robot technology doesn't really grow in leaps and bounds [unlike the internet].

Re:Electroadhesive robots

[mrbluze]

Never mind the military uses, how about using them for construction purposes? They used kids for that during the industrial revolution. Some day I reckon these robots will be cheaper than children, but it'll take a while.

Re:Electroadhesive robots

[easyTree]

Never mind the military uses, how about using them for construction purposes?

All that matters is how efficiently the US military can kill people.

Re:Electroadhesive robots

[nawcom]

And that, was, "REAL OPINIONS - WITH HOST - FROSTY PISS"

Heh don't take that as a troll; I just find anything that has the phrase "frosty piss" in it humorous.

Ok back to the subject matter that you were replying to: I've always found something odd about DARPA, compared to ARPA. I guess advanced research projects agency sounds like something funded for the sole purpose of continuing to succeed in the new discoveries and development in technology; you turn that into a government department (DARPA) (and yes, I know that the name ARPA doesn't mean they aren't a government agency), it sounds like some agency paid for with our tax dollars who's sole purpose is to design the latest death ray to kill the commies with. (think 70s/80s cold war). Heh, this is definitely an over-exageration, but you sorta get the idea. I read "robot cllimbing walls" and "funded by DARPA" it makes me think of automated spies or suicide bombers from a more humane prospective. Or maybe they'll just be automated peeping toms. who knows. Thanks for letting me rant few strange ideas from my buzzed, twisted imagination at 3:00am.

Re:Electroadhesive robots

[Mick Malkemus]

At least robots can be targeted and destroyed. Wait until nanobots are created. A soldier will be walking along on patrol, and suddenly begin to disintegrate into a pile of slush.

Re:Electroadhesive robots

[TubeSteak]

Imagen if all this effort was devoted to developing technology whose actual purpose was peaceful applications to benefit a peaceful society... The money we spend on war prevents a renaissance of humanity. The money we spend on war brought us the Internet, which has arguably brought about a modern day renaissance.

Not to mention that the military is responsible for the commercialization of a wide variety of technologies that go into making safer & cheaper products for everyone.

As for why so much technology is developed for the military...
It's because they are willing to go into a cost plus contract with companies.
Nothing like having the military pay for all the cost overruns & extra R&D.

Re:Electroadhesive robots

[Artichoke]

Robot technology doesn't really grow in leaps and bounds [...] That's 'cos they keep fitting the bally things with caterpillar tracks and not power-jumpers :P

Re:Electroadhesive robots

[hairyfeet]

Sad but oh so true. With over a hundred countries voting to ban cluster bombs,who kill and maim untold numbers of civilians long after the battle has passed,not to mention the young children who pick them up thinking them to be toys,guess who voted to not support the ban? I guess killing all those civilians and kids is okay as long as you might get one of them evil terrorists. But that is my 02c,YMMV.

Re:Electroadhesive robots

[Yoozer]

Read Marshall Brain's "Manna" - at least the robot part can be done/developed/invented realistically.

Re:Electroadhesive robots

[antirelic]

Military research goes towards providing one of the basic services a government is suppose to provide and that is for the defense of a nations sovereignty (regardless of how abstract that can be). History has proven that market forces, not governments, are better at developing technology for the benefit of society. Massive social projects directed by governments, are often misguided and result in massive unintended consequences. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Leap_Forward

If human beings were perfect, we would not need a military, and communism would have emerged as the dominant form of government. Unfortunately, Santa Claus is not real, and we still need to have a military. It is even more unfortunate that the art and science of killing people whole sale has come up with some of the greatest inventions of all time (like the internet).

Argue not against the insanity of armies and war but the argue against the insanity of human nature.

Re:Electroadhesive robots

[somersault]

Never mind the construction purposes, I want a car that I can park on the side of my office building!

Re:Electroadhesive robots

[somersault]

Not if he has his own super nano-bots protecting him! He'll just start giggling uncontrollably as the tickly little wars go on all over and inside his body

Re:Electroadhesive robots

[ichigo 2.0]

The money we spend on war brought us the Internet, which has arguably brought about a modern day renaissance.

That is most likely a happy coincidence. Imagine how many internet-equivalents we might already have if money was spent on peaceful purposes instead!

Re:Electroadhesive robots

[neglogic]

It's pretty easy to ban something you don't even have. They should ban time travel while they're at it.

Re:Electroadhesive robots

[Anonymous Coward]

I was under the impression that the Internet came about to facilitate quick communication between researchers in different locations.

Re:Electroadhesive robots

[The End Of Days]

I imagine none. Go ahead and refute that.

Re:Electroadhesive robots

[A nonymous Coward]

No, ARPA wanted some flexible way to communicate in the case of nuclear war of tremendous natural disasters. ARPA is a US defense agency.

Re:Electroadhesive robots

[ThinkWeak]

Nothing like having the American Taxpayers pay for all the cost overruns & extra R&D.

Corrected that for you

Re:Electroadhesive robots

[hairyfeet]

Are you saying you are FOR cluster bombs? Cluster bombs have never proven to be effective in the battlefield and were designed for a cold war scenario of massive Russian troops rolling down the street. In todays wars they do nothing but kill civilians and kids. There is even less of a point to cluster bombs than there is to land mines,which I can at least see being useful in guarding the border between North and South Korea.

But cluster bombs are just a menace and leave a land a deadly killing field long after the wars have passed. IMHO it is disgusting how the rest of the world has gotten rid of cluster bombs and land mines in their arsenals and we haven't. Do you really think with all our firepower that a war will be won or lost by cluster bombs or land mines? And as for other countries not having them both the US and Russian defense industries will be more than willing to sell them some,so that isn't really an arguement in todays world. But that is my 02c,YMMV.

Re:Electroadhesive robots

[neglogic]

You got me - I'm FOR cluster bombs everywhere. Putting aside the issue of the effectiveness of cluster bombs, my only point was that most of the "100 nations" probably don't have cluster bombs (or an effective air force to use them) in the first place. Their "ban" is in name only.

Re:Electroadhesive robots

[evilklown]

Well, the sad truth is that governments fund development of things that they think will protect their populous or way of life. If you think about it, this is a purely capitalistic endeavor. A government gets its money from taxing its people, so if there are fewer people (because of a terrorist attack) or the people are spending their money elsewhere ($4 for a gallon of gas) then the governments have a reduced income. It is a well-known fact that wars typically stimulate the economy, so it just makes sense for a government to invest in things for wartime purposes. In fact, this applies to companies as well. If the ROI isn't high enough, companies don't develop it. If you, as a citizen, would have proposed the idea of the Internet (as we now know it) to a company in the 1960s, they would have laughed in your face. There simply wasn't a budget to invest in computers for a whimsical endeavor, and of course personal computing was virtually nonexistent. The government funded it because a) the government could afford computers and b) they saw a way of protecting their capital investments by utilizing the technology.

Re:Electroadhesive robots

[couchslug]

"The money we spend on war prevents a renaissance of humanity."

War removes old, defective, degenerate, weak systems. (The revolutions in the US, France, Russia, and China are examples.) Inconclusive wars are less effective, which argues for waging war with sufficient force to accomplish the object of the conflict.

"The money we spend on war prevents a renaissance of humanity."

The churn of war gives the opportunity for human improvement static (i.e. "warless", conflict-free) social systems do not.

War is an antidote to stasis, not a brake on human or human technological development. War consumes some resources and shortens some lives in the process, but competition usefully destroys the weak (though in a manner far more lenient in terms of survivors than that of nature). The destruction of systems that cannot or choose not to survive competition is healthy. The competition improves the breed (not genetically, but socially) by selecting adaptive, strong-willed groups and removing some of their competition.

The freedoms that we have now are the direct result of the West being (generally) very good at war. War is needed to keep man from being asphyxiated by old religious and social systems. It is needed to prevent the resurgence of static, backward beliefs. When we become static and backward, we will require destruction in our turn.

How will we know when our failure merits losing? When it happens.

Re:Electroadhesive robots

[ichigo 2.0]

I imagine none. Go ahead and refute that.

And I imagine 5 trillion. You go ahead and refute that. ;)

Easier way!

[www.sorehands.com]

Why not have have the robots bitten by a genetically engineered spider?

Re:Easier way!

[flyingfsck]

Only two replies and the PC World server is already bitten by the Slashdot Spider.

Re:Easier way!

[StreetStealth]

Do you really want a robot like that to end up with a huge identity crisis and ponder back and forth whether it should ask out the recon drone it has a crush on?

Re:Easier way!

[iminplaya]

Don't need to

Re:Easier way!

[iminplaya]

404 forbidden...Assholes!

Re:Easier way!

[garphik]

OR even easier this could be even DIY ... okay

Tie a simple fisherman's knot to one of the appendages of the robot that would take the force > its Mass*g(approx 9.8) Then throw other end of the string over the wall (or attach it to the pulley on top of the wall), and apply force to the other end of the string directed towards the ground and away from the wall.

Also there is no guarantee that your robot will survive this climb without a scratch / broken parts, but heh it climbs

jokes apart, that is really a good advancement in tech.

Re:Easier way!

[Anonymous Coward]

Radioactive spider. Most ignorant post ever.

Re:Easier way!

[GrievousMistake]

Why the hell would they link to PC World, anyway? Popular Mechanics has a video, The Register has a entertaining writeup, and SRI's site has pictures, a diagram and some specs. All PC World has is tons of ads.

Re:Easier way!

[Anonymous Coward]

They changed it for the movie. He's probably a young'un. Cut him some slack.

Re:Easier way!

[Anonymous Coward]

Even easier still, give them a drug addiction and then take it away once they're REALLY hooked

Robocop meets Spiderman?

[Anonymous Coward]

Coming to a theater near you ???

Gecko feet

[DigiShaman]

Cool, so they managed to synthesize how a gecko sticks to surfaces...

Question: Can this technology be applied to tires? Having more grip with less surface area contact would be a major improvement.

Re:Gecko feet

[Ksevio]

They said it doesn't work very well on damp surfaces which is when you need the most grip with a car so it wouldn't be very useful for that application.

Re:Gecko feet

[xonar]

I think this is an excellent idea. Could it possibly increase highway speeds in the future? Speed aside, the safety factor would be phenomenal.

Re:Gecko feet

[Anonymous Coward]

Tires?

What about my shoes?!!!

Re:Gecko feet

[afaik_ianal]

Apart from the problems with reduced efficacy in the wet, these things support tiny forces compared to the friction that a car tire gives you.

I suspect the contacts need to be *very* close to the surface (they work like a capacitor), so you're going to lose most of the advantage of having your tire made of nice, thick, flexible rubber.

There's a technology available today for improving your car's road-holding ability: wider wheels. Most people aren't willing to bear the extra maintenance costs, or the reduced mileage.

Re:Gecko feet

[Strilanc]

I expect that even if it did work, you would end up increasing the rolling friction of the tire. That would cut into gas mileage.

Re:Gecko feet

[Anonymous Coward]

I surely wasn't the only one who half way through reading this thought:

"Driving on the walls sure would be fun"

Re:Gecko feet

[somersault]

Current tyre technology works fine at speeds upward of 150mph (depending on the tyre you buy, they are all rated differently and proper racing tyres need to be 'warmed up' before they grip properly), it's just the drivers that are the issue. It could improve safety slightly, but it would hardly be 'phenomenal' considering that most accidents are due to the drivers rather than the cars. There will always be idiots trying to push a vehicle beyond what it can actually do (that's fine on a racetrack, not so much on a public road). Aside from that, speeding tickets are also a nice steady stream of income for certain governments.

Re:Gecko feet

[Anonymous Coward]

No, one of the interesting things about this is that it doesn't work like Geckos. Geckos stick with Van der Waal forces.
This technology is active, you can turn it on and off by applying an electric charge.

Re:Gecko feet

[Bob-taro]

Cool, so they managed to synthesize how a gecko sticks to surfaces...

I'm not sure it's exactly the same thing, in light of this article.

Re:Gecko feet

[PieceofLavalamp]

Sorta, AFAIK gecko stick to walls because of the geometry of nano sized "hairs" on their feet, sorta like velcro. This robot does that to a lesser degree but uses static cling to compensate.

Re:Gecko feet

[blueZ3]

With conventional tires it's a trade off. Stickier tires are less efficient and last fewer miles. You can already buy VERY sticky tires, the kind dragsters use--the reasons that nobody puts these on their daily driver are 1)cost 2)gas mileage goes down 3)they have a shorter life.

I don't see how some outside force applied to the tire would provide much different characteristics in these areas than is possible with conventional materials science.

Anyway, as some other post already said, it's the driver, not the tires in most accidents. Traction accidents are relatively rare. And once you invent an idiot-proof tire, the world will just invent a "better" idiot.

Re:Gecko feet

[TigerNut]

The cool thing is that, like aerodynamic downforce, electrostatic friction would be adjustable (on the fly), and would not incur an inertia penalty relative to just using mass to increase your traction. If you could drive your car on near-bicycle size tires so as to reduce rolling friction, and still have acceptable acceleration, cornering and braking ability due to adaptive static friction control then it would be possible to get significantly higher mileage.

Oh look

[Anonymous Coward]

Generic minor robot advancement is an instant boon for the application of robots in warfare. Now fund my research please, general sir.

Re:Oh look

[Hal_Porter]

But dude! Now if you're an evil enemy of the US and the US sends its robots to attack you, they will swarm over the walls, Aliens style, not just the floor.It's like a sci fi movie, but we are the aliens with all sorts of cool weapons. Goddamn I'm excited just thinking about it.

I remember in the run up to the Afghanistan war there were loads of stories on Fark.com about cool technologies which would be used by America to kill the terrorists. Someone suggested that there should Fascism tag for them. On Plastic someone posted a funny Starship Troopers style dialog

Reporter: Some people say that the US has provoked this war by meddling in the Middle East.
Soldier: I'm from New York and I say KILL 'EM ALL!

So, cool technology but I'm ambivalent. Mind you as an English guy it seems better that the US has all the cool killing machines than any conceivable competitor except maybe the UK.

Re:Oh look

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't care if we "provoked" them or not. You hit me, I hit you back. Doesn't matter how justified you felt in hitting me in the first place, not one bit.

I hope Osama & crew are happy with the devastation now wrought across the region. Either it was what they wanted in the first place, or they drastically underestimated what we would do. I strongly suspect the second.

Re:Oh look

[Hal_Porter]

I don't care if we "provoked" them or not. You hit me, I hit you back. Doesn't matter how justified you felt in hitting me in the first place, not one bit. Well quite. The odd thing about the provocation argument is that they first attacked the USS Cole and the embassies back when Clinton was President.

He was actually quite pro Muslim. He saved the Bosnians from genocide and tried to get the Israelis to sign a peace treaty with Arafat. Arafat rejected it, admittedly. But I don't think the US was anti Muslim at all before 9/11, anymore than it was anti Japanese before Pearl Harbor.

I hope Osama & crew are happy with the devastation now wrought across the region. Either it was what they wanted in the first place, or they drastically underestimated what we would do. I strongly suspect the second. Al Qaeda want to re establish the Caliphate in the Middle East, Israel (after they get rid of all the Jews) and Spain. And Chechnya and Xinjang. To do that they think they just need to defeat the US. Since they think they defeated the Russians in Afghanistan, they obviously thought the US would be no problem.

This a completely crazy world view of course, opposed by the US, the Russians, the Chinese, most Arab states, Israel, Spain, France, Iran and Syria. Iran and Syria back Shiite fundamentalists like Hezbollah, not Sunni ones like Al Qaeda. Al Qaeda pissed them off by declaring Shiites apostates and killing some Iranian diplomats in Afghanistan. Even without the US, this is a powerful group able to thwart their ambitions.

And the Russians were actually defeated by the Northern Alliance, not Al Qaeda. Actually the Northern Alliance was backed by the same grand coalition which now opposes them and help to topple the Taliban.

But I think before they attacked the US, that was what they believed.

Add window washers to the list

[NotQuiteReal]

Of people who's job can be replaced by a robot.

Re:Add window washers to the list

[Anonymous Coward]

Here you go: Window cleaning robots...

Roland? Is that you?

[Frosty Piss]

Shouldn't this story have a Roland Piquepaille by-line?

Sorry, I'll shut up now...

Every single story...

[Anonymous Coward]

Is anyone else sick of reading about every new technology that seems to come out the military finds "uses" for it. Makes me think about their mindset when they look at every innovation and think "this would be really good for killing people".

Goddamn sociopaths.

Re:Every single story...

[The Evil Couch]

You might want to reread the summary.

The wall-climbing robots could be a boon for the US military, which could use them on reconnaissance or other missions in war zones, said Philip von Guggenberg, director of business development for SRI International, adding that the independent group has received some funding from DARPA, the technology research arm of the Pentagon.

Looks to me like they came up with the concept and then marketed it to the military in order to get more funding.

what? no

[westcoast philly]

I for one, Welcome out new electro-stick spybot war machine overlords. ...jokes yet? Pretty cool, but frightening.

Easy defense against these robots

[imrtt]

The article mentions that electroadhesion doesn't work well on damp surfaces. All you need to defend against these robots is a bucket of water.

Re:Easy defense against these robots

[Anonymous Coward]

The article mentions that electroadhesion doesn't work well on damp surfaces. All you need to defend against these robots is a bucket of water. Peeing on these robots is another form of defense.

Re:Easy defense against these robots

[b4upoo]

Think positive. I know that the next time I'm at home and feel like climbing the walls I'll have company. Now if these things can handle a paint brush I can change my home decor as often as I like.

Re:Easy defense against these robots

[Anonymous Coward]

Any conductive earthed surface would cause eleckystictionrobot FAIL too!

Great...Just effin' great

[hyades1]

My job's already got me climbing the goddamn walls, and for a fraction of the cost of a goddamn robot.

They might as well finish the job and make me totally redundant. Invent a robot that begs my girlfriend for sex and gets turned down

Re:Great...Just effin' great

[bledri]

They might as well finish the job and make me totally redundant. Invent a robot that begs my girlfriend for sex and gets turned down

Nothing personal, but with the right attachments it may not get turned down... Ouch.

Re:Great...Just effin' great

[gmbar888]

Age of Conan Gold
AoC Gold
Sell Age of Conan Gold
Age of Conan News
Age of Conan Gold
Buy Age of Conan Gold

Age of Conan Gold Buy Age of Conan Gold Buy Cheap Age of Conan Gold

Re:Great...Just effin' great

[chemisus]

Nothing personal, but with the right person he may not get turned down... Ouch.

There, fixed that for you.

Re:Great...Just effin' great

[Anonymous Coward]

Dude, you don't want an angry, frustrated, cockblocked, wall-climbing robot in your house.
By the time you look up, it's already too late...

Save some money...

[arotenbe]

I used to have a little toy that would do this. You turned it on and it stuck to the wall and climbed up very slowly. Its primary function was running out batteries.

Tagged: suctioncup

What ... ?

[the bluebrain]

... now we'll have robots lording over us from random vertical surfaces?
I, for one, am not sure I welcome the idea.

Flaw in the Wall

[camperdave]

how about using them for construction purposes?

Well, the wall climbing robot suffers from one debilitating flaw when it comes to construction. You see, in order to climb a wall, the wall needs to be there first.

Re:Flaw in the Wall

[kitsunewarlock]

yes, so using it to help...you know...put in wiring behind walls, paint, test durability or just climb up the bracing before the wall is put up is obviously a silly waste of time.

Well, actually, until these little buggers become cost effective it probably is. Yipes!

Re:Flaw in the Wall

[DeadChobi]

Why would we put bracing up before putting a wall up? That doesn't make sense. I think there's one viable construction use that would actually be worthwhile, and that's because otherwise someone has to stick their hand in the wall to do it.

Hmm.

[phreakincool]

"In the future: human wall climbing: For uses ranging from Special Forces needs to exterior window-cleaning "
Superhero uniform check-list:

1 - Full-body/form fitting unitard: check

1 - Ski Mask to hide my secret identity: check

1 - No shame what-so-ever: check

6 - Electroadhesive robotic thingys for hands, knees, and feet: working on that

Lem leads again and the robot free climbs

[dbIII]

Odd coincidence. Just a week again I read "The Accident" by Stanislaw Lem which is about trying to track down a robot that has gone missing and has unexpectedly done a bit of rock climbing in it's spare time.

Oblig.

[Anonymous Coward]

I, for one, welcome our wall-climbing robotic overlords.

This is easy...

[Pogdranaut]

...just get your robot to use vista for a few days, and it'll be climbing the walls without any training.

Re:War robots

[easyTree]

You can't mean to suggest that the ENEMY aren't all EVIL and wanting to kill us? But but but that would mean the government is using fear to control us. Clearly such a suggestion impugnes the good character of politicians.

We're really in for it now.

[CartoonFan]

Soon the robots will overtake us all. It is only a matter of time. First they walk, then they run, then they climb walls.

Re:We're really in for it now.

[somersault]

As long as they are just walking, running and climbing then it doesn't matter too much. When they start coming back from the future and ripping your heart out with their bare hands, then you need to be worried.

Re:We're really in for it now.

[CartoonFan]

Hopefully, by then, technology will be advanced enough to deal with them.

Re:We're really in for it now.

[somersault]

Not if they come back from the future!

Re:We're really in for it now.

[CartoonFan]

I know what you mean. Still, I'm not going to let that get in the way of living my life.

Space Elevator, Anyone?

[Anonymous Coward]

This sounds like the solution to the problem of developing a vehicle that can travel up and down a potential space elevator.

Re:Space Elevator, Anyone?

[Rams�s Morales]

Too bad they don't mention how much power is needed per pound.

An easy deterrent

[PhysSurfer]

Looks like it might have trouble with conducting surfaces. If you short those clamps together all that induced charge/voltage would likely discharge, sending the robot tumbling to the ground and maybe even blowing its power supply. Any wet wall, or even just a wall with a band of conducting material would still serve as a barrier to the robot.

They need fundind

[DrYak]

Never mind the military uses, how about using them for construction purposes?

Indeed. It's pretty sad that most (or just a lot? It seems like most...) new technology comes about for "military needs". It will probably be mainly used for construction in the future. It's just that they need more funding for the project. And these day adding "and it helps fighting the evil terrorists !" at the end of a press release increases your chance of getting government funds.

Just like the obviously outrageous "this will eradicate cancer !" claims that you see each time some bio-medical research lab publishes some obscure discovery.

Noooo!

[WizzardX]

The fools! How will we escape the Robotic Overlords now?

Print version

[Nullav]

Here's the print version for those who don't want to scroll constantly because of the massive ad-walls.
Really, I don't mind ads, but use them tastefully.

eisnhower begs to differ

[Anonymous Coward]

the 1 trillion spent on the iraq war, if spent on civilian projects, would have generated far, far, far more advances, contributed far more to industry, and benefited society much more.

yeaah the military generated a lot of cool stuff, but that is because the military uses up so much money that other science projects get starved, including nasa, the department of energy, the national institutes of health, the cdc, fermilab, etc etc etc.

giving a certain amount of money to the militray does not necessarily generate discovery or advancement faster than giving that money to civilian projects.

Re:eisnhower begs to differ

[PitaBred]

There's a difference between Iraq War spending and military research spending. We've spent MUCH less on military research than funding the endless war. I don't think you know what you're talking about... military research funding = good. Military operational funding = good when we have something worthwhile we're doing. Right now military operational funding = bad.

-1 redundant

[conureman]

Wish I could think of something humorous like ALL OF Y'ALL. I am just very impressed by the concept. How heavy is this thing? (Secret? no pix.) I used to have fun as a youngster rubbing balloons on my hair, then sticking them to the ceiling. Who would have thought this could go so far?

Say what? It's true?

[Anonymous Coward]

I guess we know how Criss Angel did one of his tricks then. And since we also know that electricity is also the solution for anti-gravity, we can only conclude that he controls the magnetic fields around him.

WALL BOT VIDEO

[mattnyc99]

http://www.popularmechanics.com/blogs/technology_news/4264594.html

The exclusivity of our times

[mi]

And these day adding [...]

"These days"? You are forgetting the original reasons GPS and the Internet got created, to name just two...

Seriously, if it weren't for the fear of and the designs over property and women of the neighbors, humans would've still been hunting-and-gathering (mostly gathering, of course)...

More like civilian applications

[Tyr_7BE]

Screw military applications - this means my roomba might be able to handle the stairs soon!

Exciting times :)

RiSE? StickyBot?

[Anonymous Coward]

This kind of device has been around for a while in academia.

RiSE:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JzfP0Ig7eVQ
StickyBot:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=odAifbpDbhs

It's neat that they implemented a new kind of adhesion and packaged it in an autonomous chassis (StickyBot is still wired due to weight constraints), but climbing robots have existed for a while.

Military, military, military

[ornel]

It's true lots of great technologies have come out of military research, but it seems a very inefficient way of coming up with new stuff. If the US is going to have such a statist economy, wouldn't it be better to use all those billions on research that is not for world domination?

Just add monkeys...

[DrHackenbush]

... as per http://science.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/05/29/1254259 and you're telling me we can have bionic, monkey-powered, wall climbing robots? Where do I sign up?

What nonsense!

[A nonymous Coward]

As for why so much technology is developed for the military...
It's because they are willing to go into a cost plus contract with companies.
Nothing like having the military pay for all the cost overruns & extra R&D. Military-inspired tech existed long before the concept of cost plus contracts.

You really need to extend your knowledge of history back farther than what has happened since you began reading.

What I hate

[davevt5]

I hate posts that link to articles with no pictures!

http://www.sri.com/rd/electroadhesion.html

Anyone remember the movie Runaway?

[butabozuhi]

Remember Tom Selleck in Runaway back in 1984! Those robots were creepy - but not as creepy as Gene Simmons or as cool as the homing bullets!

do it easier...

[Hambourgher]

And why not have have the robots bitten by a genetically engineered spider?

The "BIG Scary Enemy" change over time.

[DrYak]

"These days"? You are forgetting the original reasons GPS and the Internet got created, to name just two... The "these days" was referring to "fighting evil terrorists !".
In the sense that before that, it used to be "fighting godless communists !", etc.

Seriously, if it weren't for the fear of and the designs over property and women of the neighbors, humans would've still been hunting-and-gathering (mostly gathering, of course)... One can take human history as an example. Old Greece. Yes, some greek genuis like Archimedes got his name become legendary following feats during a military siege. On the other hand the most prolific period in terms of art and philosophy of the greek history, the so called Golden Centruy, happened during a time of peace *after the end* of the Persian wars.

More close to home, although Arpanet was started by the US military as a way for a network to survive a massive attack for the fear inspiring enemy du jour (the godless communist), most of it rising in popularity to what is the web today can be traced to the work of the CERN (a mainly pacific organisation) and development that happened during the 90s, hardly a time with "BIG Scary Enemies". Even more characteristic, now that governments have found a new scarecrow to frighten their population, you start seeing regular complaints on /. about how most of the things done by government in the name of the "War Against Evil Terrorist" is reducing the freedom one has on the net and blocking the development of creative uses.

So yes, fears has been a good way to whore for money on a few select projects. But real creativity needs collaboration between human beings, which isn't as easy at times when everybody hates each other (or at least is suspicious of each other).

Against any form of adversity humans are creative, whenever there's a hard problem (be it getting more food or women as you suggest or simply trying to survive after a catastrophe as reported during Katrina on /.), you'll see crazy solutions being applied. You don't specially need to have some people killed in war to make advancement in science. Saying that war has brought great things to humanity is a broken window fallacy.

Alfred Nobel

[EnOne]

Anyone heard of Alfred Nobel?