Slashdot Mirror


Android Copy of Young Woman Unveiled In Japan

An anonymous reader writes "According to IEEE Spectrum, Japanese roboticist Hiroshi Ishiguro, who had previously built a robot copy of himself, has now created a new android — and it's a 'she.' Geminoid F, a copy of a woman in her 20s with long dark hair, exhibits facial expressions more naturally than Ishiguro's previous android. 'Whereas the Geminoid HI-1 has some 50 actuators, the new Geminoid F has just 12. What's more, the HI-1 robot requires a large external box filled with compressors and valves. With Geminoid F, the researchers embedded air servo valves and an air servo control system into its body, so the android requires only a small external compressor.' It's also much better looking. Has the Japanese android master finally overcome the uncanny valley?"

56 of 264 comments (clear)

  1. Oh hell yeah! by santax · · Score: 5, Funny

    I want one that looks like my girlfriend! Man, I'm gonna hack myself a mute-button into this one :D She's gonna be like, perfect!

    1. Re:Oh hell yeah! by sopssa · · Score: 5, Funny

      I want one that looks like my ex-girlfriend!

      FTFY

    2. Re:Oh hell yeah! by comrade+k · · Score: 5, Funny

      I want one that looks like my mother!

      FTFY.

      --
      "Every vision is a joke until the first man accomplishes it; once realized, it becomes commonplace." -Robert H. Goddard
    3. Re:Oh hell yeah! by somersault · · Score: 4, Funny

      All that remains is to switch the compressor from "blow" to "suck".

      The labelling nomenclature could probably be improved to avoid ambiguity.

      --
      which is totally what she said
    4. Re:Oh hell yeah! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      Funny, I want one that looks like your mother too.

    5. Re:Oh hell yeah! by Zakabog · · Score: 4, Funny

      His girlfriend probably reads slashdot and posting "I want one that looks like my girlfriend's sister!" might get him in a little trouble.

  2. Finally by Johnny+Fusion · · Score: 4, Funny

    My dreams of a robot girlfriend are one step closer to being actualized

    --
    There are two kinds of fool. One says, This is old, and therefore good. And one says, This is new, and therefore better.
    1. Re:Finally by WrongSizeGlass · · Score: 4, Funny

      My dreams of a robot girlfriend are one step closer to being actualized

      I suppose the important questions for you to ask before welcoming this robot girlfriend into your life will be:
      * Does she run Linux?
      - If not, can you install Linux with or without a 'hack'?
      * What flavor of Linux would be best for a robot girlfriend? (and, no, you can't use 'GirLinux')
      * Will she still be considered 'female' once she's running Linux or will she be reset to a virgin teenage boy?
      * What type of DRM will she have?
      - What will the pirate hack to break her DRM be called?
      * And last, but not least, can she be programmed not to dump you?

    2. Re:Finally by Baseclass · · Score: 4, Funny

      Imagine a Beowulf Cluster of these.

      --
      ^^vv<><>BA
    3. Re:Finally by couchslug · · Score: 3, Insightful

      That's hardly a Troll.

      Whoever produces the first practical, reasonably lifelike fuckbot is going to be very, very rich. Just because the rest of us don't want one doesn't mean they won't sell in droves.

      After all, the inconvenient part about sex with another person is that it requires another person. A practical fuckbot would get rid of that barrier to entry. :)

      --
      "This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
    4. Re:Finally by DrVxD · · Score: 4, Funny

      * Does she run Linux?

      Nope, this is one of those times when you really want Windows instead of Linux.
      After all, which one do you think goes down more often? *rimshot*

      --
      Not everything that can be measured matters; Not everything that matters can be measured.
    5. Re:Finally by AmberBlackCat · · Score: 2, Funny

      You can install Linux but there's no driver support for the mouth or vagina...

    6. Re:Finally by CAIMLAS · · Score: 2, Funny

      You laugh at him, but you need to realize something: most of your girlfriends are likely being served up to you via a Linux machine already.

      --
      ~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers
    7. Re:Finally by Scowler · · Score: 2, Insightful

      =) Best use of a slashdot meme in a looonnnng while...

    8. Re:Finally by Miseph · · Score: 2, Insightful

      "* Does she run Linux?

      Nope, Windows XXX.

      - If not, can you install Linux with or without a 'hack'?

      Yes, but installing anything from a floppy is obviously out of the question.

      * What flavor of Linux would be best for a robot girlfriend? (and, no, you can't use 'GirLinux')

      To be honest it doesn't much matter... the speech modules are poorly written no matter which you use, all of the personality packages clearly suffer from Asperger's, and the firmware for *ahem* down below was clearly written by somebody with no earthly idea of what it should be doing. Welcome to Linux.

      * Will she still be considered 'female' once she's running Linux or will she be reset to a virgin teenage boy?

      Gender differentiation is still in alpha... just expect androgyny and you won't be so disappointed.

      * What type of DRM will she have?

      Unauthorized users will be unable to open the legs.

      - What will the pirate hack to break her DRM be called?

      Roofies.

      * And last, but not least, can she be programmed not to dump you?'

      Who cares? She'll have a mute button anyway.

      --
      Try not to take me more seriously than I take myself.
  3. Dammit Japan. by Tybalt_Capulet · · Score: 4, Informative

    Since it's from Japan, I assume you can have sex with it, and it will be on the market in three months.

    --
    Has the old saint in his forest not yet heard of it? That God is dead?
    1. Re:Dammit Japan. by Jedi+Alec · · Score: 5, Funny

      Better make sure the accelerator won't get stuck though!

      --

      People replying to my sig annoy me. That's why I change it all the time.
    2. Re:Dammit Japan. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Does anyone else hate the word "gynoid" as much as me? It's never used in the article... but someone tagged it onto the story - it's so utterly wanky fanboyish it provokes a real loathing in me. It's also a worthless neologism article on wikipedia.

    3. Re:Dammit Japan. by gilgongo · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It's also a worthless neologism article on wikipedia.

      _What is it_ with people who dislike the documentation of neologisms on Wikipedia? Where else are you going to be able to find out what a word like "gynoid" means (which I'd never heard of before now)?

      If anything, I'd favour the deletion of all non-neologised terms from Wikipedia on the grounds that nobody needs to know what a "table" is or read about Abraham Lincoln because they can always go out and buy a damn book.

      The sheer irony of people calling for articles to be deleted because they are neologisms on the one hand, while praising Wikipedia on the other for being a fountain of contemporary knowledge on the other, is just beyond all understanding.

      --
      "And the meaning of words; when they cease to function; when will it start worrying you?"
    4. Re:Dammit Japan. by Zorque · · Score: 4, Funny

      I wonder how often the developers groped the robot as they were building it.

    5. Re:Dammit Japan. by OldGeek61 · · Score: 3, Informative

      You need to read up on your Asimov, your comment doesn't have anything to do with them: 1. A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm. 2. A robot must obey any orders given to it by human beings, except where such orders would conflict with the First Law. 3. A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Law. So it looks like they pass that test!!

    6. Re:Dammit Japan. by AndGodSed · · Score: 2, Informative

      I wonder if a sex addiction with medical side effects that can be attributed to doing your fembot too often will cause them to violate those laws? The humorous solution might be to build in a "headache mod" as a safety mechanism. This is of course taking the conjecture that one step too far...

    7. Re:Dammit Japan. by Scarletdown · · Score: 2, Funny

      Never heard of death by snu-snu I take it? ;)

      Is that anything similar to Death by Boonga Boonga?

      --
      This space unintentionally left blank.
  4. Wow by binarylarry · · Score: 2, Funny

    Google is taking this new technology to amazing heights!

    --
    Mod me down, my New Earth Global Warmingist friends!
  5. Just don't make it speak by greymond · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I'm down with my real doll android, aka Cherry 2000, being able to go get me a beer and thrust back, but as soon as she starts yappin at me, it's back to the whores.

  6. Re:Copy of "himself"? by santax · · Score: 3, Informative

    You lazy bastard :P http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WijMCSfX0RA ;) happy eastern!

  7. Does it... by oldhack · · Score: 5, Funny

    Does the android come with the tentacle monster? Or is it sold separately?

    --
    Fuck systemd. Fuck Redhat. Fuck Soylent, too. Wait, scratch the last one.
  8. Obligatory by lyinhart · · Score: 4, Funny

    So... how much longer till they produce one that passes the Voight-Kampff test?

    --
    Freedom is drinking a beer in the park when you're supposed to be at work.
  9. Re:the question is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Just check out the uncanny valley on that one!

  10. No. by mark-t · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Has the Japanese android master finally overcome the uncanny valley?

    No.

    1. Re:No. by pushing-robot · · Score: 2, Insightful

      IMHO "uncanny valley" just means "robotics engineers don't understand people". Whether we feel comfortable interacting with something has little to do with whether it visually approximates Homo Sapiens: Humans relate to other species all the time. Animated movies and TV shows are full of characters that don't resemble humans at all. A long scene in the movie A.I. of an android grotesquerie that should epitomize the "uncanny valley" elicits sympathy, not fear. Why are these characters so easy to relate to? We empathize with them.

      A fundamental ability of the brain is to relate to the minds of others. We call it "Theory of Mind", "empathy", or even "anthropomorphizing", though it's not a trait limited to humans. Social animals use it to maintain relationships. Predators and prey learn to predict each others' actions. On some level, our brain takes everything it percieves and tries to create a model to map its behavior to our own. The easier a thing's behavior is to understand, the more comfortable we feel. The harder a thing's behavior is to understand and predict, the more uneasy we become. Animators, storytellers, playwrights, and cartoonists learned long ago that the best way to make an audience comfortable with a character is not to create a convincing human but to create convincingly human mannerisms. They focus on the things humans look at in other humans: The shape of a mouth, the position of an eyebrow, a squint, the speed of a movement, the direction a gaze, a particular choice of words, an instinctive reaction; in other words, all the little things we subconsciously do to tell other humans what we are thinking. By replicating (and exaggerating) the mannerisms and behaviors of a human, you can portray a convincingly "human" character with a trash compactor and a pair of binoculars.

      Unfortunately, the field of robotics hasn't caught up. Humans don't relate to today's androids, because they just don't have mannerisms we can relate to. Current "androids" are at best vaguely aware of the world, and uncoordinated in their interaction with it. If they are able to interact with humans at all they do so in a very limited manner, responding with incoherent, irrelevant, or parroted information, and their attempts at "emotion" or "human behavior" are artificial and hollow. We're unable to subconsciously translate their behaviors into our equivalents, as they are generated by algorithms that are structured very differently from our brains. Being with an android is more like being with an individual suffering some form of profound dementia.

      Of course, there's no easy way to make robots interact fluently with us. Our abilities are too limited at the moment; we probably won't have "comfortable" androids until AI has taken a few huge leaps ahead. But all the uncanny valley really comes down to is that you can't simply make a robot that looks human without the mannerisms to go with it. In fact, the more organic a machine appears the harder it becomes to think of it as just a piece of equipment, so natural behavior becomes all the more critical.

      --
      How can I believe you when you tell me what I don't want to hear?
  11. Re:the question is... by WrongSizeGlass · · Score: 4, Funny

    ...is she anatomically correct ??

    It doesn't really matter ... someone will find a way to screw it even if it's sealed tighter than an iPad.

  12. Re:uncanny valley by Venerable+Vegetable · · Score: 2, Insightful

    We're not even at the bottom of the valley yet. That thing is clearly a robot, nothing uncanny about it. Most importantly it needs a better mouth and small natural body movements.

  13. Are you kidding? by barfy · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This is exactly the valley. It looks like a robot. The valley is huge, and it won't be solved by 12 actuators. Unless you're mostly blind.

    1. Re:Are you kidding? by Angst+Badger · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Seriously. The engineer is plainly making progress over his previous attempts, but he's got a long way to go. Humans are very good at reading subtle cues in other humans, like being able to tell when a friend is distracted by some unexpressed concern. That's what an android engineer is up against. This latest effort is immediately recognizable as a non-human when in motion, and something seems distinctly off about it in still pictures. And considering that even computer-rendered humans in movies -- which is arguably an easier problem -- are still less than 100% convincing in closeups, I'm not holding my breath for convincing androids any time soon.

      --
      Proud member of the Weirdo-American community.
    2. Re:Are you kidding? by AmberBlackCat · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I have found there are guys who prefer you to be a little machine-like. Maybe feelings and emotions bother them. Maybe they'll prefer this over a really realistic model.

  14. When does it hit the Marketplace? by Captain+Spam · · Score: 2, Funny

    I know a few co-workers who'll probably all be Apple apologists about this next time I see them and promise the iPhone copy of a young woman will come soon, but I gotta say, I knew the open nature of the platform would make it possible on Android first, meaning my trusty Nexus One can...

    Oh, wait, that's not what you... oh, I see. *sigh*

    --
    Demanding constant attention will only lead to attention.
  15. Re:George Lucas did it first by moteyalpha · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Skin is an organ and can be grown or transplanted on a suitable substrate. Already in the works.. So I am guessing that it is just a hop skip and jump to a real cyborg. It would probably be cheaper too and self repairing.
    Cherry 2010 and if it follows Moore's law they will be posting on slashdot by Cherry 2020.
    I would guess that this would be a life extension method at its completion, which allows space for the brain and spinal cord along with an interface. I think that is another of those uncanny valleys.
    Though it does seem more like a science fiction movie such as reanimator.

  16. Why do we want human-looking robots now? by RightwingNutjob · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Having had my ear to the ground in robotics for the last few years, it seems to me that this is a wasted effort. Much more fundamental problems in robot-human interaction, basic things like being able to track a moving object in the room, or walking on two legs without having each movement preprogrammed, have yet to be solved reliably. Even if she looked perfect, the fact that she'd trip and fall over any unexpected bump in the floor and won't have the software to make eye contact or shake your hand will make the valley very very deep.

  17. He needs to work on the skin texture by petsounds · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The eyes seem better than his last effort, but the mouth area is really where it falls short. There isn't enough subtlety in mimicking muscle movements around the lip area, and the mouth opening and closing is a real giveaway. Although the jaw hinge seems a bit off, I think what's really going on is the lack of skin movement during articulation. The "skin" not visibly stretching creates a plastic, robotic appearance. Still, it's interesting work. I don't agree that we should be making robots that look like people though. It seems like a conscious attempt at anthropomorphism, and even if the physical appearance eventually becomes flawless, there will always be an uncanny valley in the way the robot fails to act with human subtlety.

    1. Re:He needs to work on the skin texture by Anonymous+Cowar · · Score: 3, Funny

      I think what's really going on is the lack of skin movement during articulation. The "skin" not visibly stretching creates a plastic, robotic appearance.

      Like Joan Rivers and other botox junkies?

  18. But... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    ...can she FOLD TOWELS?

  19. Japanese fembot.. by Paracelcus · · Score: 2, Funny

    Can you get electrocuted during bukakke?

    --
    I killed da wabbit -Elmer Fudd
  20. Re:The uncanny valley is getting deeper by PopeRatzo · · Score: 2, Funny

    Seeing the gynoid smile made me think of a retarded person

    That's hot.

    --
    You are welcome on my lawn.
  21. If we can't get CGI characters to act human... by cutecub · · Score: 4, Interesting
    ...then we sure as hell aren't going to be able to get robotic characters to act human.

    CGI animators, in some sense, have a much easier task then the roboticist. Its much easier to program a full musculature into an animated character than to physically build a robotic one.

    The difficulty of all this is exemplified by Robert Zemeckis' dismal "Polar Express" and "A Christmas Carol". Even when capturing hundreds of control points on the faces of the actors, you're still left teetering on the edge of the Uncanny Valley.

    "The Curious Case of Benjamin Button" and "Avatar" were more successful because they did complete surface capture of the actors faces rather than point-capture.

    Which gets back to the difficulty of making robots appear human. Its the same problem, magnified 1000 times by the fact that, in essence, you have to pack the equivalent of a millions of "control-points" into the robots face.

    Not an easy task.

    -Sean

    1. Re:If we can't get CGI characters to act human... by radtea · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Which gets back to the difficulty of making robots appear human. Its the same problem, magnified 1000 times by the fact that, in essence, you have to pack the equivalent of a millions of "control-points" into the robots face.

      You're thinking about this like a software guy, not a hardware guy. The human face doesn't have that many control points. It has a relatively small set of muscles and a bunch of connective tissue with known (albeit nonlinear) properties.

      The problem is that much of what humans do with facial expression is "non-functional" in the sense that it doesn't involve any practical intent or communication. We blink, we chew our lips, we move our muscles simply because stillness is fatiguing. I'm betting that with a relatively small amount of attention to such "non-functional" movements we'll see adequately canny robot faces in fairly short order, particularly given the huge range of perfectly acceptable facial behaviour that humans actually have.

      I get the sense that no one complaining here has ever dealt with a person whose face is partially paralyzed, or burned, or what-have-you. Anyone who has knows that you get past those aspects very quickly, and simply start seeing the person. But I'm sure the same people complaining here will still be complaining about the uncanny aspect of robot faces long after a wealth of empirical data has shown that the average person can't tell the difference without already knowing the object they are dealing with is a robot.

      --
      Blasphemy is a human right. Blasphemophobia kills.
  22. Chucky Cheese by poly_pusher · · Score: 2, Funny

    WOW! The robot band at Chucky Cheese is going to be so psyched!

  23. Re:Yes, but by Plekto · · Score: 4, Funny

    If it runs Windows you'll end up getting viruses. If it runs something Apple you'll pay for updates (or monthly fees). If it runs Linux you'll have to spend an insane amount of time with it to make it right.

    At least with this you get to choose which of the three you want to deal with, whereas with a real life relationship, well, you might get all three at once.

  24. hmm by mapkinase · · Score: 2, Insightful

    "exhibits facial expressions more naturally "

    What facial expressions? All I saw in the video were mouth movement up and down and eyes moved.

    The texture of the skin is amazingly natural as well as posture, but "facial expressions"?

    --
    I do not believe in karma. "Funny"=-6. Do good and forbid evil. Yours, Oft-Offtopic Flamebaiting Troll.
  25. Re:the question is... by somersault · · Score: 2, Funny

    Inconceivable! Nothing could be a tighter fuck than my iPad!

    --
    which is totally what she said
  26. Re:uncanny valley by somersault · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Sounds like my first gf's vague moustache

    --
    which is totally what she said
  27. The real question is... by Ralph+Spoilsport · · Score: 3, Funny
    NOT does she have a vagina. Those are easy to build - just look at realdoll.com.

    NOT that you can fuck it - again - see the real doll site for perfectly fuckable pieces of plastic.

    The REAL question is: Does she swallow? That takes sensitivity, judgment, timing, and a willingness to hoover baby batter.

    --
    Shoes for Industry. Shoes for the Dead.
  28. Obligatory Futurama Reference by Yvan256 · · Score: 2, Funny

    DON'T DATE ROBOTS!.

                                                                                           

  29. Pygmalion by Valen0 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I certainly hope this story doesn't turn into a modern day retelling of Pygmalion .

    --
    -Valen
  30. Re:The cost is terrifying. by Oxford_Comma_Lover · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Yes, but it may make it easier to replace people at tasks where you don't need human-level sentience, like fast food. Just because we're safe for a little while in highly educated professions doesn't mean this can't profoundly change the world.

    > Making a robot look and outwardly act like a human is a long way off from making one with human level sentience.

    --
    -- IANAL, this isn't legal advice, and definitely isn't legal advice for you. Also, Squee!
  31. Re:uncanny valley by Valdrax · · Score: 2, Insightful

    It's not so much an feeling of "ooh, that's so weird" as going from the point where you're impressed at how well-made and interesting looking it is to being unimpressed at the remaining flaws.

    In this case, it has a well-made face, but the fact that it doesn't move much except in starts and sputters makes it look palsied. It's not exceptionally creepy. It's just mildly unpleasant to look at in ways that something totally unrealistic like C3PO isn't.

    --
    If it's for-profit but free, you're not the customer -- you're the product (e.g., the Slashdot Beta's "audience").