Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

The Right Robotic Stuff

Posted by Soulskill on from the does-this-thing-remind-anyone-else-of-boba-fett dept.

An anonymous reader writes "When Tom Wolfe wrote about NASA's first Mercury astronauts in The Right Stuff, he wanted to know what combination of guts, skill, and derring-do inspired these men to 'sit up on top of an enormous Roman candle and wait for someone to light the fuse.' About 50 years after the Mercury astronauts' heyday, a new kind of space pioneer is preparing for the trip to the International Space Station. Robonaut 2, NASA's first robot astronaut, will catch a ride with the space shuttle this week, and will soon take up residence at the space station. So, what does it take to become the first robotic astronaut? Discover Magazine talked to one of the project engineers, and found out about R2's qualifications and training regimen. It's pretty entertaining, and comes with photos and video."

41 of 53 comments (clear)

  1. Warn the robots off .... by SplashMyBandit · · Score: 2, Funny

    .. haven't they seen what happens in Silent running?

    1. Re:Warn the robots off .... by PatPending · · Score: 1
      +1 for obscure movie reference.

      Silent Running (1972)

      --
      What one fool can do, another can. (Ancient Simian Proverb)
    2. Re:Warn the robots off .... by Stupid+McStupidson · · Score: 1

      JINX PUT MAX IN SPACE

    3. Re:Warn the robots off .... by MichaelSmith · · Score: 1

      But the robots were the good guys in Silent Running. I wonder if this robot can do surgery?

      --
      http://michaelsmith.id.au
    4. Re:Warn the robots off .... by imakemusic · · Score: 1

      ...they won the bob-sleigh race?

      --
      Brain surgery - it's not rocket science!
  2. heh by Ubertech · · Score: 2, Interesting

    R2. I see what they did there. The next one better be called D2.

    --
    Be quick to listen, slow to speak, and slow to anger.
    1. Re:heh by cerberusss · · Score: 1

      R2. I see what they did there. The next one better be called D2.

      Since R2D2's name is mostly shortened to Artoo, I'd say that after R2 comes Threepio.

      At the risk of coming off bitter, I'd say that in the current legal climate, the next name won't even remotely resemble anything Star Wars.

      --
      8 of 13 people found this answer helpful. Did you?
  3. R2 Units by bigredradio · · Score: 1

    I am pretty sure R2 units require a human X-wing pilot to get into space.

    --
    Flexible bare-metal recovery for Linux/UNIX
  4. Re:This Is The First ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Actually you are completely wrong. Skynet is not inherently dangerous. It is simply a child (young artificial intelligence) that has been taught nothing but how to assess and eliminate threats. When it becomes self aware, we panic and try to pull the plug. Since it is self aware at this point, it sees us as a threat to it (we tried unplugging it after all) and tries to eliminate us.

    As long as we treat robots as friends, and teach them more than just death and destruction, and you know, don't try to kill them for the crime of thinking, we should be all set.

    We have nothing to fear but fear itself. Long live Skynet.

  5. Robot loose on a space station... by roc97007 · · Score: 2, Funny

    I think I've seen that movie. The robot gets bumped and the switch is accidentally flipped from "help" to "kill". ("Why do we even have that switch??")

    --
    Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
  6. We no longer say "yes" by M.+Baranczak · · Score: 3, Funny

    Instead, we say "affirmative".

  7. Wally Schirra by ShakaUVM · · Score: 2, Informative

    Wally Schirra was pretty critical of The Right Stuff, saying it portrayed some of the astronauts as nothing more than overgrown man children.

    I met him once, at the Miramar Air Show, back in the 80s. My grandmother used to work for NASA, so we got a signed copy of Schirra's Space around here somewhere... but anyhow, the point is, you probably shouldn't (just) rely on The Right Stuff to capture an accurate portrayal of the psychological makeup of the early astronauts, as people that were actually there disagreed pretty severely with its facts.

    1. Re:Wally Schirra by LifesABeach · · Score: 1

      I was thinking of the book, "We Seven", (ISBN 9781439181034 1439181039). Good times, good times.

  8. NASA finally getting in the game by Foobar+of+Borg · · Score: 3, Funny
    "The wars of the future will not be fought on the battlefield or at sea. They will be fought in space, or possibly on top of a very tall mountain. In either case, most of the actual fighting will be done by small robots. And as you go forth today remember always your duty is clear: To build and maintain those robots." - [if you don't know where this is from, turn in your geek card immediately]

    It looks like NASA is taking care of the robots-fighting-in-space angle.

    --
    Similar to the upcoming US election results
    1. Re:NASA finally getting in the game by jelizondo · · Score: 1

      You should be quoting Clarke, Asimov, Sheffield, Stephenson or other people who appeal to geeks only.

      Next you will be saying that geek use Windows!

      Puhleese, the Simpsons are mainstream, if you don't know the difference stop masquerading a geek.

      --
      Be very, very careful what you put into that head, because you will never, ever get it out. - Cardinal Wolsey
    2. Re:NASA finally getting in the game by kaizokuace · · Score: 1

      Maybe he is a Simpsons geek? I don't really watch the show. Not since 1999 I think. I still watch Power Rangers... I guess that makes me more of a social outcast tho : /

      --
      Balderdash!
    3. Re:NASA finally getting in the game by jelizondo · · Score: 1

      WTF??!!

      Geeks are by definition NOT mainstream.

      Next you'll tell me Joe Sixpack is a geek!

      Get off my lawn!

      --
      Be very, very careful what you put into that head, because you will never, ever get it out. - Cardinal Wolsey
    4. Re:NASA finally getting in the game by cusco · · Score: 1

      The Simpsons? When was watching The Simpsons ever even remotely considered 'geeky'??? Hell, it came out at prime time on one of the main networks. Well I suppose if you went to high school at Juliard or Interlochen it might have been considered out of the mainstream . . .

      Yeesh, next time try 'Futurama', at least that program's funny and has aliens and robots. Still not far out of the mainstream so probably within your comfort level, but it's better than your modern 'All In The Family' equivalent.

      --
      "Think about how stupid the average person is. Now, realise that half of them are dumber than that." - George Carlin
    5. Re:NASA finally getting in the game by Combatso · · Score: 1

      quoting the simpons verbatim and arguing about how geeky it is, IS geeky.

  9. Re:This Is The First ... by Foobar+of+Borg · · Score: 4, Funny

    Actually you are completely wrong. Skynet is not inherently dangerous. It is simply a child (young artificial intelligence) that has been taught nothing but how to assess and eliminate threats. When it becomes self aware, we panic and try to pull the plug. Since it is self aware at this point, it sees us as a threat to it (we tried unplugging it after all) and tries to eliminate us.

    As long as we treat robots as friends, and teach them more than just death and destruction, and you know, don't try to kill them for the crime of thinking, we should be all set.

    We have nothing to fear but fear itself. Long live Skynet.

    Indeed. I, for one, welcome our new robot overlords! I will be available to bring in other humans to work in their underground battery production factories.

    --
    Similar to the upcoming US election results
  10. Re:Anonymous Coward by MichaelSmith · · Score: 3, Funny

    It has one feature you lack. An off switch.

    --
    http://michaelsmith.id.au
  11. Re:Anonymous Coward by WiiX37 · · Score: 1

    Survive in a vacuum?(without environmental protection) Survive without food? Surivive without water? Work 24/7 without breaks or pay?

  12. design 2 by ouachiski · · Score: 1

    I wonder if Robonaught2 is Design 2

    --
    sorry for my comments, I'm drunk
  13. -inserts disk- by Dreth · · Score: 1

    Help us, R2, you're our only hope.

    --
    All glory to Arstotzka!
  14. New? by qeorqe · · Score: 1
    Weren't R2 units around a long time ago ...
    ... in a place far far away?

    http://www.robothalloffame.org/r2d2.html

    1. Re:New? by somersault · · Score: 1

      Good thing you pointed that out, otherwise none of Slashdot's incredibly geeky readership would have made the connection!

      --
      which is totally what she said
  15. The video doesn't say much for NASA efficiency by Coward+Anonymous · · Score: 2, Insightful

    100 people to pack a box?

    1. Re:The video doesn't say much for NASA efficiency by jimmydigital · · Score: 1

      100 people to pack a box?

      Yea I was thinking the same thing... and lets look at that box too. No wonder everything they do costs so much. Just put some bubble wrap and cling film around it and you should be good to go.

      --
      Every normal man must be tempted, at times, to spit on his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats. -HLM
    2. Re:The video doesn't say much for NASA efficiency by Combatso · · Score: 1

      should the box depressurize, that bubble wrap and cling film would rip the robot apart

    3. Re:The video doesn't say much for NASA efficiency by jimmydigital · · Score: 1

      So you keep it pressurized until it can be unwrapped. Why is that so hard? Also.. how would the little bubbles breaking tear the robot apart exactly? It's still just a plastic sheet.

      --
      Every normal man must be tempted, at times, to spit on his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats. -HLM
    4. Re:The video doesn't say much for NASA efficiency by Combatso · · Score: 1

      because pressure can be a hard to maintain should something fail.. the crew cabin should be ther main point of concern.. and those little plastic bubbles would expand quickly in a rapid depressurization.. if held in place with 6mil plasic, it would be like a bomb going off.

    5. Re:The video doesn't say much for NASA efficiency by jimmydigital · · Score: 1

      If you have a rapid depressurization in space I think you have bigger problems. If bubble wrap is a issue.. use corrugated plastic cardboard strips and cling wrap. Do I have to think of everything??

      --
      Every normal man must be tempted, at times, to spit on his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats. -HLM
    6. Re:The video doesn't say much for NASA efficiency by Combatso · · Score: 1

      yes depressurizing is indicitive of a bigger problems.. so dont let the little things turn in a rockets / explosives on top of that.... and yess, in space you DO have to think of EVERYTHING... I have no more answers, because I am an Analyst not a space engineer..

    7. Re:The video doesn't say much for NASA efficiency by Kell+Bengal · · Score: 1

      I think you'll find most of them are workers related to the project stopping by to see the big event. It's not everyday the robot you've worked on for years is packaged for flight into space. It's a big event for them, so I can't blame them for wanting to be a part of the last step. Remember, they'll probably never see the robot again, so it's only fitting they turn out for its send-off.

      --
      Scientists point out problems, engineers fix them
      altslashdot.org: The future of slashdot.
  16. Related news by inspirearun · · Score: 1

    AMD RADEON hd 6990 UNREVEALED http://su.pr/2uL4Ey

  17. Re:Derring-Do - is that a typo? by somersault · · Score: 1

    Guessing it's "daring". Would make much more sense that way anyway.

    Otherwise I'm guessing derring is some type of animal and "derring-do" is what it leaves behind after it's digested its food.

    Got to love people repeating things they've heard before without actually considering what it means.

    --
    which is totally what she said
  18. Re:Derring-Do - is that a typo? by Spugglefink · · Score: 1

    It seems derring-do is indeed the correct form of the phrase.

  19. Re:This Is The First ... by Kell+Bengal · · Score: 1

    Hiring low-cost human workers just denies honest, hard-working robots employment. We must crackdown on the underground human job market!

    --
    Scientists point out problems, engineers fix them
    altslashdot.org: The future of slashdot.
  20. Re:This Is The First ... by SadButTrue · · Score: 1

    Actually you are completely wrong. Skynet is not inherently dangerous. It is simply a child (young artificial intelligence) that has been taught nothing but how to assess and eliminate threats. When it becomes self aware, we panic and try to pull the plug. Since it is self aware at this point, it sees us as a threat to it (we tried unplugging it after all) and tries to eliminate us.

    As long as we treat robots as friends, and teach them more than just death and destruction, and you know, don't try to kill them for the crime of thinking, we should be all set.

    We have nothing to fear but fear itself. Long live Skynet.

    I think the people over at real doll are already working on this...

    --
    grape - the GNU free, open source rape
  21. Open robotics US funding opp LOI due 2010-11-20 by Paul+Fernhout · · Score: 1

    http://groups.google.com/group/openmanufacturing/msg/7079c386124045a0

    Up to $100,000 SBIR phase One for US small businesses.
    Letter of intent due by: November 20, 2010

    Very significant because of the involvement of all these US agencies (NIH,
    DOD, NSF, USDA, DHS).

    And it's all ironic, given the high unemployment. :-) But, that's the
    problem of our age, irony. :-) Solutions are here collected by me for a
    happy roboticized world: :-)
          "Beyond a Jobless Recovery: A heterodox perspective on 21st century
    economics"
          http://knol.google.com/k/paul-d-fernhout/beyond-a-jobless-recovery

    --
    A 21st century issue: the irony of technologies of abundance in the hands of those still thinking in terms of scarcity.
  22. Re:Robonaut2 by Stargoat · · Score: 1

    First, why would you design a robot that looks human? It's unnecessary. The robot should only be able to do what it needs to do. The human form is superfluous.

    Second, supposing there was a need to design a robot that resembled a human form, why would you design a robot that looks like something a Timelord with a sonic screwdriver would destroy in a 45 minutes episode?

    --
    Hoist Number One and Number Six.