Toy Robots Can Guard Your Home

More useful... by Monkeedude1212 · 2010-11-09 07:57 · Score: 4, Insightful

Is simply multiple cameras.

If I was Burgling you, and I heard a noise from downstairs starting to head up, I might sneak into the nearest closet - wait for that thing to pass, then bolt out the door.

Whereas if you simply had a realtime view from many angles - there's no real chance I'd be able to dodge you seeing me - and possibly identifying me.

Re:More useful... by blair1q · 2010-11-09 07:59 · Score: 2, Interesting

If only an article would stop accepting posts when the correct answer was posted...
Re:More useful... by BenoitRen · 2010-11-09 08:02 · Score: 2

Multiple cameras can't cover the same area, and are likely more expensive. Thieves will surely be more mindful of cameras as well, and dodge their view area.
At any rate, these robots sound awesome!
Re:More useful... by h4rr4r · 2010-11-09 08:05 · Score: 2, Insightful

Which does what exactly?
The police are not going to be interested, I say this as someone who has seen folks go through that situation. The police will showup, offer to give you a copy of their report for your insurance company and not even bother to view the footage much less use it in anyway.
Re:More useful... by CrazyJim1 · 2010-11-09 08:06 · Score: 3, Funny

Yeah, but if you want to mount a machine gun to all your cameras, you'll have to buy multiple guns. With just one robot that patrols, you save a load on weaponry. Oh... who am I kidding. Once you get one robot with weaponry, it just becomes an addiction to buy more.

--
God spoke to me.
Re:More useful... by icebike · 2010-11-09 08:06 · Score: 3, Funny

Why not just mount the whole dam shark on it?
Much scarier chasing burglers around the house with sharks than lasers.

--
Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
Re:More useful... by GameboyRMH · 2010-11-09 08:06 · Score: 2, Interesting

At any rate, these robots sound awesome!
I've looked at them, they're not that great sadly. The webcam quality is horrible, battery life is poor and the camera's vertical aim can't be adjusted.
I might pick one up for fun if the price drops low enough.

--
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
Re:More useful... by Monkeedude1212 · 2010-11-09 08:14 · Score: 1

It means when you see that punk around the neighbourhood you beat his ass?
I agree that survelience isn't true security - but if thats what you're going for - than all I'm saying is more Cameras are better than a mobile 1.
Re:More useful... by TheKidWho · 2010-11-09 08:18 · Score: 1

You assume burglars are smart. You know what they say about assuming...
Re:More useful... by natehoy · 2010-11-09 08:19 · Score: 5, Funny

Because then you'd be up all night wondering when you're going to hear [Knock! Knock!] "Candygram!" on the bedroom door, knowing it'll be the last thing you ever hear other than your own screaming.
Land sharks can never be trusted.

--
"This post contains words, known to the State of California to cause thought. Wash brain thoroughly after reading."
Re:More useful... by dave562 · 2010-11-09 08:22 · Score: 4, Insightful

If I had the balls to break into somebody's home, I'd probably just take the robot to spite them.
Re:More useful... by Triv · 2010-11-09 08:27 · Score: 3, Insightful

"Whereas if you simply had a realtime view from many angles - there's no real chance I'd be able to dodge you seeing me - and possibly identifying me."
Why do people always believe that their home is always somehow a target for burglars? You don't have to secure your possessions with cameras and robots and laser tripwires, you just need to make the house across the street look like less of a hassle to get into.
The easiest way to not get burgled it to make your house look, from the street, to not be worth a burglar's time. The cheapest way to do this is to buy a dog house and put it in your front yard. The second cheapest way to do this is to buy a dog house, put it in your front yard, and put a dog in it.
Or here's something my Grandfather taught me: leave a different light on in a different room every night. I defy you to find a security system cheaper than the 10 dollars a year the electricity will cost you.
Moral of the story: you're not that special, and if you get burgled, you spun a d20 and rolled low. There are other things more worthy of being thought about than that.
Re:More useful... by RevWaldo · 2010-11-09 08:29 · Score: 1

It's a poor sort of security that assumes that the person you're up against isn't very bright. And/or creative and/or desperate and/or psychotic.

.

--
Prisencolinensinainciusol. Ol Rait!
Re:More useful... by TheKidWho · 2010-11-09 08:31 · Score: 1

Kinda like how your brain works huh, You stop asking questions when you see an answer that "looks" right?
Re:More useful... by noidentity · 2010-11-09 08:34 · Score: 1

Why do people always believe that their home is always somehow a target for burglars?

Well, once you've got a troop of seeing-eye robot sentries constantly patrolling the house, I think you have made your house a pretty good target. Adding lasers and tripwires, doubly. So I think those things are justified... if you've installed them.
Re:More useful... by alphax45 · 2010-11-09 08:40 · Score: 1

My kingdom for some mod points right now to mod this funny!

--
K Man
Re:More useful... by cduffy · 2010-11-09 08:42 · Score: 1

Only if they're smart, and paying attention.
The homeowner in this article is a friend of mine (Google Cache link on account of the original being broken), and they didn't do much by way of trying to avoid his cameras.
Of course, him being armed and present did a lot more than cameras alone would have, too.
Re:More useful... by Monkeedude1212 · 2010-11-09 08:48 · Score: 1

Are you saying that I'm smart?
I never once mentioned Burglars and Intelligence, I merely said what I would do if I were burgling.
Re:More useful... by gknoy · 2010-11-09 08:50 · Score: 1

Yeah, but then you need to get the full time monitoring lackeys, and install the shark pools. It's just too much hassle.
Re:More useful... by Max_W · 2010-11-09 08:59 · Score: 1

Actually, Rovio is surprisingly fast.
Re:More useful... by blair1q · 2010-11-09 09:04 · Score: 1

Yes. Same as everyone's.
Except that mine is a lot better at knowing what "looks" right than most people's, and has a lot of experience reading between the lines, looking behind the curtain, cutting through the haze, and seeing the forest for the trees.
Re:More useful... by natehoy · 2010-11-09 09:06 · Score: 1

According to the article, once the toy dog is tricked out it'll set you back a little under $1000. For that kind of money, you can put at least nine of these little suckers (or any one of a number of similar models) into your house:
http://www.amazon.com/Cisco-Linksys-Wireless-N-Internet-Monitoring-Camera/dp/B002OHDFOA/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1289334401&sr=8-2
There are also models with higher resolution and/or automatic night vision, which of course comes at a price. But you can still afford two or three really, really good cameras for $1000.
With one robot, the crook's gonna hear it coming a mile away and one swift kick means no surveillance. When you check in a few minutes later, you'll probably just assume the batteries ran out. It's passive surveillance, meaning your chances of catching footage of someone in the act is slim to none.
A solid handful of well-concealed AC-connected cameras means you'll have redundant coverage throughout the house, with no batteries to worry about recharging. Battery backups are pretty easy if you're worried about a power outage (assuming your Internet connection is similarly backed up, but you'd need that for RoverCam too). Cover the windows, hallways, and doors. No one can get in the house at all without at least one camera catching motion.
Best of all, it's an active surveillance system - the cameras can be set to only capture and forward imagery if they see motion, so instead of checking at random on the off chance you were robbed or becoming overwhelmed with hundreds of hours of footage of a still room, the system can notify you and send the important imagery to an email address somewhere so you have a copy securely offsite. You can easily place cameras so they are hard to see and your would-be thief needs to walk through their field of vision to get to them (far corners of rooms are ideal).
Your local cops might be vaguely interested only in that it proves the person on the camera is not you, and they'll be more willing to sign the forms so your insurance company can reimburse you (technically it'll be a loan with interest because your insurance rates will go up).
About the only practical use would be if you feared coming home to a house with the criminal still in it, leading to a physical confrontation. You could scan the house on your smartphone from your car, I suppose. The problem is, if you fail to get a response back from one ROV, you might logically assume that the batteries went dead. Compare that to one of the independent cameras in the active system having already told you hours ago that they detected motion (and you have a secure copy of the imagery).
The criminal might be able to deactivate them, but it'd be almost impossible for them to take out all nine without at least one of them sensing motion and notifying you before it went dark.
If you're totally paranoid about someone being in your house, you could also have a pretty simple machine running BigBrother and notifying you every hour that "all is well" if all your cameras are pingable, or notifying you immediately when a camera goes offline. That way, if the thief goes around disabling cameras and manages to do so without triggering the camera through motion, at least you'll get multiple warnings that "Camera A is out", "Camera B is out", and you'll pretty much know that someone is walking around the house breaking cameras.
But, agreed, an ROV-mounted camera is cool concept. I'd still love to have one, but solely for the geek factor, not for surveillance.

--
"This post contains words, known to the State of California to cause thought. Wash brain thoroughly after reading."
Re:More useful... by quickgold192 · 2010-11-09 09:13 · Score: 1

So the whole dog argument is a little confusing to me. I heard somewhere that having a dog is the best deterrent (hardly the cheapest though) against a burglar, and I also heard that most professional burglars will agree. I have two counter points, however:
Point one: Do people really train their guard dogs to attack strangers? Who wants a friend to visit, only to be bitten by the dog? And why should a thief be afraid of a housebroken dog? If it's the middle of the day and everyone's at work, the dogs will definitely bark at a stranger, but all it takes is a couple treats and a toy to win their friendship. It Takes a Thief confirmed this, say what you will about the Discovery Channel.
Point two: My least favorite sound when I knock on a door to a friend's house it the loud barking of dogs. I find it uninviting and normally if they bark at the doorbell, they will jump on the visitor and probably tear his clothes with their claws. Do you want to live your life answering the door with "sorry about the dogs; they're friendly, don't worry!" You might train them *not* to bark at the doorbell and jump on visitors, but then what good is a guard dog that doesn't bark?
Re:More useful... by natehoy · 2010-11-09 09:23 · Score: 1

The most important thing in a home security system, to me, is notification that my house has been entered. Forget protecting my stuff. I'm not Chuck Norris, and my shit can be replaced. I don't own anything worth dying for. Not a single thing. The important data on my computer is encrypted and backed up offsite, the papers I care about are in a well-concealed safe, and I can buy replacements for anything else that's important.
I primarily lock my doors so the insurance company can't gripe about my lack of precautions if they see signs of forced entry. The webcams are there to serve the same purpose - if I got robbed, I could show time-indexed footage of someone who is not me driving down my driveway, breaking into the door, and taking things. If I can catch useful imagery of the thief, that's a bonus, for sure. But as far as the insurance company is concerned, I only need to show that it wasn't me stealing from my own house.
But the number one most important part is knowing that I want to be very careful when re-entering my house because the thief could still be there. And for that I want an active system like a motion detector or a few $100 motion-sensing webcams, not a passive system that requires action on my part.
This ROV camera is really cool. But it's not a security item, it's a really cool geek toy.

--
"This post contains words, known to the State of California to cause thought. Wash brain thoroughly after reading."
Re:More useful... by iamhassi · 2010-11-09 09:29 · Score: 2, Informative

"More useful... Is simply multiple cameras."

And I'm sure you'd have better luck with multiple cameras: Of the 89 reviews, 35 gave it 1 out of 5 stars. That's a very poor score, who would buy something where nearly half the reviews are 1 out of 5 stars?

And the complaints aren't just "I can't set it up". Many of the complaints are Battery only has a 10 minute charge, no customer service, Broke after 2 months, no customer service.

One customer even managed to fix his using internet instructions after WowWee said it was broken forever: " I followed the recovery steps outlined in the link, and ended up with a functioning Rovio. This was after several emails with WowWee where they ended up saying "sorry, there is no way to recover from this problem". Basically "too bad"; no warranty because I had owned it for more than 180 days.

Obviously the biggest problem isn't setup or software, it's poor relibility added with poor customer service.

--
my karma will be here long after I'm gone
Re:More useful... by thewils · 2010-11-09 09:34 · Score: 1

..yes! It make an ass out of u and some guy named ming.

--
Once I was a four stone apology. Now I am two separate gorillas.
Re:More useful... by geekoid · 2010-11-09 09:34 · Score: 1

Besides charlie Brown, who the hell puts a dog house n their front lawn? and who wouldn't notice the lack of use?
You are correct, just don't make it worth the hassle. Of course, that assumes the burglar is thinking beyond that moment. Many crimes committed to fullfil and addiction aren't really thought out.
Most wierd and 'stupid' bank robberies are spur of the moment addiction induced decisions.
If you think about it for 30 seconds, people would realize why sticking up a bank in the US is stupid.

--
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
Re:More useful... by natehoy · 2010-11-09 09:41 · Score: 1

Do people really train their guard dogs to attack strangers?

No. But, in general, dogs don't need to be trained to bark at people they don't know, and dogs are unwanted noise. Your average thief is just looking for a nice, quiet house they can get into without anyone noticing and spend some quality time picking out the choicest bits. If you have a dog barking his head off in the front yard, it increases the chances that someone is going to pay attention (yes, there's a 90% chance the dog will be ignored and you'll go unnoticed, but that's a 10% better chance of being notified than the neighbors across the street who don't have a dog).

My least favorite sound when I knock on a door to a friend's house it the loud barking of dogs.
All things come at a cost. If a dog barks when someone other than Master or Mistress (or someone that Master or Mistress is obviously comfortable with) is around, then they are doing their job. The same discomfort you feel is what will keep the thief away. You can also, as you say, train them not to bark at the doorbell (good luck with that!) or have their vocal cords snipped so they aren't so loud.

what good is a guard dog that doesn't bark?
Some, but not as much as a guard dog that does. The presence of a dog means an extra layer of hassle a thief has to deal with. Thieves don't generally want hassle. If it's a choice between your house with vague signs a dog lives there, and your neighbor's house with no signs of a dog at all, you're relatively safe - all other things being equal the thief will go for the neighbors. If if's a choice between your house with vague signs a dog lives there and your neighbor's house with a loud dog out in the yard, then you're the better-looking target if all other factors are equal.
Honestly, you don't need a dog if none of your neighbors have one. All you need is a doghouse, a leash tied somewhere on the front porch, and maybe a few scratches on the front door. Make your house look a little more dog-infested than your neighbors, and you decrease your desirability as a target.
But there are other factors, of course. Are your entrances and windows free of obstructions and visible to your neighbors, or protected by naturally defensive foliage? A thief doesn't mind jimmying a window under the concealment of a dark corner with a line of bushes, but he'll hesitate if that bush is a hawthorne or rosebush with long thorns and is right up against the house. You might think that having a private mud room with the outer door unlocked is a great idea when it's rainy, but it gives your would-be thief a quiet protected place to work on your main door locks.
Sometimes, a "PROTECTED BY SECURITY SYSTEM" sign as every bit as effective as a full-on security system. And nothing beats having a person home most of the time.

--
"This post contains words, known to the State of California to cause thought. Wash brain thoroughly after reading."
Re:More useful... by fermion · 2010-11-09 09:53 · Score: 1

Absolutely agreed. In many cases, the amont of deterrent, for many people, seems to be based on the value they wish others to place on objects rather than the value of the objects. In other cases, people go out of their way to exceed the norms of neighborhood, in which case what do the expect?
There was another recent article about the use of cameras to monitor personal property. I know people who do this. They have often have a overexcite sense of personal property. It is not only that they do not want people walking on their property, but get upset if they walk too near the property, or can be heard from the street. In some cases the damage are legitimate and there is a reason to go after the culprit. But I figure when one's entire existence is centered around explicitly security, one letting other people control one's life, and one no longer has any real self determination.
So, to me , the question is whether the big screen TV, the SUV, the valuable jewelry, is worth the opportunity cost to secure it. If life, on net, would be better without such outlandish objects. Or if the possessions are an excuse to have cameras everyone where so can have a value not necessarily voluntarily bestowed in normal day to day life.

--
"She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
Re:More useful... by adamdoyle · 2010-11-09 10:02 · Score: 1

If I had the balls to break into somebody's home, I'd probably just take the robot to spite them.
Yeah, especially if the thief thinks that the robot is storing the video footage locally. I didn't RTFA but I imagine it streams the video to a server wirelessly (i.e. not inside of the robot), but that doesn't mean the thief knows that. But I guess if the video _is_ stored externally, then at least you would a pretty good shot of the thief (even if you do lose the robot).
Re:More useful... by Dare+nMc · 2010-11-09 10:05 · Score: 1

I had some of the same thoughts, my reasoning came down to 2 things. 1) Dogs are un-predictable (in a unique situation.) 2) Even a thief has a conscious and doesn't want to hurt a Dog if it does react.
Re:More useful... by operagost · 2010-11-09 10:11 · Score: 1

Moral of the story: you're not that special, and if you get burgled, you spun a d20 and rolled low.

Well, in that case I'll find the plate armor +5 so it'll take a natural 1.

--

Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
Re:More useful... by bennomatic · 2010-11-09 10:32 · Score: 1

This. The article says to me, "Come to my house: I have cool robots to steal!" Just carry a battery-powered wifi jammer (google it; WTF is going on with paste on /.?) and the robots won't be able to report you!

--
The CB App. What's your 20?
Re:More useful... by ClickOnThis · 2010-11-09 10:51 · Score: 1

Point one: Do people really train their guard dogs to attack strangers? Who wants a friend to visit, only to be bitten by the dog? And why should a thief be afraid of a housebroken dog? If it's the middle of the day and everyone's at work, the dogs will definitely bark at a stranger, but all it takes is a couple treats and a toy to win their friendship. It Takes a Thief confirmed this, say what you will about the Discovery Channel.
It is possible to train a dog to attack a stranger who clearly attacks the dog or his/her owner first but simply to bark at the stranger under any other circumstances. The German-Shepherd-Dog breeding program from Germany includes such training in their breed-standard tests. The training is extremely time-consuming and most dogs and their owners can't (or shouldn't) do it, but a well-trained Schutzhund dog can be a good family pet, friendly to invited guests, and also a good protector.

Point two: My least favorite sound when I knock on a door to a friend's house it the loud barking of dogs. I find it uninviting and normally if they bark at the doorbell, they will jump on the visitor and probably tear his clothes with their claws. Do you want to live your life answering the door with "sorry about the dogs; they're friendly, don't worry!" You might train them *not* to bark at the doorbell and jump on visitors, but then what good is a guard dog that doesn't bark?
Barking != jumping up. Young exuberant dogs have a natural tendency to jump up to greet people. You can control the behaviour through training. As for barking ... as long as the dog stops when the handler invites you in, I don't see the problem. Again, it's a matter of training.

--
If it weren't for deadlines, nothing would be late.
Re:More useful... by AlXtreme · 2010-11-09 12:17 · Score: 1

Robbing the neighbors house (who don't have a dog) is easier.
Most dogs won't bite strangers, but why would you risk a barking dog when you can move on to easier targets? Sure, most dogs are easily pleased, but that means the robber has to bring those treats and risk the dog not being interested in them and bark instead. Why take the chance?
Burglars like easy pickings, otherwise they won't be in business for very long...

--
This sig is intentionally left blank
Re:More useful... by gamecrusader · 2010-11-09 13:17 · Score: 1

thats why a shotgun with deer slugs, assault rifle, or an M14 sniper rifle with 20 round magazine all loaded of course next to your bed at all times for personal protect
Re:More useful... by gamecrusader · 2010-11-09 13:23 · Score: 1

only for states with automatic weapons build robot out of titanium plating (armor) add duel AR-15s with feeding system now that'd change the mind of a thief not rob this place
Re:More useful... by ImprovOmega · 2010-11-09 13:27 · Score: 1

2) Even a thief has a conscious and doesn't want to hurt a Dog if it does react.
Ahem
Re:More useful... by Dan541 · 2010-11-09 14:21 · Score: 1

Really, I would just take the damn robot with me. Those things are worth money.

--
An SQL query goes to a bar, walks up to a table and asks, "Mind if I join you?"
Re:More useful... by Unkyjar · 2010-11-09 15:59 · Score: 1

Dogs are great, especially if they bark a lot because annoyed neighbors tend to ignore them. This is something you can usually find out when staking out the house. Also the false sense of security means they are less likely to have other security measures in place.
My favorite moment in "It Takes a Thief" is when they actually steal the dog as well.
Re:More useful... by sempir · 2010-11-09 20:33 · Score: 1

by fermion (181285)
But I figure when one's entire existence is centered around explicitly security, one letting other people control one's life, and one no longer has any real self determination.
One lives in a certain country in Africa. One has a very "overexcite" sense of personal property, to wit "myself".Here one's entire existence is, of necessity, centered on security. One lives with it and One carries on with Ones life within the confines of that. A way of life for some and is a source of hilarity to my Son when I visit in the USA. he lives a lovely rural town.
One needs to be a little circumspect in critting other peoples sense of values and way of life. I bet you are under some form of outside control in your life too, you just haven't thought it through.

--
A closed mouth gathers no foot.
Re:More useful... by natehoy · 2010-11-10 01:03 · Score: 1

No, won't work. I clearly remember from a documentary I watched once that land sharks are unstoppable. I can't recall the title, but it aired on Saturday nights and it kept repeating the theme about land sharks being very dangerous and pretty much invincible.

--
"This post contains words, known to the State of California to cause thought. Wash brain thoroughly after reading."
Re:More useful... by tehcyder · 2010-11-10 01:16 · Score: 1

You assume burglars are smart. You know what they say about assuming...
It is generally wiser to over- rather than under-estimate an opponent.

--
To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
Re:More useful... by tehcyder · 2010-11-10 01:51 · Score: 1

you just need to make the house across the street look like less of a hassle to get into.
Simples, just make a big cardboard sign reading "no deliveries please, on holiday for two weeks" and stick it on the front door of the nearest handgun-packing neighbour.

--
To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
Re:More useful... by tehcyder · 2010-11-10 01:59 · Score: 1

Honestly, you don't need a dog if none of your neighbors have one. All you need is a doghouse, a leash tied somewhere on the front porch, and maybe a few scratches on the front door. Make your house look a little more dog-infested than your neighbors, and you decrease your desirability as a target.
Or a "beware of the dog" sign on your front door.

--
To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
Re:More useful... by mldi · 2010-11-10 04:24 · Score: 1

Since most people don't want to deal with a break-in in the first place, I would also suggest plainly visible fake cameras outside the house as a deterrent. Also, since I'm paranoid about the thieves taking off with the video footage as well (if they're smart), I securely bolted down a small safe with a high capacity thumb drive inside that I use to record the footage. It's secured to a concrete floor in the basement, and bolted from the inside. I only drilled a single hole big enough to fit a USB cable through (re-wired, so only the cable itself had to fit and not the bulky end). If they figured out that's where security footage was kept and they really wanted it, they'd have to invest quite a bit of time into removing it.

I use several small PoE cameras with motion detectors. They're not super high resolution but they'll do the job just fine for how close they are to the break-in points. I have a battery UPS powering the whole thing for a very long time in case the power goes out. The server I use to control the cameras and provide me with notifications is one of those outlet plug servers and uses 5W. The cameras and the PoE switch use the most power.

The expensive part was the cameras. The switch and plug server ran me less than $100. The thumb drive costed around $50. I picked up some obviously fake security cameras for a few bucks to put in plain view outside, plus I already had motion detection lights. That along with the cameras, UPS, and cable was well under the $1,000 mark. I did the installation myself.

If some idiots are stupid enough to break in, they'd better be wearing masks.

--
If you aren't suspicious of your government's actions, you aren't doing your job as a responsible citizen.

A New Use For Them by camperslo · 2010-11-09 08:00 · Score: 2, Interesting

What we need are some cannibalistic robots that'll go around the house feeding on old PCs and other consumer electronics. It should cut the cost, help them grow (and reproduce?) and save us the hassles of other recycling methods.

Re:A New Use For Them by rAiNsT0rm · 2010-11-09 09:28 · Score: 1

...or maybe stop buying so much consumer electronic goods and you wouldn't be a burglar's target :)

--
http://teasphere.wordpress.com - A little spot of tea

"Enhance the audio and video quality" by Anonymous Coward · 2010-11-09 08:02 · Score: 1, Funny

Enhance 224 to 176.
Enhance, stop.
Move in, stop.
Pull out, track right, stop.
Center in, pull back. Stop.
Track 45 right. Stop.
Center and stop.
Enhance 34 to 36.
Pan right and pull back.
Stop. Enhance 34 to 46.
Pull back.
Wait a minute, go right, stop.
Enhance 57 to 19.
Track 45 left. Stop.
Enhance 15 to 23.
Give me a hard copy right there.

Re:"Enhance the audio and video quality" by Altus · 2010-11-09 08:17 · Score: 1

I was thinking about something more like :
"Home again, home again, jiggity jig. Good evening J. F."

--
"In America, first you get the sugar, then you get the power, then you get the women..." -H. Simpson

Say... by The+Damned+Yankee · 2010-11-09 08:04 · Score: 2, Funny

This is how Davros got his start, isn't it? First it's just one or two remote units for home security, then the next thing you know they're heavily armed and armored killing machines intoning "EX-TER-MIN-ATE!" at the neighbors.

--
"Against the assault of laughter nothing can stand." - Mark Twain

Re:Say... by burisch_research · 2010-11-09 08:15 · Score: 4, Funny

"Against the assault of laughter nothing can stand." - Mark Twain
My money is on the heavily armed and armored killing machines.

--
char*f="char*f=%c%s%c;main(){printf(f,34,f,34);}";main(){printf(f,34,f,34);}
Re:Say... by sempir · 2010-11-09 20:43 · Score: 1

Mark Twain had it right. Imagine having an alarm that laughed maniacally, and really loud! If I heard that when doing someones house I wouldn't know whether to shit or go blind!

--
A closed mouth gathers no foot.

But do they do networking? by digitaldc · 2010-11-09 08:09 · Score: 1

After getting a few of these to guard my home, I just need to purchase and upgrade a few more of these robots to do my job, and then I can live the life I really want to live!

--
He who knows best knows how little he knows. - Thomas Jefferson

Microphone by Xarin · 2010-11-09 08:10 · Score: 1

I would think that the microphone would run afoul of wiretapping and eavesdropping laws.

Re:Microphone by smooth+wombat · 2010-11-09 08:15 · Score: 1

It's in your own house. You can't eavesdrop on your own property (excluding creepy landlords who put cameras in the showers of single women [or men] who are renting from them).
Besides, what's the burglar's defense going to be? "Yeah, I broke into the guys home. So what! That doesn't give him the right to record what I took!"

--
We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security. -- Dwight D. Eisenhower
Re:Microphone by Tekfactory · 2010-11-09 08:23 · Score: 1

Some states only require one party to be aware that the conversation is being recorded.
A simple sticker at the entrances to the house might fix anything else, this house monitored etc, audio and video will be provided to law enforcement.
The real question I have is how well the webcams do in low light, and or could you combine this with X10 controls to switch on the lights?
Re:Microphone by Anonymous Coward · 2010-11-09 08:27 · Score: 1, Funny

Besides, what's the burglar's defense going to be? "Yeah, I broke into the guys home. So what! That doesn't give him the right to record what I took!"
Considering that in some places a burglar can sue the homeowner for getting hurt during a break-in, and win, this is nowhere near as far-fetched as it should be.
If you live in one of these states, remember the 3 S's when dealing with a burglar: "shoot, shovel, and shut up".
Re:Microphone by Pro923 · 2010-11-09 09:03 · Score: 2, Interesting

Webcams do great with infrared light... You can't tell that the lights are on, but you show up perfectly on the webcam. This is the secret to all camera night vision technologies. We discovered it decades ago when we realized that my friends' video camera could see the blinking light when he clicks on the TV remote control.
Re:Microphone by tehcyder · 2010-11-10 02:08 · Score: 1

You can't eavesdrop on your own property (excluding creepy landlords who put cameras in the showers of single women [or men] who are renting from them).
I love the idea that these creepy landlords are non-sexist.

--
To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it

iPhone Support by bradgoodman · 2010-11-09 08:11 · Score: 1

...if only...

Re:iPhone Support by arndawg · 2010-11-09 08:15 · Score: 1

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Ejh--_56ic&feature=player_embedded THis looks cool. If i where a burglar i wouldn't definetly be scared to met by a hacksaw.
Re:iPhone Support by bradgoodman · 2010-11-09 08:32 · Score: 2, Informative

Yea...the Parrot is a whole lot less impressive in person though.
Problems are:
1. It is very difficult to fly through the camera - when you're not actually looking at it.
2. You need to be near it - Meaning the Parrot becomes a WiFi access point that your phone has to connect to. i.e. You cant fly it over the open 'net.
3. There is no type of "docking" - or "auto docking" - so you need to be there to physically turn it off, plug it back into the charger, etc.
The Parrot would be cool if it was more like the Rovio - and visa-versa!
Re:iPhone Support by Blakey+Rat · 2010-11-09 09:40 · Score: 1

It's also effing loud. Some Apple-loving hipster brought one into the office, it sounded like a weed wacker.

--
Comment of the year

Useless by zounds011 · 2010-11-09 08:12 · Score: 1

He'll have to check the camera footage every couple of minutes for this to be of any use (i.e. to catch an intruder in the act). Guarding his house has just become a full-time job. Also, the robot would have to be pretty quiet to allow it to sneak up on an intruder. And how good are the camera images going to be in the dark?

Re:Useless by Anonymous Coward · 2010-11-09 08:28 · Score: 1, Informative

This could help on the full-time job part: http://vitamindinc.com/

Summary better than Article by icebike · 2010-11-09 08:12 · Score: 1

In an odd turnabout, the summary is better written than the linked article, which reads like someone writing in English as a second language.

This set up may not be reliable enough for guarding, let's say, a bank, but for the home is well enough. And Oschler is no the only one who experimented with this type of home security.

--
Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.

This is just Ridiculous by VortexCortex · 2010-11-09 08:12 · Score: 2, Insightful

Everyone knows that the best way to scare off buglers is to call out into the darkness, in your most shaky and unnaturally high pitched tone, "I have a gun! ... I've already called the police!".

This, followed shortly by turning on all the lights and tip-toeing around in your boxers wielding a golf club is more than enough security for anyone!

Re:This is just Ridiculous by mrnobo1024 · 2010-11-09 08:31 · Score: 1

Did you know those burglars back in 1950 or what? Things have changed since then...
Re:This is just Ridiculous by Anonymous Coward · 2010-11-09 08:38 · Score: 2, Funny

Everyone knows that the best way to scare off buglers

Why scare them off? I say join in with some drums.
Re:This is just Ridiculous by PitaBred · 2010-11-09 08:39 · Score: 1

The reason that is in the news is because it's not the norm. Fucked up people have been around forever.

--
My blog. Good stuff (when I remember to update it). Read it.
Re:This is just Ridiculous by VeNoM0619 · 2010-11-15 05:23 · Score: 1

"Batteries Not Included" movie reference? Very nice

--
Disclaimer: I am not god.
We may not be created equal
But we can be treated equal.

Re:Beowulf by gstoddart · 2010-11-09 08:14 · Score: 1

Imagine a Beowulf cluster army of these things.

I think the term in this case becomes a swarm.

A Beowulf gives you a bunch of compute power, a swarm gives you a bunch of little things working semi-autonomously working for a collective goal.

--
Lost at C:>. Found at C.

If you need to log in and watch... by gad_zuki! · 2010-11-09 08:17 · Score: 2, Informative

then these machines aren't guarding your home. Get an alarm system.

That said, I owned a Rovio for a few weeks last year. I bought it as an xmas present to myself and found it lacking. I thought it would be cute to watch the dog from work but the CMOS webcam on it just required too much light to be usable. Even under well-lit conditions the compressed video was of marginal quality. I also wanted to use voice chat feature, which is IE only btw, but that didn't work out well either. The audio was either horrible or badly delayed. Not was there a "listen" button. It simply decided to broadcast audio when it decided to (whenever sound hit a threshold). It also had a low battery life and failed to dock often. Luckily, Amazon accepted my return and I got my money back.

Its a neat device and cheap for a telepresence robot, but not that great. I'd love to see a v2 of this, especially if it was easily hackable.

Re:If you need to log in and watch... by pz · 2010-11-09 09:00 · Score: 1

The reviews on Amazon are pretty damning. Sounds like your experience was one of the more positive ones.

--

Put my fist through my alarm clock with its ding-dong death inside my ear. - The Blackjacks.
Re:If you need to log in and watch... by hitmark · 2010-11-09 17:29 · Score: 1

as with anything online, negative reviews are more likely to be posted then positive ones.

--
comment first, facts later. http://chem.tufts.edu/AnswersInScience/RelativityofWrong.htm

EAT LEAD, SUCKER! *bangbangbangbang!* by alispguru · 2010-11-09 08:17 · Score: 1

At least, that's what the toy robot did in A Fistful of Yen.

--

To a Lisp hacker, XML is S-expressions in drag.

All it can do is watch? by Gulthek · 2010-11-09 08:19 · Score: 4, Funny

Bart: Milhouse. You were supposed to be the night watchman.

Milhouse: I was watching. I saw the whole thing. First it started falling over, then it fell over.

Re:Beowulf by Thud457 · 2010-11-09 08:24 · Score: 1

Gene Simmons is going to luv this!

Tom Selleck, not so much...

--

the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff

Re:Beowulf by jeffmeden · 2010-11-09 08:27 · Score: 3, Funny

Considering this is slashdot, I automatically read that as "I'm putting a GNU on mine!" and started wondering where the punchline was...

s/guard/watch/ by noidentity · 2010-11-09 08:30 · Score: 1

There, fixed that for you.

Re:Beowulf by mcgrew · 2010-11-09 08:37 · Score: 1

Asimov wrote a short story about debugging robot swarms way back before robots even existed. It was a swarm of mining robots, but whenever an emergency came up they would so marching dances.

The punch line was, the server robot was twiddling its thumbs.

I can't remember the name if the story, sorry.

--
Free Martian Whores!

Thats nice... but mine's better. by MachDelta · 2010-11-09 08:39 · Score: 1

Cute, but I still think my home security system is better. Unlike a robot with a camera, mine will actually scare a burglar away.

Plus, she's warm and cuddly in the winter and is almost trained to fetch a beer for me. If only beer came in plastic bottles (she doesn't like the glass, and aluminum is too thin), i'd be set! :)

Re:Uh, okay. by turgid · 2010-11-09 08:45 · Score: 1

I don't have an HDTV in my house and the contents of the drawers are scattered about wildly already, you insensitive clod!

--
Stick Men

Re:Beowulf by gstoddart · 2010-11-09 08:50 · Score: 1

Asimov wrote a short story about debugging robot swarms way back before robots even existed

I continue to be amazed at the prescience of Asimov.

Sheer freakin' genius!!

--
Lost at C:>. Found at C.

Re:Beowulf by TeXMaster · 2010-11-09 09:00 · Score: 1

Catch that Rabbit

--
"I'm never quite so stupid as when I'm being smart" (Linus van Pelt)

My first thought... by bodino · 2010-11-09 09:05 · Score: 1

Oh no! A toy robot! Ruuunnnnn!!!

A classic from the Kentucky Fried Movie
http://jb5353.tripod.com/kfm/toy.wav

Re:My first thought... by rastilin · 2010-11-09 09:11 · Score: 1

They must be shaped like garden gnomes, and there should be loads of them.

Bonus: Have their eyes glow red when they move towards a target en-masse.

--
How do you kill that which has no life?

I want Rovio minus the computer by Pro923 · 2010-11-09 09:09 · Score: 1

What would really be ideal is a robot docking station. Most of us already have a device that takes WiFi, has a camera, microphone and runs software - it's our laptops. Why not just a robotic docking station with some software that lets me control it from anywhere? Just eliminating this once a year situation alone would be worth the cost: "Turn the car around! I think I left the curling iron plugged in!"

Re:Beowulf by Attila+Dimedici · 2010-11-09 09:12 · Score: 1

Considering this is slashdot, I automatically read that as "I'm putting a GNU on mine!" and started wondering where the punchline was...

Do you have any idea how big a gnu is?

--
The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison

Re:Beowulf by Gizzmonic · 2010-11-09 09:15 · Score: 2, Informative

Heh. For those of you that don't know, he is referencing "Runaway," a terrible sci-fi movie starring Kirstie Alley, Tom Selleck and Gene Simmons. One of Michael Crichton's worst stories...the idea is that in the future, people use robots for everything. But the robots constantly screw up, in horrible and unintentionally hilarious ways. Like the robot that cooks your spaghetti has a gun built into it for some reason, and somehow its programming gets confused and it shoots you dead.

Also, they have 'robot drivers' for cars, but instead of being just a computer built into the car, they use mechanical mannequins that actually manipulate the steering wheel, gas, brakes, etc. MST3k-quality dreck.

--
(-1, Raw and Uncut is the only way to read)

Re:I did this six months ago, except autonomous by Yvan256 · 2010-11-09 09:17 · Score: 1

Because nobody wants robots which require one cellphone contract per robot?

What is a Man Trap? by LifesABeach · 2010-11-09 09:30 · Score: 1

Is this device a man trap if I mount a flash bulb device on it and it takes a "flash" picture?

Re:Uh, okay. by Bert64 · 2010-11-09 09:37 · Score: 1

Or the thieves might think the robot is valuable and steal that too...

--
http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!

This is not security by Strange+Ranger · 2010-11-09 09:46 · Score: 1

This a great way to capture footage of somebody in a ski mask smashing your camera.

The only "security" this provides is the secure feeling of looking at your stuff so you can sigh with relief that you haven't been robbed yet.

--

Operator, give me the number for 911!

One low tech easy way to break this by bubblegoose · 2010-11-09 09:47 · Score: 1

That will work great, until someone cuts the phone and cable lines to your house and your modem goes dead.

When I used to work on security systems we would bring along a shovel for installs. We would bury the phone line and move the phone box inside to the basement. Made it inconvenient for the home owners if they needed changes to their service (they would have to be home to let the phone guy in), but gave them a heck of a lot more security.

For my own place I put up a dummy box with some wires running into it. If they cut the wire it set off the alarm.

--
I hope that someday we will be able to put away our fears and prejudices and just laugh at people. - Jack Handey

Realistically, though... by sean.peters · 2010-11-09 09:50 · Score: 1

How useful are cameras, either? So you happen to catch a guy on film robbing your house. Even if you happen to be watching while it happens, the guy is going to be long gone before the cops get there, and what good is the video really going to do you? It's fine for evidence... IF the cops ever catch the guy who did it, which is highly unlikely. But I don't see how it deters a break-in in the first place.

It seems to me you'd be a lot better off to invest in more secure locks, alarm systems (more for scaring off the burglar than anything else), and similar stuff.

Re:Realistically, though... by adamdoyle · 2010-11-09 10:10 · Score: 1

How useful are cameras, either? So you happen to catch a guy on film robbing your house. Even if you happen to be watching while it happens, the guy is going to be long gone before the cops get there, and what good is the video really going to do you? It's fine for evidence... IF the cops ever catch the guy who did it, which is highly unlikely. But I don't see how it deters a break-in in the first place.
It seems to me you'd be a lot better off to invest in more secure locks, alarm systems (more for scaring off the burglar than anything else), and similar stuff.
Also, a video of a guy wearing a mask is less than useful. I agree with the locks... even Medeco locks aren't completely bump-proof, but why go to the extra trouble of key-bumping a Medeco lock (which is much more work than bumping a regular lock) when there's a house across the street with its windows unlocked.
Re:Realistically, though... by Uzuri · 2010-11-15 04:12 · Score: 1

Mostly it's useful to help keep your insurance company from saying "Theft? What theft?" and refusing to pay. Otherwise, you're right. Useless.

--
I'm a she-slashdotter... but I make up for it by living with my folks.

Nice thing about Rovio... by X86Daddy · 2010-11-09 10:10 · Score: 3, Informative

If you can do any type of programming that hits URLS, you can program the Rovio... it's whole interface is HTTP Puts and Gets with custom URLs, and it's well documented. After Wowwee released some of the advanced documentation, someone published the commands to brighten the camera within a week, solving a problem of way-too-dark video that had existed since the beginning. With this level of control, throwing together an interface you can operate from your cell-phone becomes very plausible... no laptop needed.

The person the article is about is actually the author of RoboDance, which is a complex application that controls a bunch of robots, with an emphasis on the infrared controlled kinds like RoboSapien. His next version of RoboDance is the one that will include Rovio control and probably all the capabilities described in the article.

I've been really impressed with the Rovio... my only complaint is that the battery life is pretty weak, right out of the box.

Re:Nice thing about Rovio... by zounds011 · 2010-11-09 22:32 · Score: 1

HTTP? I'm disappointed.
I was expecting LOGO.

First thing I'd steal... by AJWM · 2010-11-09 10:11 · Score: 1

...would be the cool robots.

Perhaps after hacking in to them to see if there was anyone, like, at home.

--
-- Alastair

Re:I did this six months ago, except autonomous by DaFallus · 2010-11-09 10:13 · Score: 1

How about posting pictures of each robot in addition to the YouTube videos? Also, your wiki seems to be rather incomplete with regard to the descriptions of your products.

--
No one cares what your captcha was

Houston TX, USA

Re:Beowulf by Dr.Syshalt · 2010-11-09 10:18 · Score: 1

No, he talks about new Operating System: GUN/Linux.

Movie Robots by Dvinn · 2010-11-09 10:32 · Score: 1

Reminds me of the robot from the movie Loverboy. That robot had a motion detector and I thought the audio was hilarious.

"Papa papa! Intruder! Baaaad Boy! Papa!" or "Papa, Violator!! Baaaad Dudes"

With the right audio this could be the robot v2.0

Rovio NEEDS updating to be of any use for security by Onlookers.net · 2010-11-09 10:54 · Score: 1

Rovio COULD be a great security device if the firmware!!! could be updated to do some basics like motion detection email/ftp on triggering, including Sound Events/recording etc.. It has all the hardware needed, but WowWee doesn't seem to be interested in the possible security applications. Oh another thing it needs (in case anyone is listening) is an option to have it 'not seek the charging station' when it's running out of power and has not left the station. So that if the house loses power, and after the rovio battery gets low, it won't hop off the charger to 'go find it' and endup dead in the middle of the room when the power returns. I myself had a burglary with the Rovio on, but it wasn't of any use. Thankfully other security measures worked and police were able to catch 2 out of 3 of them with my rovio in their trunk! Watching court proceedings currently, so far they have spent 3-6 days behind bars... Facing life in prison for being armed (thankfully I wasn't there).

You can install all the cameras you want... by Ga_101 · 2010-11-09 11:00 · Score: 1

It won't stop them being defeated by a the burglar wearing a hoodie.

I'll take mine with Extra anchovies please! by JoeKeegan123 · 2010-11-09 11:08 · Score: 1

Did anyone else think of that old 80's movie with Patrick Dempsy in it, "Loverboy" when they saw this title? One of the wives that he was taking care of had a husband who was into home security. and his security device was a toy robot that shouted, "Intruder....very bad boy....INTRUDER!" in an obnoxious chinese sounding voice. Hillarious.

Domo by macdaddy357 · 2010-11-09 15:45 · Score: 1

Domo Arigato, Mr. Roboto!

--
How ya like dat?

Re:Beowulf by uncoveror · 2010-11-09 15:58 · Score: 1

How about frikkin' laserbeams!

--
The Uncoveror: It's the real news.

Re:EAT LEAD, SUCKER! *bangbangbangbang!* by Tothalvadi · 2010-11-09 19:01 · Score: 1

Heh, one of my favorite scenes. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DqNac7Fz1Uc

Re:Uh, okay. by RockDoctor · 2010-11-09 20:01 · Score: 1

I don't have an HDTV in my house and the contents of the drawers are scattered about wildly already, you insensitive clod!

Then go out and spend your termination pay check on a swarm of robots to rearrange the mess from the drawers on the floor and to watch your new HDTV for you.

Sheesh, some people just don't understand consumerism.

--
Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"

Re:Beowulf by tehcyder · 2010-11-10 01:08 · Score: 1

Runaway," a terrible sci-fi movie starring Kirstie Alley, Tom Selleck and Gene Simmons.

With a cast like that, who'd have guessed?

--
To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it

Re:Beowulf by mldi · 2010-11-10 03:45 · Score: 1

Wooooosh!

--
If you aren't suspicious of your government's actions, you aren't doing your job as a responsible citizen.

My first thought... by sabt-pestnu · 2010-11-10 07:00 · Score: 1

was "Kentucky Fried Movie"...

Re:Beowulf by Jeremiah+Cornelius · 2010-11-10 08:18 · Score: 1

How about frikkin' laserbeams!

I want to shoot an intruder, not highlight their PowerPoint presentation...

--
"Flyin' in just a sweet place,
Never been known to fail..."

Slashdot Mirror

Toy Robots Can Guard Your Home

116 of 151 comments (clear)