Slashdot Mirror


Kilobots — Cheap Swarm Robots Out of Harvard

An anonymous reader writes with news of a research project at Harvard into controlling large swarms of small robots. This article describes what they call Kilobots. (Which, for clarity's sake, have nothing to do with killing. Yet.) Quoting: "They're fairly simple little robots about the size of a quarter that can move around on vibrating legs, blink their lights, and communicate with each other. On an individual basis, this isn't particularly impressive, but Kilobots aren't designed to be used on an individual basis. Costing a mere $14 each and buildable in about five minutes, you don't just get yourself one single Kilobot. Or ten. Or a hundred. They're designed to swarm in the thousands."

121 comments

  1. Welcome! by DrSlinky · · Score: 2

    I'd like to be the first to welcome out new robot overlords.

    If there's anything I can do to make this transition easier on you, you need but ask. Oh, and that neighbor I don't like is part of the resistance.

    1. Re:Welcome! by ColdWetDog · · Score: 2

      I'd like to be the first to welcome out new robot overlords.

      If there's anything I can do to make this transition easier on you, you need but ask. Oh, and that neighbor I don't like is part of the resistance.

      I'll bring the broom and dustpan.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    2. Re:Welcome! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sorry, your heart just isn't in it. I guess this story needs something about bitcoin. Like each robot is worth how many bitcoins, or how they might mine or steal bitcoins....
      Slashdot sucks these days.

    3. Re:Welcome! by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      Ha, you fool. I'd like to be the first to welcome our new grey goo overlord!

    4. Re:Welcome! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's ok. With enough robots working to apply a voltage in series, Ohm's law will take care of that.

    5. Re:Welcome! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      how about each robot is about the size of a bitcoin?

  2. Oblig. XKCD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny
    1. Re:Oblig. XKCD by religious+freak · · Score: 1

      WTF is up with the XKCD hate from some people? It's weird.
      Is there a reason for this, or are people just assholes?

      --
      If you can read this... 01110101 01110010 00100000 01100001 00100000 01100111 01100101 01100101 01101011
    2. Re:Oblig. XKCD by drolli · · Score: 1

      Also see: Mantrid Drones (The Lexx).

    3. Re:Oblig. XKCD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You know what's worse than haters? Censors.

      Don't mod down honest opinions just because you disagree with them.

    4. Re:Oblig. XKCD by sco08y · · Score: 2

      WTF is up with the XKCD hate from some people? It's weird.

      It's karma-whoring and contributes nothing to the discussion. It's usually the same comics over and over again. The comic itself is smug and pretentious.

    5. Re:Oblig. XKCD by Eponymous+Hero · · Score: 0

      every single "obligatory xkcd" that i've clicked has been a comic that relates in some way to the topic. it's the same thing as dropping a funny movie reference during a conversation. it contributes relevant humor to the discussion. i've never thought the comic was smug or pretentious, but maybe you are just not the artist's audience, who are intellectuals after all. see, the problem with being better than everyone else is that people tend to think that you're pretentious. in reality, it's exactly like the parent said, you're just an asshole.

      just because you get whooshed every time you read xkcd doesn't mean it's smug nor pretentious. the fact that you think it's the same comics over and over again adds weight to my theory that you don't understand them. you're like the anti-music guy that thinks all heavy metal or rap sounds the same when you don't even get it to begin with. also, people tend to fear what they don't understand, and hate what they fear.

      my hatred for morons like you is borne of the fear that somehow someone somewhere who doesn't deserve it is going to have their life negatively impacted in a huge way due to your stupidity, and that eventually that negative impact is going to spread like a hurricane started by butterfly wings to MY life.

      oh, there's an obligatory xkcd for that.

      --
      insensitive clod overlords obligatory xkcd car analogy russian reversals whoosh pedant fanbois ftfy in 3...2...1..PROFIT
    6. Re:Oblig. XKCD by religious+freak · · Score: 1

      +1

      --
      If you can read this... 01110101 01110010 00100000 01100001 00100000 01100111 01100101 01100101 01101011
  3. Ok.. by errandum · · Score: 2

    Haven't braitenberg vehicles kind of simulated this kind of behavior for a while now?

    1. Re:Ok.. by Joce640k · · Score: 1

      Dunno....but that looks like a really fun project to work on. Anybody know where you can buy those for $14?

      --
      No sig today...
    2. Re:Ok.. by RespekMyAthorati · · Score: 1

      They could probably be mass-manufactured in China for a dollar or so.

      I'd buy that for a dollar!

  4. Why? by Cedarbridge · · Score: 2

    Its a cool idea and all but designed for the thousands? What on Earth would I want a thousand little vibrating bots that jostle around in circles and blink at eachother for?

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

      So you can laugh maniacally at your helpless minions as the carpet installers arrive?

    2. Re:Why? by Matheus · · Score: 1

      Call me old fashioned, but I refuse to call these a swarm until they can fly. :)

    3. Re:Why? by SomePgmr · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Good question. Also, you'd have to find a well-cleaned aircraft hangar or something with enough perfectly flat, obstacle-free space for them to do anything. I don't think the idea is really about making these particular ones practical... but more about programming a whole swarm all at once and having them ready to go off and do whatever they're supposed to on their own. And managing that in a way that's cheap and effective. The article says they're looking to get up to a thousand of them and have them work out "self healing" and "collective trasport". These taks have been done individually, but baby steps towards a more impressive whole, I guess.

    4. Re:Why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      My wife could think of a few good reasons..

    5. Re:Why? by InsectOverlord · · Score: 1
      To keep cockroaches off.

      And if you step on one of them by accident, you might kill it but the result won't be nearly as gross.

    6. Re:Why? by martin-boundary · · Score: 1

      What on Earth would I want a thousand little vibrating bots that jostle around in circles and blink at eachother for?

      The warm glow from spending $14,000 to help a future Harvard startup monetize its slashverts? And a free set of steak knives!

    7. Re:Why? by religious+freak · · Score: 1

      Why not?

      --
      If you can read this... 01110101 01110010 00100000 01100001 00100000 01100111 01100101 01100101 01101011
    8. Re:Why? by RespekMyAthorati · · Score: 1

      What I don't get is what they could possibly demonstrate with a thousand of these things that they couldn't demonstrate just as well with 100.

  5. Prey by bp2179 · · Score: 1

    Michael Crichton wrote a book about how we thought we could control thousand of nanobots using swarm theory. I wonder if they are using algorithms derived from bees. As long as we don't develop AI anytime soon, I think we are safe.

    1. Re:Prey by martin-boundary · · Score: 1

      I wonder if they are using algorithms derived from bees.

      Gosh I hope not! There's a documentary with Michael Caine that shows this would be a bad idea.

    2. Re:Prey by Jeremi · · Score: 2

      Michael Crichton wrote a book about how we thought we could control thousand of nanobots using swarm theory.

      Also, L. Ron Hubbard wrote a book about how we are all haunted by thousands of evil alien ghosts. Fortunately, both books are works of fiction, and therefore have little relation to reality.

      --


      I don't care if it's 90,000 hectares. That lake was not my doing.
    3. Re:Prey by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

      Michael Crichton wrote a book about how we thought we could control thousand of nanobots using swarm theory.

      Michael Crichton was a crypto-fascist crank who was wrong about almost everything.

      Sort of like an even less talented Ayn Rand who read Popular Science.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    4. Re:Prey by TapeCutter · · Score: 2

      Michael Crichton wrote a book

      Let me guess, it's about "science gone mad", right?

      --
      And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
    5. Re:Prey by Hal_Porter · · Score: 2

      Please Cease and Desist from violating the Centre for Religious Technology's Intellectual Property.

      --
      echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
    6. Re:Prey by Hal_Porter · · Score: 2

      Still pissed about this, eh?

      --
      echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
  6. Re:Kilobot by Intrepid+imaginaut · · Score: 2

    Indeed, they could have chosen a less ominous name.

    Like fluffyboppers.

  7. We will lose. by lw54 · · Score: 1

    You could kill a robot. Maybe even 10. But, in the thousands, even if they are tiny and weak, you will lose.

    1. Re:We will lose. by artor3 · · Score: 1

      I'm pretty sure a decent pair of boots is all you'd need to defeat a swarm of these things.

    2. Re:We will lose. by Kjella · · Score: 1

      No. The only reason it's a remotely good science fiction toy is because the robots self-replicate or assimilate - usually by magictech. Built what's essentially a machine gun turret on wheels and it'd be much more effective than a million toy soldiers.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    3. Re:We will lose. by davester666 · · Score: 1

      ...except for the few thousand that manage to climb up the side of your boots and then burrow inside your legs...

      --
      Sleep your way to a whiter smile...date a dentist!
    4. Re:We will lose. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My EMP device says otherwise

    5. Re:We will lose. by SomePgmr · · Score: 1

      Well the article says one of the next steps is "self healing", whatever that means. I'd guess that just means bringing in new bots to replace dead ones. But hey, it's something. :)

    6. Re:We will lose. by artor3 · · Score: 1

      They can't climb or burrow. They have all the mobility of my phone in vibrate mode.

    7. Re:We will lose. by Jeremi · · Score: 2

      They can't climb or burrow. They have all the mobility of my phone in vibrate mode.

      Well sure... These are just the research prototypes. v2.0 will add spring-loaded legs, and teeth.

      --


      I don't care if it's 90,000 hectares. That lake was not my doing.
    8. Re:We will lose. by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      Imagine being buried in thousands of phones, which all vibrate in sync.

    9. Re:We will lose. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think I know quite a few women who would pay good money for that.

    10. Re:We will lose. by delirium28 · · Score: 1

      Yeah, so did the Daleks, but that didn't stop them!

      --
      Who is John Galt?
    11. Re:We will lose. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Buried in vibrators?

    12. Re:We will lose. by NoNonAlphaCharsHere · · Score: 1

      And even before they all link together and form a MegaZord that crushes cars and buildings underfoot...

    13. Re:We will lose. by elrous0 · · Score: 1

      Even if I send wave-after-wave of my men at them?

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
  8. D'awww by Windwraith · · Score: 2

    They are so cute!
    I don't even know why but I was "awww"ing when all the robots started to blink their lights in unison.

    1. Re:D'awww by Shemmie · · Score: 1

      Totally opposite reaction to me. I got the creeps when I saw the little imps talking to each other to synchronize their flashing lights.

      It was like watching the Borg boot up!

    2. Re:D'awww by Windwraith · · Score: 2

      Really? That was one of my favorite parts...I can imagine them making cute beeps while flocking around.
      Then again I happen to find most "real" robots cute. with those huge shiny camera eyes and unreliable movement. It's like watching metal puppies tripping while taking their first steps.
      I'd be willing to get myself a dozen and have it move around my desk all day. What would they do if they go berserk anyway? Vibrate all over me until I die of old age?

    3. Re:D'awww by SanityInAnarchy · · Score: 1

      Second obligatory XKCD.

      --
      Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
    4. Re:D'awww by elrous0 · · Score: 1

      It's cute until you realize they're blinking "kill" in Morse.

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
  9. Vancouver? by drwho · · Score: 1, Offtopic

    A swarm of creatures with low intelligence? You mean, that Harvard manufactured the Canuks rioters/fans?

    1. Re:Vancouver? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, it's normal Harvard human product.

    2. Re:Vancouver? by guruevi · · Score: 1

      At least those Canuks fans get something done (even though it's destruction/economic stimulus). I believe they're more like a group of IT managers at a Microsoft convention - they can all start communicating with the latest buzzwords but in the end it doesn't mean anything to anyone observing and trying to get an intelligent answer.

      --
      Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
  10. Batteries by BradleyUffner · · Score: 2, Funny

    The battery life is only 3 hours, and is non rechargeable.. I'd REALLY hate being the intern at a company using a swarm of 1000s of these guys after the first experiment.

    1. Re:Batteries by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      FTA:

      To power the entire robot, each Kilobot has a 3.4 V 160 mAh lithium-ion battery. This battery can power the robot for 3-10 hours depending on the robot’s activity level.

      As far as I know these are rechargable and they even designed a system to reload them in bulk.

    2. Re:Batteries by AmberBlackCat · · Score: 1

      You fix that problem with another robot...

    3. Re:Batteries by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In the first video, the guy specifically says they are rechargeable.

    4. Re:Batteries by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      See, that's why they'll have to start using humans for power eventually. You've been warned.

    5. Re:Batteries by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Unfortunately for your joke... the battery *is* rechargeable. Further, you only have to put the thing on a special "charger sandwitch" (ground on top, 6v bottom) and they'll recharge.

  11. Re:Kilobot by tripleevenfall · · Score: 1

    I'm not too worried, as my gigantic robotic stamping boot is in alpha testing

  12. Not what I'd like to see come out of Harvard... by RobinEggs · · Score: 1

    I'm afraid I misread the headline as something much, much cooler.

    Did anyone else read that Harvard had invented a "cheap swarm of killbots?"

    Because that would be awesome.

    1. Re:Not what I'd like to see come out of Harvard... by Mogusha · · Score: 1

      I'm surprised noone has said it yet, but do they have a predefined kill limit? So, if they get out of hand we can send wave after wave of men at them?

    2. Re:Not what I'd like to see come out of Harvard... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are Aspies good for anything but pop culture references and solving obscure mathematical problems?

    3. Re:Not what I'd like to see come out of Harvard... by Dahamma · · Score: 1

      Yep. Once I realized what it really said I was pretty bummed.

      Ah, but we can always build more killbots!

  13. Nibbled to death by ducks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Even ducks can kill you, given enough ducks

  14. Yes, Soulskill, your readers are retarded by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    (Which, for clarity's sake, have nothing to do with killing. Yet.)

    Thank fucking god we have editors. I might have never realized that "kilo" could refer to anything but killing.

    No, the /. readers are, as I am, buck-toothed sloping-foreheaded morons who think that "kilobot" means robots that kill things. We've obviously never used any computers outside of an Xbox, let alone the metric fucking system, and that is why we're all reading a goddamned tech news site.

  15. When will this lead to something useful? by c0d3g33k · · Score: 2

    I understand that small steps (no pun intended) need to be taken to advance the state of the art, but this remains an academic novelty until these little guys can do something useful. Doesn't have to be terribly complicated. There are plenty of simple yet highly repetitious and tedious tasks that would be perfect for a cooperating swarm of little worker bots working in parallel. Like carrying the leaves off of the lawn and depositing them in the woods (or a recycling bag) in the fall or similar. Then I would be impressed (and would be the first in line to buy the kit).

    1. Re:When will this lead to something useful? by 1+a+bee · · Score: 3, Informative

      For you and I further down the food chain, it'll probably be a while. For researchers, though, it's arguably already useful. FTA:

      Generally people who want to experiment with large swarms have had to be content with computer simulations, which is fine, but at some point you have to try things out in the real world (or as close as you can get in a lab), and Kilobots can make that happen. .. at $14 each, a thousand robots is actually an achievable number with a modest grant, which is something that probably has not been possible before.

    2. Re:When will this lead to something useful? by c0d3g33k · · Score: 2

      Agreed. I made a weak attempt to acknowledge this in my opening sentence, but in my haste to get to my main point, I was overly dismissive without meaning to be. Moving beyond simulations and into the real world is definitely a necessary and laudable achievement.

    3. Re:When will this lead to something useful? by RandCraw · · Score: 1

      Exactly. Clean out my gutters. Paint my house. Weed my garden. Stop just writing papers.

    4. Re:When will this lead to something useful? by innerweb · · Score: 1

      From a military or industrial perspective, this is useful. This is one step away from a self-organizing mine field, or sensor array. By allowing them to choose the proper *scatter*, you can very easily release a set of bots in the field to do anything from look for oil in the water to finding illegal aliens crossing the border. True, these little guys are not going to be the used solution, but they are providing the conceptual testing that will lead to more expensive and larger machines doing real work. Once you have the proven behaviors, it is a a simpler matter to add them to other machines to give the machines we currently use the same behaviors. I don't see them doing lawn work anytime soon, but in the military and industrial world, there are many applications where these behaviors would be ideal.

      --
      Freud might say that Intelligent Design is religion's ID.
    5. Re:When will this lead to something useful? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I dony see a reason to physically build something in such a theoretical stage. It would be much cheaper and make a lot more senses to simulate it in than to spend tens of thousands on them. Seems like their physical movement and sensors could be matched with ten lines of code.

  16. Replicators??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why am I thinking about the replicators from SG-SG1??? ;^)

    1. Re:Replicators??? by IonOtter · · Score: 1

      You aren't the only one, I assure you.

      --
      [End Of Line]
  17. The first robot war begins in 5...4...3... by zill · · Score: 2

    How long until they divide into two camps and fight to the death over whether kilo = 1000 or 1024?

    1. Re:The first robot war begins in 5...4...3... by jabberw0k · · Score: 1

      The Kilobots and the Kibibots? (Cue Prokofiev's "Montagues and Capulets")

    2. Re:The first robot war begins in 5...4...3... by mysidia · · Score: 1

      Maybe so... The string Kibi is really close to Kibo. Perhaps the folks on alt.religion.kibology could have some insight into what the strategy of Kibo's kibibots would be :-)

  18. The size of a quarter by safetyinnumbers · · Score: 1

    That's about the size of 15 pence, for readers in the UK.

    1. Re:The size of a quarter by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's about the size of 15 pence, for readers in the UK.

      If a 15 pence coin actually existed :-/

    2. Re:The size of a quarter by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      woosh?

  19. Killbots by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Am I the only one who read that as killbots, and then got really excited?

    1. Re:Killbots by lostfayth · · Score: 1

      The editors were rather prescient then.

    2. Re:Killbots by nurb432 · · Score: 1

      Why yes, yes you were the only one.

      --
      ---- Booth was a patriot ----
  20. But the're incapable of folding my fitted sheets.. by RNLockwood · · Score: 1

    and I think they won't do so well on my carpets. But how about swarm wars? THAT'S cool!

    --
    Nate
  21. What we have is a new measure of automation by mysidia · · Score: 5, Insightful

    1024 kilobots = 1 Megabot

    1024 Megabots = 1 Gigabot (aka 1 Decepticon)

    1024 Gigabots = 1 Terabot

    1024 Terabots = 1 Petabot (A sufficient number of bots to enslave humanity)

    1024 Petabots = 1 Exabot (A sufficient number of bots to enslave the the planets in our solar system)

    1024 Exabots = 1 Zettabot (A sufficient number of bots to enslave our galaxy)

    1024 Zettabots = 1 Yottabot (A sufficient number of bots to enslave 25% of the known universe)

    1024 Yottabots = A sufficient number of bots bots to replace all interesting objects in the known (and unknown) parts of the universe with Kilobot swarms.

    1. Re:What we have is a new measure of automation by tebee · · Score: 1

      So if each kilobot takes 1 day to make a duplicate of itself - we have 90 days until we get to the "A sufficient number of bots bots to replace all interesting objects in the known (and unknown) parts of the universe with Kilobot swarms" stage?

      --
      N.B. this user is far too lazy to write a witty and intelligent sig.
    2. Re:What we have is a new measure of automation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      1024 kilobots = 1 Megabot

      1024 Megabots = 1 Gigabot (aka 1 Decepticon)

      1024 Gigabots = 1 Terabot

      1024 Terabots = 1 Petabot (A sufficient number of bots to enslave humanity)

      1024 Petabots = 1 Exabot (A sufficient number of bots to enslave the the planets in our solar system)

      1024 Exabots = 1 Zettabot (A sufficient number of bots to enslave our galaxy)

      1024 Zettabots = 1 Yottabot (A sufficient number of bots to enslave 25% of the known universe)

      1024 Yottabots = A sufficient number of bots bots to replace all interesting objects in the known (and unknown) parts of the universe with Kilobot swarms.

      Or...

      1024 Yottabots = 1 Hellabot

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SI_prefix#Related_proposals

    3. Re:What we have is a new measure of automation by mysidia · · Score: 1

      we have 90 days until we get to the "A sufficient number of bots bots to replace all interesting objects in the known (and unknown) parts of the universe with Kilobot swarms" stage?

      Unless they are extremely versatile in their reproduction and operation, they run out of essential easily-obtainable resources on earth to harvest for rapid reproduction long before 90 days.

      And have to start either mining resources themselves or utilizing enslaved species to do work to extract resources for Kilobot reproduction :)

    4. Re:What we have is a new measure of automation by charlieo88 · · Score: 1

      When you open the box and count out only 1,000 ONLY THEN do see the little asterisk where the manufacture says 1,000 kilobots to the megabot because for marketing purposes they use SI prefixes.

    5. Re:What we have is a new measure of automation by 91degrees · · Score: 1

      Yes, except Kilo means 1000. Not 1024. RAM manufacturers use an approximation, but the official IEC term is .

    6. Re:What we have is a new measure of automation by mysidia · · Score: 1

      Yep, but 24 out of 1000 is less than 2.5%, and 24^8 out of 1000^8 is less than 0.00000000001%, so you keep the box anyways :)

    7. Re:What we have is a new measure of automation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yottabots, roll out!

  22. My Kilobot by stinerman · · Score: 1

    My Kilobot has Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available.

  23. "nothing to do with killing" by Arancaytar · · Score: 1

    So they're working on robot swarms that will totally not try to wipe out humanity?

    Even as a pun, that's a Suspiciously Specific Denial.

  24. Re:What we have is a new measure of automatons by 1+a+bee · · Score: 1

    Pew! And I was worried about kilobots turning on us. It's them yottabots we should be worried about. Oh, wait a minute.. I think they've so throughly won we call their collective reality.

  25. neato... by Thraxy · · Score: 1

    I was very impressed by that synchronized blinking action there. That will come in handy... Endless possibilities there, my friend... endless

    1. Re:neato... by hazem · · Score: 1

      It's very similar to a "Firefly" simulation in Netlogo (http://ccl.northwestern.edu/netlogo/). It's an agent-based simulation language/system that allows you to explore similar behaviors as the ones seen here, but virtually.

  26. Simulation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I really don't get what is the point with using bots like that.
    With such limited functionality, they should be really easy to simulate, wouldn't they?
    This must be some kind proof of concept and even to prove a certain controlling concept they shouldn't have to use robots.
    No, this must be for fun or to attract attention.

    Granted, the last part of the movie was really cool.

  27. I don't believe it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Nothing to do with killing? Pshaw.

    But it's okay; kilobots have a pre-set kill limit. I shall merely send wave after wave of my men at them until they reach that limit, and shut down.

  28. OMG RepRap is the new skynet by cultiv8 · · Score: 1

    Only now you have to buy parts off ebay

    --
    sysadmins and parents of newborns get the same amount of sleep.
  29. Calling CleverNickname... by RyuuzakiTetsuya · · Score: 1

    ...please pick up the shaped like a galaxy class starship courtesy telephone please...

    --
    Non impediti ratione cogitationus.
    1. Re:Calling CleverNickname... by MichaelSmith · · Score: 1

      Will hasn't posted here since 2009 but you could try reddit...

  30. Killbots by hoborg1 · · Score: 1

    I misread and was hoping for cheap swarms of killbots...

  31. Been seeing them for years by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

    Kilobots â" Cheap Swarm Robots Out of Harvard

    We call them politicians. They come straight of of Harvard with hair gel and sense of entitlement already applied.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
  32. Ian McDonald detailed what these could become by Basilius · · Score: 1

    He called them "BitBots" and they feature prominently in his recent book "The Dervish House."

    I want some.

  33. yes, cool.. but.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why use real robots? Swarming/flocking behaviours can be simulated beautifully in software at $0 extra per unit..

  34. Meh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    more like Yawnbots

  35. Legion - Geth by AleXelA · · Score: 1

    http://masseffect.wikia.com/wiki/Legion

    Legion is a unique geth mobile platform, designed to operate outside the Perseus Veil and interact with organics directly. To that purpose, it houses 1,183 geth programs, as opposed to the one hundred in other platforms, enabling it to operate independently and speak....
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rMPeG3pQlPw&NR=1 ...If questioned about specifically using Shepard's N7 armour to repair itself, Legion becomes evasive, first rationalizing with "there was a hole" and then states "no data available" after being pressed, suggesting that it was the result of an irrational action, which goes against the concept that every action the geth take is the result of calculation, unaffected by emotion.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wF7KYQ1_jKo

    Waking up the Geth: (there is a new faction inside the Geth (that break apart from the earlier less evolutioned ones), that builds their own future, no one will be armed ... unless they involve themselves...)
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VMzBSRityaU&feature=related

    Geth enters the Quarian ship: (Geth meet their creators, creators meet their killers, the Geth keep the homeworld and the Quarians had to scape and live exiled)
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QDemlIaPv18&feature=related

    Of course the Geth views's of the whole story is just the opposite, they were just defending themselves .... which may not be false.

    Did you even know you could get in love with them?
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2IdIhFXcRl8

    I love Legion's mind machine calculations all the time:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UJI66t-B83g&feature=related

  36. Perfect Job for Kilobots - Work on Homepage of SSR by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I propose Kilobots get to work on the home page of their mothership Self-Organizing Systems Research Group that looks straight from the nineties with fuzzy background images and large images for headlines included. I know, I know, substance over style but a little more style wouldn't hurt for a presumable word-class research outfit.

  37. This is not swarm behavior at all by popo · · Score: 1

    Swarm behavior requires a mutual awareness between devices. This is simply a remote control which affects a large number of units. The problem with this approach is that it only works initially, but random differences in movement become magnified over time. Since each bot movement includes a random margin of error (think: drunkard's walk) the "swarm" will dissipate over time and show less cohesion. In true swarm behavior, each individual actor (bot, in this case) is aware of the greater swarm.

    --
    ------ The best brain training is now totally free : )
    1. Re:This is not swarm behavior at all by stevelinton · · Score: 1

      The article says they can communicate with one another.

  38. Kilobots, Harvard, okay, buzzwords, we got it, by arisvega · · Score: 1

    .. but what do they DO ?

    --
    The three laws of thermodynamics:(1) You can't win. (2) You can't break even. (3) You can't even quit.
  39. I, for one, welcome our new Kilobot overlords... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'd like to remind them that as a typical US SlashDot reader, I carry enough body weight to generate plenty of BTUs for their energy fields.

  40. what is the purpose? by hesaigo999ca · · Score: 1

    What is the purpose of these bots other then just run around and talk amongst themselves???

  41. if (Kilobots == Zerglings) by optymizer · · Score: 1

    My life for Aiur!