Slashdot Mirror


Startup Testing Mobile Farmbots

An anonymous reader writes "Wired reports on Harvest Automation, a Massachusetts company developing small robots that can perform basic agricultural labor. The ones currently being tested in greenhouses and plant nurseries are 'knee-high, wheeled machines.' 'Each robot has a gripper for grasping pots, a deck for carrying pots, and an array of sensors to keep track of where it is and what's around it. Teams of robots zip around nursery fields, single-mindedly spacing and grouping plants. Key to making the robots flexible and cost-effective is designing them to work only with information provided by their sensors. They don't construct a global map of their environment, and they don't use GPS. The robots have sensors that detect boundary markers, a laser range finder to detect objects in front of them, and a gyroscope for navigating by dead reckoning. The robots determine how far they've traveled by keeping track of wheel rotations.'"

10 of 243 comments (clear)

  1. Visions by NEDHead · · Score: 4, Interesting

    of Silent Running come to mind

  2. Hook it up to Facebook by grantek · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If you need a bit better pattern recognition or control there's thousands of people willing to do farming from their PCs for free.

  3. This is obviously the future by Dr.+Spork · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The efficiency of farming (yield value per area+inputs) is going to have to grow a lot as global population increases and gets richer. This is obviously one step in that direction. Sure, this robot is laughably primitive compared to Google's self-driving car, but future generations will do better. I think that in 20 years, we'll be able to intersperse multiple simultaneous crops in the same field, which is good for the soil, reduces the need for fertilizer and pesticide, and generates a more value.

    The most important reason why we don't see this sort of farming on a large scale is because it requires much more fine-motor work and is incompatible with the machines we use today. But once those machines get substantially cheaper and more dexterous than people, I think we'll make this transition. Our food will be better for it, and there will be more of it. I don't think that this is very far off in the future.

    1. Re:This is obviously the future by DigiShaman · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I'm a bit concerned about all of this advancement to support extended population growth. My gut feeling is that we are just setting up ourselves for a big fall the more we detach ourselves from nature. Like a house of cards. It can only go so high before the entire system collapses. It's just a matter of when. For example, a high-altitude nuclear warhead my never cause bodily harm. But the EMP it releases is enough to shutdown entire nations with all microchips fried. That means no transportation and running water. Within weeks, people start dieing and bodies decomposing where they last crawled for survival. Truly scary stuff.

      --
      Life is not for the lazy.
    2. Re:This is obviously the future by LordLucless · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The efficiency of farming (yield value per area+inputs) is going to have to grow a lot as global population increases and gets richer

      Not necessarily. Using the most modern farming techniques, we produce far more food than the population that grows it actually requires. The problem is, the areas that have the largest (and most quickly growing) populations, are the areas that use the least effective farming techniques.

      Apart from stopping the wars that suck up their manpower, and pillage their crops, getting modern farming in widespread use in the third world is the big step to combating world hunger. And if the pattern is anything like what we've seen, once their standard of living is raised, they stop having as many children, and population will taper off. Much of the western world (US and Australia I know for sure) is currently at below-replacement levels of reproduction.

      --
      Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean there isn't an invisible demon about to eat your face
  4. Re:If these have the impact of the "cotton gin"... by Jeff+DeMaagd · · Score: 4, Informative

    From my hazy recollection of American history, the cotton (en)gin(e), made it possible to process cotton with a lot less labor making slaves less necessary(?) and set the stage for the civil war. Or something like that.

    The general idea of your post may be correct, but I think it's the opposite. The cotton gin made slaves more necessary to the south (or at least so they believed) because it made seed-heavy cotton varieties into a viable crop. This cotton would grow well where other crops didn't. Without the gin, the plant wouldn't have been economical and slavery would have continued to gradually fade. Some of this is conjecture, it's hard to speculate accurately on possible alternative paths of history, but slavery was supposedly declining before the cotton gin was made available.

  5. Picture with their handler by theshowmecanuck · · Score: 4, Informative

    Here is a picture of the agro robots. It's OK, there are no goats around.

    --
    -- I ignore anonymous replies to my comments and postings.
  6. Re:This would solve... by wanzeo · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Actually, something like this can't really take off precisely because of cheap labor. Cheap bots will only be capable of limited tasks while requiring close supervision, and expensive ones will cost much more than a minimum wage laborer.

    Not too long ago I was looking into what it would cost to build a (nearly) fully automated greenhouse. The problem is, no matter how efficient or clever your system is, you simply cannot compete with the cost of human labor at the very bottom of the skills spectrum.

    It is frustrating, because it seems like we should automate the more basic and repetitive tasks first, but in a market based economy, is simply isn't, well, economical.

  7. This is needed like 10 years ago by WindBourne · · Score: 5, Insightful

    America, in fact the west, has a serious issue with illegals. However, the west, is by far, the worst. We have neo-cons that encourage illegals to be here working for below prevailing wages, while not paying taxes. Then we have dems leaders that push for amnesty and allowing more illegals in, as long as they get amnesty. That is just plain twisted. Now, why do these illegals come to America (and canada, EU, UK, and Australia)? Because even below minimum wage, they still make more money than what they make in their own nations. The problem is that western levels of goods, count on taxes being paid as well as re-investment in the local economy. As such illegals who work in the nation, but then send the money out of the nation, are just as bad as those that outsource to China who manipulates money, dumps monster amounts of pollution on the planet (in 2015, China will dump more than 50% of all CO2; in 2019 +-, they will have accounted for 1/2 of ALL co2 that man has ever emitted, and that assumed a slower growth path then they are on; worse, it does not include their SO2, mercury, lead, chemical pollutions, etc, etc, etc that are dumped in the Sea of China, The pacific ocean, and in our shared airs). Basically, Illegals are not cheap enough to warrent keeping them here, and the real costs is the damage to western society. Those libs that back giving jobs to illegals because they deserve it are about as stupid as as the neo-cons: they will destroy the west and esp. America, due to lack of thought.

    The only real way to save the west, and ultimately, the world, is to automate. In particular, food should be automated. Right now, less than 2% of American labor goes into Ag. One of the bigger issues is that we now import a lot of food. But we increasingly import shrimp from farms in South America and Asia. How bad are these? HORRIBLE. Both use loads of anti-biotics. IN addition, they do it not in isolated ponds, but along the shoreline. THis is some of the most important areas on the earth, and it is being destroyed to send sickly shrimp to the west. Insane.
    Likewise, we get loads of food from China. Hell, Nestle is now producing candy in China. SICK. At this time, upper middle class Chinese buy food from USA, Canada, Australia, and EU. Why? Because they know that the good that is coming from China is loaded with mercury, lead, and many other pollutants. And this is happening again, because China is cheating, and companies like Nestle are greedy as all hell.

    Ever been on a Chinese commercial fishing boat? I have talked to a fishery person that was working on one to make certain that China was not stealing or mis-labelling. She was telling afterwards that she no longer eats fish unless it is from USA, Canada, EU, UK, or Japan. She tells me that China was the worst. Disgusting conditions.

    Robotics will solve a lot of these issues. We can grow our own shrimp here cheaper than importing them. Likewise, the same is true of veggies, fish, etc.

    It is time for America, and the west, to take a stand and say enough is enough. We need to quit backing those that pollute and destroy our planet. Time to put a tax on all goods based on pollution from where they come from.

    --
    I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
  8. Re:This would solve... by benjamindees · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Humans consume resources. If you're concerned about limited resources, you should be concerned with limiting human population growth. Hiring immigrants does exactly the opposite -- it subsidizes population growth and provides a "relief valve" for failed governments.

    I'll repeat that for you in case you missed it. Welcoming immigrants simply perpetuates the poverty and the oppressive governments you seem to be so concerned about.

    Walling most of them out would absolutely make us more prosperous, because we have more resources per capita than anywhere on Earth. In the long run it would make them more prosperous as well.

    --
    "I assumed blithely that there were no elves out there in the darkness"