BigDog Robot Grabs, Lifts, and Throws Cinder Blocks With Its New Arm

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

BigDog Robot Grabs, Lifts, and Throws Cinder Blocks With Its New Arm

Posted by Soulskill on Friday March 1, 2013 @02:30AM from the please-don't-teach-it-to-aim-for-humans dept.

cylonlover writes "Boston Dynamics' BigDog may have already been replaced by the beefier LS3, but that doesn't mean it's totally obsolete. Today the company unveiled a version of the quadruped equipped with an arm where a head (or tail) would go. As can be seen in a slightly disquieting video, it's powerful enough to lift and toss a heavy cinder block. Key to this work, funded by the U.S. Army Research Laboratory, is that BigDog uses the dynamic forces of its whole body to help it throw the cinder block. It begins by taking several steps to the side before quickly accelerating as it swings its arm, temporarily launching itself into the air in the process. This approach is similar to the way an athlete winds up before throwing a discus, for example, and greatly enhances the robot's throwing power. Since few robots are as capable as BigDog when it comes to balance, it's an excellent platform to test these sorts of strenuous actions."

91 comments

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

An interesting future by Servercide · 2013-03-01 02:35 · Score: 3, Insightful

Considering the military is preparing for a future of cyber warfare. I find it interesting that we are willing to put war fighters into suits that assist with body movements. You know they will have connectivity eventually. I mean, what if the Chinese hack into the systems that control these suits. They would have a whole battalion playing twister in no time :)
1. Re:An interesting future by dywolf · 2013-03-01 04:17 · Score: 1
  
  naked twister...i've seen some of those women they have in the Chinese Army, even if they are just a drill/show platoon. *drool*
  
  --
  The guy who said the election was rigged won the presidency with the second-most votes.
Disquieting indeed by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-01 02:38 · Score: 1

Man bites dog. Dog ... er ... throws cinder block ...
1. Re:Disquieting indeed by Servercide · 2013-03-01 02:39 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  Anyone think about the giant dog from Half Life?
2. Re:Disquieting indeed by NatasRevol · 2013-03-01 02:59 · Score: 2
  
  I was hoping the big dog would throw one of those chihuahuas from "Beverly Hills Chihuahua".
  I would love to see how far it would go.
  
  --
  There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
3. Re:Disquieting indeed by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-01 07:13 · Score: 0
  
  This isn't disquieting at all. It's obviously not a big dog, it's just a small elephant.
This thing... by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-01 02:42 · Score: 1

Is terrifying.
1. Re:This thing... by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-01 03:26 · Score: 0
  
  You know when your dog twitches his paws in his sleep, like he's running?
  Well this is what he's running from
2. Re:This thing... by aaaaaaargh! · 2013-03-01 03:41 · Score: 1
  
  Not only that, I would not go anywhere near such a machine unless I knew exactly how it was programmed, how its programs have been audited and formally verified, and what kind of safety mechanisms have been built in. Seriously, as long as not at least as much safety evaluation is put into this machine's software as is put into civilian fly-by-wire airplanes it's just a matter of time until the first machine operator will die.
3. Re:This thing... by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-01 03:54 · Score: 0
  
  No kidding. There can be only so much time before this thing will be seen throwing babies near the Central Park.
4. Re:This thing... by blane.bramble · 2013-03-01 04:08 · Score: 1
  
  No, he's dreaming he is piloting one of these, and you are the one doing the running...
5. Re:This thing... by hoggoth · 2013-03-01 05:24 · Score: 2
  
  BigDog: PLEASE PUT DOWN YOUR WEAPON. YOU HAVE 20 SECONDS TO COMPLY.
  (drops gun)
  BigDog: YOU NOW HAVE 15 SECONDS TO COMPLY.
  what could possibly go wrong?
  
  --
  - For the complete works of Shakespeare: cat /dev/random (may take some time)
6. Re:This thing... by Ol+Biscuitbarrel · 2013-03-01 05:57 · Score: 3, Funny
  
  BigDog: PLEASE PUT DOWN THE SNAUSAGE. YOU HAVE 20 SECONDS TO COMPLY.
  (drops gun)
  BigDog: YOU NOW HAVE 15 SECONDS TO COMPLY.
  what could possibly go wrong?
  FTFY
7. Re:This thing... by geekoid · 2013-03-01 06:01 · Score: 1
  
  I like how OmniCrop overlooks the real money maker. The freaking power supply.
  
  --
  The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
8. Re:This thing... by KhabaLox · 2013-03-01 06:33 · Score: 2
  
  Do android dogs dream of electric mailmen?
  
  --
  Ceci n'est pas un sig.
Ob. Brockman by JeanCroix · 2013-03-01 02:43 · Score: 1

I, for one, welcome our new cinderblock-chucking quadrupedal robotic overl-- OW, MY FOOT!
1. Re:Ob. Brockman by ByOhTek · 2013-03-01 03:21 · Score: 3, Funny
  
  Ath leath ith juth hith your footh...
  
  --
  Self proclaimed typo king, and inventor of the bear destroying coffee table (patent not pending).
RWAAAAAAAAAH!!! by TWX · 2013-03-01 02:44 · Score: 1

I love how the "mouth" looks like it's growling/howling in fury and triumph with its "head" held high after throwing the block...

--
Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
1. Re:RWAAAAAAAAAH!!! by boristdog · 2013-03-01 02:47 · Score: 1
  
  As someone else said in another thread: "If I saw this coming at me I would run away screaming, while pooping myself."
video by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-01 02:46 · Score: 2, Informative

Video of the cinder block toss by Big Dog.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2jvLalY6ubc
And a Rick Astley video, well just because it was tempting....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lyViVmaBQDg
1. Re:video by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-01 03:06 · Score: 0
  
  which was scarier?
2. Re:video by pushing-robot · 2013-03-01 04:51 · Score: 1
  
  And a Rick Astley video, well just because it was tempting....
  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lyViVmaBQDg
  Wow. That actually DID lead to Rick Astley.
  Few have ever achieved the legendary Reverse-Reverse Rickroll. I bow before your masterful trolling skill.
  
  --
  How can I believe you when you tell me what I don't want to hear?
Teaching an old dog new tricks? by K.+S.+Kyosuke · 2013-03-01 02:57 · Score: 1

It only confirms the old proverb; if you absolutely have to make him a Zaphod Beebledog in order to do that, it shows how difficult it is!

--
Ezekiel 23:20
The Terminator by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-01 02:57 · Score: 0

Here it comes!! This is the beginning of the end for humanity. A cinderblock-hurling machine is how it starts--machines that are a lot stronger than humans....
1. Re:The Terminator by durrr · 2013-03-01 03:05 · Score: 2
  
  An industrial robot from 2000 could've decapitated three people with the cinderblock and in the same swing thrown it twice as far.
  Cinderblock throwing have never really been any industry metric of robot strength though, but they've been very strong for a long while.
2. Re:The Terminator by bev_tech_rob · 2013-03-01 03:29 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  Yes, but those machines are securely bolted to the floor and have maximum leverage. They weren't walking on legs at the same time and have to deal with balancing themselves whilst throwing the block..
  
  --
  You're messin' with my Zen Thing, man.....
3. Re:The Terminator by GreenTom · 2013-03-01 08:24 · Score: 1
  
  If I had mod points, +1 funny for "Cinderblock throwing have never really been any industry metric..."
Your Leg Here by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-01 02:58 · Score: 0

It would have been much more dramatic if it was lifting up a big hunk of meat and tossing it - implying that would be your limb or some chunk of your body, if BigDog had taken a bite out of it.
1. Re:Your Leg Here by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-01 03:14 · Score: 0
  
  I would have been more impressive it it had just started humping someone's leg with its big hunk of meat. Then it'd be like a real dog.
2. Re:Your Leg Here by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-01 03:29 · Score: 0
  
  Someone will attach a red rocket to its undercarriage, I'm sure.
you want the blocks? by alexs001 · 2013-03-01 02:59 · Score: 2

come get the blocks, and don't f*** with me!
It's the law by Fuzzums · 2013-03-01 02:59 · Score: 1

Since there is no practical use in construction for a robot like this, we can probably say goodbye to the three laws.

--
Privacy is terrorism.
1. Re:It's the law by bev_tech_rob · 2013-03-01 03:32 · Score: 1
  
  Actually it would be very practical! Put a hopper on top of that thing so it can load and haul a few blocks at a time and it would be invaluable to a masonry worker for fetching blocks for a job instead of a helper or the masonry person him/herself having to haul them....would be very handy...
  
  --
  You're messin' with my Zen Thing, man.....
2. Re:It's the law by peragrin · 2013-03-01 07:18 · Score: 1
  
  I can see hundreds of uses for a robot that can pick up heavy objects move over unimproved, uneven, terrain including stairs. And set it back down again.
  Heck even if I have to plug it into a job site generator it would be useful.
  Of course it would put another 20% of the work force out of jobs but who cares
  
  --
  i thought once I was found, but it was only a dream.
How large would it be on battery power? by WillAdams · 2013-03-01 03:00 · Score: 1

What sort of current is in-flowing through those cables?
Will that chassis support batteries which will make the thing function? If so, for how long? What's the recharge time?
Until the robots are running on some sort of power which allows dynamic recharge and sustained off-grid operations, all one has to do is outrun them until their batteries run down.

--
Sphinx of black quartz, judge my vow.
1. Re:How large would it be on battery power? by durrr · 2013-03-01 03:08 · Score: 2
  
  That chassis supports batteries since 2008 when they demonstrated the fucking thing in their parking lot. And if not batteries it could probably run with a diesel generator.
  The cables are there because
  1.It's easier to develop a device that you can run without swapping batteries all the time
  2. Support cables to prevent it from falling over when you test and fine tune the movement algorithms
2. Re:How large would it be on battery power? by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-01 03:14 · Score: 0
  
  Obviously this is the first you've heard of Big Dog. Heck just watch some of the other videos on their channel. This thing is already in use by the military. What you see here is a lab environment, if it's just testing why constantly charge and recharge batteries when you can just plug in?
3. Re:How large would it be on battery power? by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-01 03:20 · Score: 0
  
  it utilizes a gasoline motor (like a hybrid) in other videos
4. Re:How large would it be on battery power? by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-01 03:50 · Score: 0
  
  What sort of current is in-flowing through those cables?
  Will that chassis support batteries which will make the thing function? If so, for how long? What's the recharge time?
  Until the robots are running on some sort of power which allows dynamic recharge and sustained off-grid operations, all one has to do is outrun them until their batteries run down.
  teen invents compact nuclear reactor
  If robodog's internals get smaller and so does this power source...
5. Re:How large would it be on battery power? by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-01 04:16 · Score: 0
  
  Big dog is hydraulically powered, so the current flowing through those cables could be 3000 psi hydraulic fluid at god knows what flow rate. This is also one of the reasons it takes up so much power as hydraulics aren't that efficient.
  Untethered, it uses a gasoline engine to drive a hydraulic pump, which is responsible for the buzzing noise you hear in the videos.
6. Re:How large would it be on battery power? by dywolf · 2013-03-01 04:19 · Score: 1
  
  those cables are more to support the robot in testing so it doesnt fall over.
  the Dog has run on its own power source for years.
  
  --
  The guy who said the election was rigged won the presidency with the second-most votes.
7. Re:How large would it be on battery power? by lxs · 2013-03-01 04:32 · Score: 1
  
  What sort of current is in-flowing through those cables?
  That cinder block weights what? 20 kg?
  It throws it about 2 meters high in half a second...
  This gives a power output of 0.5 * 20 * 9.8 * 2 = 196 W Let's assume that there are inefficiencies and I guessed low on height and weight so peak output would be in the ballpark of 1kW
  Say it's powered by a car battery.
  A car battery is about 40Ah at 12V = 480Wh or 0.5 kWh
  So by my wildly inaccurate Friday afternoon calculations it could chuck rocks for two hours before it runs down. Although I think I recall a video of Big Dog with a small gasoline powered generator on board. So when it comes for you, you either have to shoot the gas tank or hide in a tall tree. I bet someone here could produce a better guesstimate.
8. Re:How large would it be on battery power? by lxs · 2013-03-01 04:43 · Score: 1
  
  make that 30 minutes.
9. Re:How large would it be on battery power? by geekoid · 2013-03-01 06:27 · Score: 1
  
  3) so it doesn't get loose during a test and chase you down like a dog.
  
  --
  The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
10. Re:How large would it be on battery power? by GreenTom · 2013-03-01 08:25 · Score: 2
  
  you forgot 3. If it goes crazy and starts trying to kill everyone, it looses power after a few feet.
Chunking overlords by PlusFiveTroll · 2013-03-01 03:02 · Score: 2

Once it can throw chairs, Balmer should worry about keeping his job.
1. Re:Chunking overlords by Sulphur · 2013-03-01 07:44 · Score: 1
  
  Once it can throw chairs, Balmer should worry about keeping his job.
  Right now it would destroy cinder block furniture.
Regarding the "three laws" by nu1x · 2013-03-01 03:02 · Score: 1

The "three laws" (or equivalent) will apply to every robot made NOT for the US army.

--
I have nothing to lose but my bindings.
1. Re:Regarding the "three laws" by durrr · 2013-03-01 03:27 · Score: 1
  
  The three laws apply to no robots at all, because they aren't intelligent enough to dynamically apply them. Not to mention even understand them.
2. Re:Regarding the "three laws" by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-01 08:45 · Score: 0
  
  No. The three laws apply to no robots at all because IT WAS A FREAKING SCI-FI NOVEL!! Geez, get out of mom's basement once in a while!!!
When did WWIII Happen? by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-01 03:02 · Score: 0

I missed it World War III happened and now we at the point of throwing stones at each other.
Coming soon...Ballmerbot! by Camaro · 2013-03-01 03:03 · Score: 1

That can grab, lift and throw chairs!
Oblig. XKCD by WillAdams · 2013-03-01 03:04 · Score: 1

Robot Apocalypse
What if there was a robot apocalypse? How long would humanity last?
http://what-if.xkcd.com/5/
Even got a mention on Forbes.
William

--
Sphinx of black quartz, judge my vow.
1. Re:Oblig. XKCD by TWX · 2013-03-01 03:26 · Score: 1
  
  What that comes down to, is that humans don't *need* electrical power to merely function. We certainly *like* electrical power, but if it were us versus computers/robots, cut the power, the batteries only last so long, then disassemble them.
  
  Even if they're guarding all of the power stations and somehow manage to operate them without humans (which is currently impossible), there's absolutely no way to guard all of the power distribution.
  
  And to my knowledge, the only autonomous robot that I am aware of that is in any way widespread that runs and charges without human intervention is the Roomba. I'm not exactly worried about a Roomba, no would I be too worried by a lawnmower equivalent.
  
  --
  Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
2. Re:Oblig. XKCD by geekoid · 2013-03-01 06:22 · Score: 1
  
  but they could build more very quickly and take over other facilities.
  of course, if the are smart, they will just release nerve agents and radioactive dust into the air.
  There are a lot of things humans do we could replace with robots if we wanted to. right now, we don't want to.
  "somehow manage to operate them without humans (which is currently impossible),"
  ehhh, maybe, maybe not. SCADA system automatically hand almost all of the utilities.
  Humans punch buttons,. the robots to much of the other work.
  We don't currently have a robot that can walk through a facility to check for leaks...but if we wanted to completely automate leak detection, we could.
  hmm. Now I'm really thinking about it.
  How much for the repair process can we automate right now?
  Lets say we need to keep a power plant running.
  A automated CNC machine makes parts.
  A robot arm drops it onto an automated conveyor belt.
  The belt takes it to an automated inspection system
  It drops it into the appropriate bin.
  When it has the correct number of pieces, the until roll onto a truck.
  When the truck detects it's full, it automatically drives to the power plant that needs the parts.
  The bin can the roll off the truck and to the storage area.
  a similar storage system could deliver the part to where ever needs repair.
  All those thing exist and are being used in the world right now, just not put together throughout an entire chain, yet.
  Now we see a unit that can walk itself anywhere and use an arm.
  The Roomba prove the 'self charging' issue us solved. it was solve in the 50s, btw.
  The big issue preventing this is internal power supplies. .. or the ability to send power effectively through the air to charge these large objects.
  
  --
  The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
3. Re:Oblig. XKCD by Spiridios · 2013-03-01 06:35 · Score: 1
  
  What that comes down to, is that humans don't *need* electrical power to merely function. We certainly *like* electrical power, but if it were us versus computers/robots, cut the power, the batteries only last so long, then disassemble them.
  This part of your post made me think of something: while we certainly *like* electrical and gas power for a lot of convenience and we can certainly live without watching the latest popular TV show, we do sorta depend on it for food. I suppose most farm equipment is still mostly mechanical powered by gas/diesel, but I don't think we can continue to feed 7 billion people without the help of machines. I don't think this affects our outcome in a robot revolution, just something interesting that your post induced.
4. Re:Oblig. XKCD by vlpronj · 2013-03-01 07:41 · Score: 1
  
  "Even if they're guarding all of the power stations and somehow manage to operate them without humans (which is currently impossible), there's absolutely no way to guard all of the power distribution." Even Stephen King could figure out a problem there (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maximum_Overdrive) "In the storm of bullets, Hendershot, Wanda June, and three of the truck drivers are fatally gunned down. Then the military vehicle begins beeping its horn in a morse code message which Deke translates as "Someone must pump fuel. Someone will not be harmed. All fuel must be pumped." When the power for the building comes on again, Bill decides to turn on the pumps, despite Brett's protests not to trust the trucks. Bill points out that they have to with the military vehicle's presence. Over most of the day, in 100F degree heat, Bill, Brett, Deke, Curtis, and a few others take turns venturing outside and refuling all the trucks, plus hundreds more trucks that arrive at the Dixie Boy to refuel. When the fuel runs out, a driverless tanker truck appears and beckons Bill to refill the truck stop's fuel tanks to continue the refueling."
Big Dog now Little Elephant by flyingfsck · 2013-03-01 03:06 · Score: 1

They should rename it.

--
Excuse me, but please get off my Pennisetum Clandestinum, eh!
1. Re:Big Dog now Little Elephant by Spiridios · 2013-03-01 06:36 · Score: 1
  
  More like little apatosaurus, if you consider the gripping bit a mouth.
Bad dog! by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-01 03:09 · Score: 0

Bad dog, that's not how we play fetch!
Video with better audio here by spiritplumber · 2013-03-01 03:10 · Score: 1, Funny

Video with better audio here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p6L6MhSgpgo That's exttremely impressive. I wonder how much it costs though...

--
Liberty - Security - Laziness - Pick any two.
1. Re:Video with better audio here by your_neighbor · 2013-03-01 03:55 · Score: 1
  
  fail?
neat! by HPHatecraft · 2013-03-01 03:16 · Score: 1

In the ruins of WWIII, this will be the perfect appliance for taking the charred rubble from a radioactive landscape, and using it to besiege the last, stubborn remnants of humanity in a bid for total, and complete annihilation of the "enemy" (little did we know the enemy was within(!!!)). OR it could be used to help kind old ladies across the street. Really, I'm guessing the latter.
Seriously. What the hell?
1. Re:neat! by durrr · 2013-03-01 03:37 · Score: 2
  
  The real application is obviously dwarftossing
2. Re:neat! by Remus+Shepherd · 2013-03-01 04:29 · Score: 1
  
  If you're tossing the old ladies across the street in a parabolic arc, I don't think that qualifies as 'helping'.
  
  --
  Genocide Man -- Life is funny. Death is funnier. Mass murder can be hilarious.
3. Re:neat! by fyngyrz · 2013-03-01 04:45 · Score: 1
  
  You never met my grandmother.
  
  --
  I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
4. Re:neat! by idontgno · 2013-03-01 05:12 · Score: 1
  
  You're using an inappropriate, non-robotic, definition of help.
  
  --
  Welcome to the Panopticon. Used to be a prison, now it's your home.
Two arms are better than one by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-01 03:23 · Score: 0

Give it two arms, and it can throw grenades, rifles and hold a bow and arrow, not forgetting being able to fire two revolvers at the same time.
1. Re:Two arms are better than one by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-01 03:43 · Score: 1
  
  and it can throw grenades, rifles and hold a bow and arrow
  I suspect it would be more effective to fire the rifle, rather than throwing it. Unless of course, it's fighting Superman.
fire control by RichMan · 2013-03-01 03:43 · Score: 1

I'd be more impressed with some heavy weapons and fire call interfaces.
Mortar and anti-vehicle missles controlled by google-glass type interfaces on human scouts.
Also let big dog launch a couple of aerial drones also linked in.
We need a robot that can move cinder blocks... by bigtech · 2013-03-01 03:43 · Score: 1

and injure innocent bystanders. What have you got?
1. Re:We need a robot that can move cinder blocks... by geekoid · 2013-03-01 06:26 · Score: 1
  
  It could throw shirt into the crowd of a monster truck rally!
  Anyways I look forward to hearing this thing laugh as it chases me and throw gernades my way~
  
  --
  The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
That isn't an arm. by John+Hasler · 2013-03-01 04:03 · Score: 1

It's a neck, head, and jaws. Add some weight to the head and approporiate "musculature" to the neck and the machine could learn to gallop.
It still needs to learn how to stand dynamically without prancing, though.

--
Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
1. Re:That isn't an arm. by pushing-robot · 2013-03-01 04:42 · Score: 4, Funny
  
  I firmly believe that the US military's focus on monotheistic cultures, coupled with the USMC and DARPA's involvement in Boston Dynamics, points to a vast and intricate conspiracy, facilitated by the US government, to engineer a scenario where CNN will one day show people running through the streets amidst screams of "Oh My God! Ponies!"
  Honestly, it's a textbook Illuminati hazing ritual.
  
  --
  How can I believe you when you tell me what I don't want to hear?
2. Re:That isn't an arm. by John+Hasler · 2013-03-01 04:47 · Score: 1
  
  Mod parent up.
  
  --
  Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
Interesting by kilodelta · 2013-03-01 05:03 · Score: 1

When they do the high speed video of the thing - notice the flickering exit sign.
1. Re:Interesting by drinkypoo · 2013-03-01 06:14 · Score: 1
  
  When they do the high speed video of the thing - notice the flickering exit sign.
  I haven't watched the video, my connection is crap and I'm downloading right now, but most LED signs on the market today seem to have LEDs in them.
  
  --
  "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Of course. by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-01 05:43 · Score: 0

When I throw cinder blocks, I take a running start, too.
I, for one welcome the reverse by geekoid · 2013-03-01 06:03 · Score: 1

game of fetch our robotic dog overlords wile make us play.
"Lets See How You Like Eating The Same Thing EveryDay, HUMANZ!"

--
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
also EXIT signs by drinkypoo · 2013-03-01 06:16 · Score: 1

This is what I get for not pressing the correct button. My latency was surprisingly low at that moment, I stabbed for the escape key rather quickly.

--
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Dear Boston Dynamics by ThatsNotPudding · 2013-03-01 06:29 · Score: 1

Dear Boston Dynamics (aka Cyberdyne Systems):

Stopitstopitstopitstopitstopitstopitstopitstopitstopitstopit.

#UnintendedConsequenceBlock
why not add wheels? by Khashishi · 2013-03-01 07:00 · Score: 1

in addition to the legs. That way, it could use wheeled transport on flat terrain and legs on rough terrain.
1. Re:why not add wheels? by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-01 08:48 · Score: 0
  
  and that kinda thinking is why you're a sys admin and not working for Boston Dynamics.
2. Re:why not add wheels? by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-01 17:09 · Score: 0
  
  Because seeing non-living things "walk" creeps living things out. It's an uncanny valley thing.
  Speaking of uncanny valleys, it's easier to navigate a valley with legs than it is on wheels.
Obligatory Bionic Reference by amacbride · 2013-03-01 07:13 · Score: 1

The slow-mo shots reminded me of this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hI24QTOQPtA
Actually A Head by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-01 07:42 · Score: 0

The interpretation by the author of this article that this machine is equipped with "an arm where a head (or tail) would go" is quite incorrect.
The appendage that we see is equivalent to a head (albeit with a long neck). The machine manipulates the cinder block using "jaws" in the same manner as would any dog, hyena, or other similar mammal.
To consider this appendage to be an "arm" is a misplaced fancy.
Re:$10,000 CHALLENGE to Alexander Peter Kowalski by MatrixCubed · 2013-03-01 07:42 · Score: 1

Your ideas are intriguing to me, and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.
Perfect name for this "athlete" by Sigg3.net · 2013-03-01 23:29 · Score: 1

is Armstrong, of course.

--
Defining Statistics and Social Research