Slashdot Mirror
Boston Dynamics Wildcat Can Gallop — No Strings Attached
Boston Dynamics has been making eye-catching (and sort of creepy) military-oriented robots for several years, and we've noted several times the Big Dog utility robot. The newest creation is the untethered, gas-powered Wildcat; this is definitely not something I want chasing after me. (Not as fast as the previous, tethered version — yet.)
Kinda reminds me of my ex, actually. Fast, noisy, high maintenance.
Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
Why not just use a horse? Costs less, more reliable, powered by renewable resources ... the horse.
great to recreate a horse ... but engineering is NOT bound by natural selection ... why not innovate? perhaps it's a fundamental issue with how engineers think?
You can't order a horse to carry gear to specified coordinates unattended. Horses don't climb rough terrain particularly well either.
I am becoming gerund, destroyer of verbs.
Whereas this thing trips over itself on a flat surface and has a step height of a few inches, making it far better for rough terrain.
If we're talking about the WildCat video, it looked like the front right leg joint broke when it fell, not that it tripped. If that's the case, it's just an engineering problem to reinforce that joint.
"Total destruction the only solution" - Bob Marley
...really smart people creating things - "war machines" to be blunt - that will wind up killing someone on some battlefield somewhere (probably the Middle East and North Africa). If BD were creating robotic devices for peaceful purposes - a "dog" for the blind, a robot that can do some old lady's shopping for her - then I would be applauding the effort/brilliance on display here. But building clever war machines? Sorry, but this isn't something intelligent, conscientious people would even dream of working on. So its "boo combat robots" for Boston Dynamics from me, rather than "yay cool robots"... My 2 Cents. Feel free to disagree...
Why did the chicken cross the road? Because Elon Musk put an AI chip in its head.
Looks scary -- but at least you'd hear it coming.
I wouldn't want it chasing after me either - I would probably die from laughter.
Signature intentionally left blank.
Call me when it's powered by unobtainium and shoots lasers from its eyes and energy bolts from its tail.
Only the dead have seen the end of War. - Plato
Horses were better than early cars. So they shouldn't have developed cars?
I could see advanced legged robots being useful in search & rescue in rough terrain, unexploded ordinance disposal (think IEDs), and several other applications. I'd like to take some of this company's robots and engineers out to our training area, Disaster City.
Loud? It's an engineering prototype. The idea is to get it running first, then worry about the non-essential stuff like mufflers, armor, weapons, storage racks, etc.
John
Obey the government or they'll set one of these on you.
Or at least use it to guard against all those pesky WWII vets spoiling Obama's meme.
I for one welcome our military petrol-powered gigantic robot flea overlords.
A latent existence
...in a creepy sort of way.
Python: 'And then suddenly you have a language which says "we're all stuck with whatever the whiniest coder wants".'
Horses actually require a lot of support in terms of food compared to mechanized units.
Because what you think of as a "horse knee" isn't a horse's knee.
Google for an image of a horse skeleton, and compare its bones to your own. In another tab, google image for a horse. Look at where the joint between the humerus and radius bones is at (in humans that is the elbow), and what that point actually looks like on the horse. Do the same for the joint between the femur and tibia (a human knee).
Basically, what you think of as 'knees' in quadrupeds are equivalent to our wrists and ankles. What you consider their 'lower legs' is equivalent to our hands and feet. And what you consider to be their 'feet' is equivalent to our fingers and toes, and even our finger- and toenails for the hoofed animals.
With all that said, yes it does look like an animal with no head or tail is running ass-first.
If you think I voted for Trump because of this post, you're wrong. I voted for Dr. Jill Stein of the Green Party. Again.
I would argue that developing forms of robotics for the battlefield (autonomous or not) has a huge potential to reduce hostility. Decision making on the battlefield in person has to take into consideration enemies, civilians and friendlies, and a naturally increased hostility is present due to the personal risk involved. With robots you can forget about the personal risk forget about friendlies and concentrate on separating civilians from hostiles, it makes combat one dimension simpler.
Also robots can be sent into situations that would be suicidal, plain immoral, or not physically possible for human soldiers... go down this street with enemies hiding amongst civilians and don't shoot until you get really close because your more likely to kill a civilian, that's not really a situation you can send a human into successfully without ether huge risk to civilians or a huge risk to friendlies.
It's a sharp tool that can be used far more accurately than a blunt one such as a bomb. Something that is likely to stop stupid military decisions like preemptive strikes with massive civilian casualties, because there is another option.
I'm not saying i trust the hands of whoever these tools end up in, but the potential for good is as great as the potential for bad as with most technology.
Can we please try to make the content behind the links more transparent in the future? I'd like to know which one is the new story without having to scan through them all.
This. Horses are a real PITA in the field. Fuel is bulky, they're heavy. Hard to drop out of planes (successfully anyway). They don't always do what you want them to do (Whoa Nelly!). They resent being shot at or blown up.
Of course, these aren't all that practical yet. It's basically electronic animal 101. But BD has some impressively cool tech. Their big problem is the energy source. Internal combustion engines are just so 20th century.
Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
Maybe they'll get with Tesla, and put an all-day lithium pack in one.
If you think I voted for Trump because of this post, you're wrong. I voted for Dr. Jill Stein of the Green Party. Again.
The knees all face forward, which is the same as most animals I know of. The knees on a horse all face forward too. Here's an image:
http://www.horses-healthy-balance.com/1_31_3_patella-problems-in-horses-and-dogs.html
Same goes for cats. You're probably confusing the horse's ankle/heel with its knee. On animals like horses and cats, there is no "heel" like on a human; that part on the rear leg is raised far off the ground, and only their toes (or toe, in the case of a horse) actually rest on the ground.
I'm surprised by people who see this and immediately think terminators and war machines. Why is it that when I saw this I thought "land transport". I imagine one of those things carrying me from home to work every day, assuming I'm sitting in an actuated capsule that compensates for the galloping. Until some issues are figured out, electric cars and high-speed rail will do the trick, but I think this is the future for land transport. Unlike electric cars these babies can JUMP at crossings thus eliminating the need to slow down or stop.
It is designed closer to a Sheep and even runs like sheep do. I really would like to see them make one like a cat that can run, crouch and leap like a cat can. then we will have something that is fearsome.
Imagine that thing leaping a 60 foot ditch at you.
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
You mean like you can do with a helicopter?
Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
Maybe we should invest in researching mind-control helmets for donkeys, then.
Okay, that was a joke, but perhaps an automated mechanical rider (that operated the reins and stirrups) would almost be practical...
"[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz
You can build and train horses pretty fast. Horses are quite happy to fuck each other, so if you have enough pregnant mares, after a couple years lead time you will have horses coming out of your ass. Plus the "trainers" don't need a highly specialized skillset. People have been riding and using horses for thousands of years. It's really not that complicated.
Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
Helicopters aren't easy to hide. That's why they have a habit of getting shot down a lot, particularly when they operate in the daytime. The purpose the Boston Dynamics quadrapeds are being developed for is to provide additional load carrying for troops operating in difficult terrain. Otherwise you'd just use wheeled vehicles (although they also sacrifice stealthiness by kicking up dust).
I am becoming gerund, destroyer of verbs.
So whenever I read about things like this, my initial reaction is "what are they thinking?" followed by abject disgust for anyone involved in the project.
WTF? Turn in your (wo)man card. Like an overpowered sports car or a gun that shoots through schools, the outrageously excessive badassery of this thing has an appeal all its own.
For every smoking clanking roaring polluting autonomous quadruped you refuse to build, I'm going to build two.
You complain about how fuel for horses is bulky, then object to using an internal combustion engine (which runs on the most convenient fuel known to mankind)? That does not make sense.
"[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz
You can't order a horse to carry gear to specified coordinates unattended. Horses don't climb rough terrain particularly well either.
No, but maybe you could add a GPS system and a couple of servos to pull on the reins like a real rider would.
It would be a lot cheaper/quieter than this thing...
No sig today...
I really would like to see them make one like a cat that can run, crouch and leap like a cat can. then we will have something that is fearsome.
That requires a different approach to control than the one they're using. All the Boston Dynamics quadruped robots start up by trotting in place, then extending the stride.
So were large battery packs. Technology just hasn't realized it yet.
while(1) attack(People.Sandy);
To hell with that. If we're remote-controlling horses/donkeys, lets not recreate a human-horse interface. Lets create a machine-horse interface. Maybe something like a headset that gives sound-commands indicating range and direction binaurally. That way the horse can follow along a set of waypoints. Give it a 2-way radio, and we can send updated orders, and can get status updates on progress.
The whole setup will be quieter and longer-range with a longer possible mission time.
You can't order a horse to carry gear to specified coordinates unattended. Horses don't climb rough terrain particularly well either.
unlike mules...
"Maybe we should invest in researching mind-control helmets for donkeys,"
Because congress would kill funding thinking it would be used on them.
"Because the robot is loyal to whomever sets it up, one rogue billionaire can buy up a robot army and conquer his choice of any number of banana republics that he wants. ... So a single man to conquer a nation wouldn't be unheard of. In fact no one might even know who is the man who conquered their country."
Good points in theory Something related I created:
"The richest man in the world: A parable about robotics, abundance, technological change, unemployment, happiness, and a basic income.":
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p14bAe6AzhA
I met Mark Raibert in the mid-1980s while hanging out at CMU when he was just getting going with robots that hopped on one leg. He's come along way the past quarter century. Much of the robotics work at CMU then (as probably now) was funded by the military. I've been thinking about these sorts of social and economic aspects of robotics ever since. See my website for more related ideas.
BTW, in practice, as was noted by someone else in a comment to another story a week or so ago, it is far easier to design robots that kill all humans (like based on heat signature and shape) than to design robots that distinguish some humans from others.
A 21st century issue: the irony of technologies of abundance in the hands of those still thinking in terms of scarcity.
"I'd like to take some of this company's robots and engineers out to our training area, Disaster City."
Which Disaster City? There's quite a few just in the USA alone.
You can't store horse unmaintained in a warehouse.
You can't drop a horse by parachute out of the back of a cargo plane.
Horse have to be trained individually.
Right, because this is the kind of thing you should think of when considering a stealthy approach
I guess you could remove vocal chords or something. but for that matter, I'm quite sure that someone has already considering the noise of the demo robot and noise cancellation features would be included on a production model (or, you know, don't power it with a lawnmower engine).
Someone flopped a steamer in the gene pool.
Sorry, I don't buy it. This thing is the antithesis of stealthy. When it's moving it's constantly bouncing up and down and can be heard from the next valley. So to actually move your troops anywhere, they have to telegraph their position. Any kind of pack mule is infinitely superior to this monstrosity in the situation you describe.
They're still working on the software and hardware to perfect moving like a animal. Stealth comes later. This obviously has no practical purpose yet and your retort makes no sense.
Huh...
They invented the rat thing.
Though admittedly a huge, noisy, much slower and significantly less radioactive rat thing.
Still though...
Admit nothing. Deny Everything. Make Counter-accusations.
And now I'm imagining a horde of Goatse-inspired warbots charging the enemy ass first, making a drawn-out farting sound and attempting to entrap them in that gaping maw.
Thanks.
Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.
It's a *prototype*. The power supply can be rengineered to use something other than an IC engine in the future.
I am becoming gerund, destroyer of verbs.
What's your point? Mules can't climb everything a man can either. Maybe the US Gov. should start a program to breed militarized, obedient pack mountain goats to keep you satisfied.
I am becoming gerund, destroyer of verbs.
TEEX, Texas Engineering Extension Service.
Helicopters got known as mobile weapon platforms because they were easy to hide. You fly in *under* the terrain (not subterranean, but under the peaks in that area, and possibly even below treetop level, some were known to have followed roads cut through forests), then pop up to shoot missiles, then drop below the terrain before return fire can be brought to bear.
The problem with helicopters is that small arms can bring them down. A helicopter armored to the level of an A-10 will not get off the ground. The mule is the UGV. Deliver ordinance to a location unmanned and without human risk. As a support vehicle, they are not yet ready for prime-time.
Learn to love Alaska
But only the Democrats.
Learn to love Alaska
It's the back legs that go the wrong way. But I agree it looks odd.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
I thought the noise was a safety feature, to warn people to get the fuck out of the way of the infernal contraption.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
Real riders steer with their legs.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
...and in ways that aren't to your advantage.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
I suspect the energy density of gasoline/diesel is somewhat higher than that of hay.
Plus you need to feed a horse all the time, not just when it's working.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
Penguins! Form square! At 100 yards, volley fire, present...
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
The first cars were slower and more error prone than horses. Yet, we persisted and improved until cars are much much better than horses. I remember helping friends ranching in the '80s. Horses everywhere. Then I moved out of the US. Dogs are used to manage most animals, and motorbikes are the standard ranch tool of choice in place of horses. A motorbike can carry more weight for longer than a horse. And a motorbike can cover more varied terrain than a horse (though not both at the same time).
There's a value in the "unmanned" you are missing. Picture 10,000 of them with the coordinates of the forward line programmed in. When the infantry is digging in and preparing for the counter-attack, the mules show up, refueling, rearming, and feeding them. The supply lines are the weakest part of most armies (and the US understanding of that and focus on supply one of the reasons it dominates, not the cool gadgets that take most of the budget). And an automated mule would (well enough of them, anyway) let almost anyone take and hold something they otherwise couldn't.
Learn to love Alaska
Please realize that in the real world there are real people who really want to kill you. If they could, they would roll right into America, claim all its land and natural resources as their own, and kill anyone and everyone who inconveniences them.
If this were not the case, things would be different. But this is the case. There are real threats in the world, and they require real defenses. In order for the defenses to be effective, they must be able to efficiently utilize lethal force.
If you disagree with that, on any grounds, then you are simply daft.
If you don't have a problem with human military force, then I will ask you, what is your problem with maximizing the safety of our own soldiers? It is noble of them to put their lives on the line to protect ours.....but if we can build machines which they can operate from a safe distance away, don't we owe it to them to do this? What sense does it make for us to demand that our family members march right into an active battle when they could send a remote-controlled force instead? If you think there is some moral obligation to put ourselves at greater risk than necessary, you are insane.
I will concede that killer robots represent a technology that could be abused. *EVERY* technology can be abused. Potential abuse is not in-and-of-itself an argument for squelching it. Potential abuse (of any technology, including living, breathing, obedient soldiers), is an argument for transparency and accountability. And, a very strong one at that. But it is NOT an argument for the rejection of otherwise useful and effective technologies.
Lastly, if your country doesn't develop these things, eventually someone else will. Are you sure you want to be at a disadvantage like that?
Seriously. Get real.
It's a *prototype*. The power supply can be rengineered to use something other than an IC engine in the future.
Figuring that one out will be a world changer.
Everything I've seen released about the shutdown, nothing indicates that the order was given as executed by those doing the work. It's as likely that an Obama-hater tried to go overboard to smear Obama. Leaving it wide open for Republican Congressmen to come over and move barriers for photo-ops, rather than crafting bills to end or voting on bills to end the shutdown.
There was a budget agreement in place, but it was sabotaged by anti-ACA Republicans. Obama has done nothing to cause or prevent the shutdown, he hasn't been given anything to sign or veto. Not like Clinton's shutdown, where he vetoed bills he didn't like, until 28 days later, one was put in front of him he was willing to sign.
Learn to love Alaska
While you are so interested in all those measures, the people walking next to it have shot you and strung you up. It's "better" than having a Hummer following with the same stuff in it. Maybe. Or will be shortly.
Learn to love Alaska
It's a *prototype*. The power supply can be rengineered to use something other than an IC engine in the future.
Hay?
The enemy doesn't spend hours making snares for pack mules. As you say, that's a fucking stupid idea. They are much more likely to just attack you and your friends.
Learn to love Alaska
No, for rough terrain you want a mule, not a horse.
https://encrypted.google.com/search?q=fahrenheit+451+hound
It's the onboard shield generators!
This clip totally needs the Six Million Dollar Men theme: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=chPanW0QWhA#t=52
Why does it always have to be weapons? Why can't it just deliver pizzas or groceries autonomously?
this is my sig
I consulted Wikipedia about bone names: in a cat (and many outer quadrupeds) the tarsal joint forms what is the "knee" in our legs, and the metatarsals are the lowest segment of the leg. The joint happens to point backwards, and consequently it looks "right" to us, and a robot with its knees pointing forward looks "creepy".
The Boson Dynamics people obviously found that it's somehow beneficial to have that joint pointing forward rather than backward, and they have the freedom to engineer it that way. Nature doesn't have that freedom: Evolution frequently "chooses" second-best solutions where the "design penalty" is small, because evolution always works in infinitesimal steps, there is no chance of atop-to bottom rewrite, the process doesn't cater for that.
Take that, "Intelligent Design" believers.
The robot overlords have no need to hide. The terminators will not be powered by tiny nuclear reactors, fuel cells or lithium batteries. No, they will be powered by 2-stroke chainsaw motors.
That would be a *WOOOOSH* Here's a hint: Think of the Party Mascots.
If you were doing that, then you'd develop a wheeled vehicle since in most civilian places where pizzas and groceries are available, there are roads and wheeled vehicles can go faster and more efficiently than ones with legs.
Oolite: Elite-like game. For Mac, Linux and Windows
The problem isn't that it runs on the most convenient fuel around. It's that 90%+ of the energy turns into waste heat.
Not that horses are better, but the efficiency of ICEs is terrible.
With the first link, the chain is forged.
I'm pretty sure the main attraction to the Wildcat is it could probably take a few more bullets than a horse and won't get scared by gun fire, snakes, fire or anything else. I don't know about you, but I've been around horses my whole life and know if a small piece of barbed wire can effectively end its life, it doesn't bring much to the table against something, (that when armored and ready for deployment), will shrug off most small weapons fire and keep on going.
Their big problem is the energy source. Internal combustion engines are just so 20th century.
Actually, they would have a big problem -- namely, abysmal energy density -- if they switched from internal combustion to batteries. The technology that best meets the mission requirements is the technology that should be used. Let's not have prejudices against the best-performing technology, simply because it also performed well in the 20th century.
That that is is that that that that is not is not.