Slashdot Mirror
Intel Offering 3-D Printed Robot Kits
jfruh writes Intel is developing a series of robot kits for hobbyists, ranging from "Jimmy", a $1,500 "social robot," to a more robust $16,000 model. The robots are powered by Intel x86 chips, are programmable, and can have exoskeletons parts produced at home by 3-D printers. From the article: "The two-legged Jimmy will be one in a line of robots that Intel hopes do-it-yourself enthusiasts will embrace, developing more functionality for the robots, which will be able to handle tasks such as turning on lights, picking up newspapers and even having conversations, researchers said at the Intel Future Showcase 2014 in New York City Tuesday. Intel and its robotics partners will sell kits with servo motors, batteries, boards, a frame and other internal parts. Using 3D printers, users can create robot designs and place them on the exoskeleton."
Robots are more about software than hardware. Though having smart hardware looks and feels good. Intel's success would be dependent on doing a good job on the software and making is user friendly.
September 17th, 2014: Paramedics free Florida man's penis from 3D printed robot.
These seem similar to the Nao, which is a line of small humanoid robots from France. About the same price point.
What you can do with them depends strongly on the sensors. If the joints are position-controlled only, and you don't have force feedback, locomotion and manipulation will be clunky. There are some simple robot components, such as 6 degree of freedom force sensors for wrists and ankles, which are insanely expensive today, because they're made by hand for research and industrial purposes.
If you have all that sensing, plus three axes of accelerometer and three axes of rate gyro, you should be able to get Boston Dynamics type agility out of the thing. If the DARPA Humanoid Challenge produces some usable open-source software, it should be possible to move that down to toy-sized robots.
If they don't make the files available I can categorize this with the growing number of companies who believe that I should pay for the files needed to print the same shit they design once and resell multiple times, something in my opinion that is unethical.
Elroy looked more like her than Jane.
How exactly is 1500-15000 worth of equipment 'hobbyists'? And that's on top of the money you've already spent on getting a 3d printer.
Then again, if you've got the disposable income to buy a 3d printer, just for fun, then I suppose these kits are equally cheap.
What would be nice would be if they could come up with *cheap* robots of this calibre. Like, a robotic version of the raspberry pi. That way those of us who arn't rich can still enjoy them and learn about more advanced robotics than a 3 wheeled soup can that follows lines.
They'd sell a lot more robots, if they looked like beautiful girls. Where is chobits technology already?
If telephones are outlawed, then only outlaws will have telephones.
contradict each other, but hey, more 3D printing hype!
Robots! (breath! breath! pant! pant!) Cars! We'll 3D print organs and cars and houses and colonize Jupiter!
Summary: You're buying a completely mass-manufactured robot and you can 3D print the equivalent of baby shoes hanging from the rear-view mirror.
But hey, 3D printed robot.
http://www.3ders.org/articles/20140529-intel-expects-to-launch-3d-printed-robot-jimmy-later-this-year.html
More specifically, Intel has a TERRIBLE reputation in 2 areas:
1) Announcing something when it is far from finished.
2) Producing "consumer" items no one wants.
Examples:
2001: Intel closing consumer electronics unit
2011: Intel drops smart TV to focus on smartphones, tablets and thin laptops
Some experiences:
In 2012, I was visiting an Intel web page. A pop-up asked me to take a survey. I said yes. I mentioned several management problems at Intel. I said that the problems at Intel started at the top. For example, the then CEO, Paul Otellini had paid $6 billion for McAfee. I said that, in my opinion, McAfee software was worse than useless, that McAfee had no connection with Intel's business, and that the $6 billion was entirely wasted. (Last week I mentioned McAfee anti-virus software to a programmer acquaintance who works for a bank. He said McAfee anti-malware software is worse than the malware it is supposed to protect against.)
I'm not saying I had any influence, but 3 months later it was announced that Otellini would no longer be CEO of Intel.
This is my understanding from talking with friends and acquaintances who work at Intel: The processor and chipset division is managed quite well. Apparently Intel top management doesn't mess with that, maybe because they don't understand anything about it.
Non-technical people can't manage technological companies! To manage Intel well, it is necessary to have technology in your heart and be fascinated with the details. And, at the same time, it is necessary to have the social ability to manage a large company.
Several years ago I called an Intel support person and showed him a huge mistake in the description of an Intel product. He said something like, "We are re-doing the web site. We will fix that soon." A year later, I talked to the same man. He didn't remember me, but I remembered him, and had written his name. I mentioned the same error. He gave the same excuse again.
Another experience: Several years ago I wanted to buy Intel motherboards. It took 2 hours to become a member of some online Intel group and find the exact model number.
Remember Intel Bunny People dolls? Apparently someone at Intel thought that processor and motherboard buyers would be motivated by a cute doll.
It is my understanding that Intel's incompetence continues. It surprises me, but my own personal opinion is that I would be a far better manager than what Intel has now. One of the biggest problems in the entire world is the rarity of good management.