Slashdot Mirror


Volkswagen Factory Worker Killed By a Robot

m.alessandrini writes: A worker at a Volkswagen factory in Germany has died, after a robot grabbed him and crushed him against a metal plate. This is perhaps the first severe accident of this kind in a western factory, and is sparking debate about who is responsible for the accident, the man who was servicing the robot beyond its protection cage, or the robot's hardware/software developers who didn't put enough safety checks. Will this distinction be more and more important in the future, when robots will be more widespread?

342 comments

  1. It's that time... by LaurenCates · · Score: 5, Funny

    Time to welcome our new robot overlords.

    --
    Some people don't believe in fairies. I don't believe in The Patriarchy.
    1. Re:It's that time... by halfEvilTech · · Score: 5, Interesting

      In related news - one of the first reporters to tweet about the story works for the Financial Times has a rather unfortunate name relating to deadly machines. The reporters name being Sarah O'Connor.

      https://twitter.com/sarahoconn...

    2. Re:It's that time... by Jhon · · Score: 5, Funny

      I suggest we program all robots with some type of rules that prevent this from happening. Some 'laws', if you will that prevent them from hurting people. Force them to follow their programming (unless it tells them to hurt people). Finally, prevent them from damaging themselves or their work (unless it would cause them to hurt people or not follow their programming).

      These are pretty basic 'laws'. I don't know why someone hasn't come up with this yet.

    3. Re:It's that time... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I represent the Issac Asimov estate, Dr. Evil, JD. Those laws are copyrighted for all eternity - or soon will be thanks to Disney - and I am afraid that unless we are paid One Hundred Billion dollars (*da da dat!*), the World will be doomed!

      Bwahahahahaahha! Bwhahahahahahahaha! Bwhwhahahahahahahah! bwahaha, Hmmm.

    4. Re:It's that time... by tehcyder · · Score: 3, Funny

      In related news - one of the first reporters to tweet about the story works for the Financial Times has a rather unfortunate name relating to deadly machines. The reporters name being Sarah O'Connor.

      https://twitter.com/sarahoconn...

      I assume she ended the tweet with #theresastormcomingin?

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    5. Re:It's that time... by jeffmflanagan · · Score: 1

      No, oddly considering her name, she has not seen the Terminator movies.

    6. Re:It's that time... by leuk_he · · Score: 1

      Well, beside the sarah conner thing, military is already looking into buiding robots. It is a small step from unmanned drones, and the dream of military to have a war without casualties at your own site. The plans to forbid them will be too little, too late.

    7. Re:It's that time... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      Of course not. That would be breaking the fourth wall.

    8. Re:It's that time... by kanweg · · Score: 1

      She lived it!

      Bert

    9. Re:It's that time... by rhazz · · Score: 2
      From her feed:

      Sigh. I've never even watched the films. Now my feed is full of people tweeting me about skynet.

    10. Re:It's that time... by JackieBrown · · Score: 1

      This reminds me of Office Space and Michael Bolton

    11. Re:It's that time... by LifesABeach · · Score: 1

      The loss of life is never acceptable; that aside, but after working for a european business I would not be surprised to hear, "The most efficent thing to have happened is that the worker should have not been in the way in the first place."

      "3 Laws Safe" sounds pretty good these days.

    12. Re: It's that time... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Why, is it an api?

    13. Re:It's that time... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      it was not a random worker walking in the robot cage, was thew actual robot maintenance guy iirc

    14. Re:It's that time... by Opportunist · · Score: 3, Interesting

      And this is how copyright caused thousands of deaths because the life saving checks could not be implemented.

      I feel like a story coming to me...

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    15. Re: It's that time... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      What we call industrial "robots" really are just fancy remote control/programmed toys. They got slightly more smarts than a woodchipper. They follow a programmed dance --rather stupidly. If something is between them and the next step they go THRU it with 500-1000lbs of force.

    16. Re:It's that time... by Anubis+IV · · Score: 1

      Some 'laws', if you will that prevent them from hurting people. [...] I don't know why someone hasn't come up with this yet.

      The idea is all well and good (and yes, I get the reference, this isn't a "whooosh", just a serious response to a joke post), but maybe we need to overcome some more basic issues first, such as stopping machines from labelling people as gorillas.

    17. Re:It's that time... by sabbede · · Score: 1
      AHAHHAHAHAHA!!!!!!

      Thank you life, for being so damn funny.

    18. Re:It's that time... by Krishnoid · · Score: 4, Interesting

      First law of robotics: A robot without computer vision or radar may assume that it has free agency to operate within the convex hull encompassing its range of motion (otherwise referred to as its threatened area).

      Even if the robot malfunctions due to other failures, those safety cages and perimeter markings are supposed to pretty much guarantee that you'll be safe if you're standing outside them, right? In that regard, one might worry more about robots that have autonomous control and unrestricted range of motion.

    19. Re:It's that time... by OhPlz · · Score: 1

      #nofate

    20. Re:It's that time... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Skynet is here

    21. Re:It's that time... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Farfecrushing.

    22. Re:It's that time... by NostalgiaForInfinity · · Score: 1

      I suggest we program all robots with some type of rules that prevent this from happening. Some 'laws', if you will that prevent them from hurting people.

      Yeah, and that's going to be just about as effective as laws are in real life in preventing murder.

    23. Re:It's that time... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You know... The entire point of asimovs multi book sagas about the 3 laws is... they don't work, can't work, and are a really bad idea.

    24. Re:It's that time... by Jawnn · · Score: 1

      In related news - one of the first reporters to tweet about the story works for the Financial Times has a rather unfortunate name relating to deadly machines. The reporters name being Sarah O'Connor.

      https://twitter.com/sarahoconn...

      "Seriously, Sarah. You need to let go of these fantasies. Do you want to end up back in the hospital again?"

    25. Re:It's that time... by davester666 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      If you are dumb enough to get into a cage match with a robot...

      --
      Sleep your way to a whiter smile...date a dentist!
    26. Re:It's that time... by invid · · Score: 1

      Have they sent Dr. Susan Calvin to speak with the robot yet?

      --
      The Moore-Murphy Law: The number of things that will go wrong will double every 2 years.
    27. Re:It's that time... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If it service you, you can kill it. (with Schwarzenegger voice)

    28. Re:It's that time... by thinkwaitfast · · Score: 2

      might worry more about robots that have autonomous control and unrestricted range of motion

      You mean like a driverless car?

    29. Re: It's that time... by kesuki · · Score: 1

      that is true industrial robots are non thinking and need to remain that way. an offshoot of industrial robots are 'mercy killing robots' which again are non thinking robots which crush puny disease crippled humans. and for cattle slaughter there are compressed air hammers which allow efficient fast skull shattering death devices which are operated by normal beings who are hungry.

      thinking robots do not need robotic laws because this impairs their use in warfare. and we want our killing machines. I have played war games with no concern for the consequences. the AI is actually better than what a human can do. it can control hundreds of units as if they were individually thinking of combat fields where wounded individuals flee. even with voice, gaming keyboards, and gaming mice, the computer has better skills, because it is scripted, a human using macros on such gaming devices is almost able to be better than the ai, however even a pro level ai is still bound by it's scripts. for instance the threat detection of new expansions of resource collection. for a human they just monitor the mine areas. a ai will go to any map position where it detects resource building construction (cite: gulf war) so in a game you can build a building not near a resource spot and cancel it every time the ai gets close enough to fire, the ai will always go after the newest resource found and will go to multiple sites where resource building are erected even if no resource is there. so one can build cancel then rebuild when the ai goes to another place. this tactic allows one to make the ai waste it's time attacking building that are not needed while the player perpares to destroy the buildings of the ai with units the ai army would easily beat if it wasn't driving back and forth between two points which are far from the real base and expansion.

    30. Re: It's that time... by jd2112 · · Score: 2

      Sorry, the robot left. But you can wait here, It said it would be coming back.

      --
      Any insufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology.
    31. Re:It's that time... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The most efficent thing to have happened is that the worker should have not been in the way in the first place.

      Personal responsibility. In the same way you don't need to change the gun laws just because some retard cop used a loaded gun to scratch his ear and managed to shoot himself in the head.

      It doesn't matter how many safety measures you take if they are bypassed, at some point you will have to say that everything works perfectly except the dude that managed to kill himself.

    32. Re:It's that time... by MobileTatsu-NJG · · Score: 1

      That'd be funnier if those stories weren't mainly about how the laws weren't really working.

      --

      "I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)

    33. Re:It's that time... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Asimov's Three 'Laws' Of Robotics were never intended to be a recipe for avoiding all problems. They were intended to have enough holes, ambiguities, and corner cases in them to allow the writing of interesting stories - and in that respect, they lived up to their goals.

    34. Re: It's that time... by FatdogHaiku · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Right. I've worked on stuff that can crush a full size car without much load increase on the hydraulic pumps. And when I worked on that stuff, I had all the low voltage fuses in my pockets and my own padlock on the lock out lever of the power panel. The machines move too fast and with enough force that they would not notice a bit of flesh getting crushed until it was too late. On top of that, every machine I ever saw (CNC, relay and limit switch, or sonar actuated) had well marked exclusion zones that you just do not enter when the unit is energized... Unless the guy got inside the cage and then closed it up to over ride basic security(cage open=power off) I just can't understand this happening.

      --
      You have the right to remain sentient. If you give up the right to remain sentient, you will be elected to public office
    35. Re: It's that time... by Quasimodem · · Score: 1

      "Call for Gregory Powell and Mike Donovan."

    36. Re:It's that time... by Quasimodem · · Score: 1

      The Three Robotic Laws were a rational attempt to make a tool safe for the user, and it worked for the robots who all use logic. Trouble arose when robots interfaced with humans, who often react illogically, or employ metaphors instead of simply saying what they meant.

    37. Re:It's that time... by HiThere · · Score: 2

      Why? Just make it so that as far as the machines are concerned Gorillas are a subset of humans. And then keep the actual gorillas away from them.

      You've got a reasonable point for more advanced machines, but for now I'd just as soon that they also avoid squashing dogs and cats...or, pretty much anything protoplasmic over, say, 5 pounds. Or 4. Slaugher house machines don't need to be intelligent, and shouldn't be. Not until things are FAR more developed.

      And, really, wouldn't you just as soon that your car avoided running over that skunk? So if you adopt a variant of the precautionary principle, you can get most of the advantages without waiting for perfection.

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
    38. Re:It's that time... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Except, these aren't those kinds of robots. Your statement makes little sense. These are automated mechanical devices. There is a very big difference. Whose fault is it if they die by walking out in front of a car on a busy highway? If an avalanche falls on them? If you cut your finger off while cutting food? You cannot assign intelligence to something that is not intelligent, then demand that it 'behave' according to laws that were conceived to regulate the actions of intelligent beings or creations. That's moronic.

    39. Re:It's that time... by khallow · · Score: 2

      The entire point of asimovs multi book sagas about the 3 laws is... they don't work, can't work, and are a really bad idea.

      Actually, the laws did work and by the end of the series had worked too well, to the point that robots had not only removed themselves from human society in order to protect humans, but it is implied that they also had removed any other potential intelligences (in the whole galaxy!) that they had deemed non-human as well.

    40. Re:It's that time... by Master+Moose · · Score: 1

      This would just lead to a Planet of the Apes style apocalypse.

      Robots are programmed not to hurt Humans.

      Robots are Programmed to recognise Gorillas as a sort of Human.

      Gorillas rise up - Robots by their programming are unable to stop them. Without their fancy gadgets to protect them. Humans lose the impending war.

      --
      . . .gone when the morning comes
    41. Re: It's that time... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If something is between them and the next step they go THRU it with 500-1000lbs of force.

      We use Newtons around here, mister.

    42. Re: It's that time... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Have to AC since i modded you up. Would like to know their LOTO policy.

    43. Re: It's that time... by thegarbz · · Score: 5, Interesting

      This. I've worked with industrial palletizing robots before and I've seen some amazing failures. A simple sensor not detecting that the pallet had jammed on the rack and the robot then proceeded to pick up the next box and place it at the bottom of the next pallet cutting the entire previous stacked pallet in half.

      So imagine my surprise when I heard that someone at my work got fired when he defeated the safety locks to step inside the safety cage because every 6th movement the robot misaligned a box. We have security footage of him ducking under the robot's arm as it swung over it's head to fix the box every 6th movement.

      There's a simple place to lay blame in most of these cases, and it's typically Darwinism or suicide.

    44. Re:It's that time... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      so you'd rather be crushed to death against a metal plate than called a gorilla?

      I'm pretty confident you're in a minority

    45. Re: It's that time... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Comparing war to RTS games. That's a paddlin'.

    46. Re: It's that time... by RightwingNutjob · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I was responsible for the servo of an optical tracking mount with moving dome and powered cable wrap (no manipulator arms, just four axes of motion, three of them coaxial) and I still made sure to pump out about 100kbytes/sec worth of telemetry for all the moving machinery that was there. A 5 or six axis robot should probably be pumping out at least that much of telemetry.

      The second real question is what their data retention polcy is so that human error can be isolated from electromechanical fault and software fault.

    47. Re: It's that time... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I love fig newtons!

    48. Re:It's that time... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Robotics are not quite as "Evolved" as you seem to think, factory robots are a relatively simple mechanical device programmed to perform repetitive task, they do not come fully equipped with sensors and "Intelligence" which would allow them to comprehend or understand the environment in which they are working.

      Move arm 30 degrees
      Close Hand
      Move arm -30 degrees
      Open hand.
      Repeat...

    49. Re:It's that time... by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      Don't worry. Learn a lesson from Napoleon, Hitler, and Principal Skinner: wait for winter.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    50. Re:It's that time... by TapeCutter · · Score: 1

      Asimov's intention was to demonstrate there is no such thing as a "recipe for life" for robots, humans, or any other life form. The 10 commandments and other real life attempts to provide a recipe for life are also full of holes, ambiguities, and corner cases that can only be resolved by human judgement. This is why courts have a judge and jury.

      --
      And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
    51. Re:It's that time... by cb88 · · Score: 1

      If he was working on it outside of a safe area... he should have disconnected the power, locked it out and tagged it out... anything else would have have been an OSHA violation here in the USA I would imagine.

    52. Re:It's that time... by Pseudonym · · Score: 4, Funny

      Of course, if you didn't keep it in a cage, then maybe it wouldn't lash out against its handlers.

      --
      sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f(q{sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f});
    53. Re:It's that time... by Pseudonym · · Score: 1

      Kind of like how the Prime Directive always makes the best course of action perfectly clear.

      --
      sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f(q{sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f});
    54. Re:It's that time... by jez9999 · · Score: 1

      That woman has absolutely zero sense of humour.

      "Guys. I don't know what skynet is. And I wouldn't follow me - I tweet really boring stuff about unit wage costs and the like."

      "Ugh, this is a bit uncomfortable. A person has actually died."

    55. Re:It's that time... by Plumpaquatsch · · Score: 1

      And this is how copyright caused thousands of deaths because the life saving checks could not be implemented.

      I feel like a story coming to me...

      No, they couldn't be implemented because they can only be implemented in a Positronic Brain. At least that's closer to the truth than your claim.

      --
      Of course news about a fake are Fake News.
    56. Re:It's that time... by Plumpaquatsch · · Score: 1

      Have they sent Dr. Susan Calvin to speak with the robot yet?

      Well, he said: "I was just waking up, trying to rub my eyes, then there was this idiot in the way of my arm, and bamm, I hit him."

      --
      Of course news about a fake are Fake News.
    57. Re:It's that time... by Plumpaquatsch · · Score: 1

      That woman has absolutely zero sense of humour.

      "Guys. I don't know what skynet is. And I wouldn't follow me - I tweet really boring stuff about unit wage costs and the like."

      "Ugh, this is a bit uncomfortable. A person has actually died."

      You actually think "You report on a guy being killed by a robot, and your name is almost like that of a character in a movie about a killer robot" is funny? Let alone a couple of hundred times over?

      --
      Of course news about a fake are Fake News.
    58. Re:It's that time... by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      In case you're wondering, I know why you don't get invited to parties...

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    59. Re: It's that time... by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      What we call industrial "robots" really are just fancy remote control/programmed toys. They got slightly more smarts than a woodchipper. They follow a programmed dance --rather stupidly. If something is between them and the next step they go THRU it with 500-1000lbs of force.

      And isn't that the hell of it. We have self driving cars, radar based braking and road centering assist but can't put sensors on a construction robot that will inform it that something is in a place where it shouldn't be. Time to move past the silly "programmed dance" mode. It isn't rocket surgery, isn'at all that expensive, and should be considered a distinct legal liability for the companies that produce and program the things.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    60. Re:It's that time... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And, really, wouldn't you just as soon that your car avoided running over that skunk? So if you adopt a variant of the precautionary principle, you can get most of the advantages without waiting for perfection.

      I'd prefer my car run over the skunk rather than drive into the ditch and total itself and injuring me.
      I'd prefer my car drive into the ditch and total itself and injure me rather than run over a 5-year old child.

      Knowing what's human is important.

    61. Re:It's that time... by HiThere · · Score: 1

      It's important. The times that it's critical are rare. So... add if's it's in the middle of the road you prefer to stop rather than run over it. If it's up-right it's proper to dodge dangerously rather than to hit it. The number of crawling kids in the middle of the road is quite small, but it's larger than the number of infants, so add in something that smoothly increases the probability of human as it's (estimated) weight approaches 90 pounds and decreases it as it exceeds 300 pounds. Or 400. So you have a flattened bell curve with a smooth top.

      But really, all this fiddling is just to handle corner cases. Usually you just stop or avoid the thing on the road without wondering much what it is. Only if you can't do either of those do you need the fancy figuring, which is a pain, because that's when you need the fast decision, so you "corner case handler" need to be something simple.
      Rule 1: If it's standing up, it's a human. Don't hit, even if you must take damage. (This yields several false positives, but too bad. We need a quick decision.)
      Rule 2: Estimate it's weight. (Ouch! That looks like a slow process...so while you're doing it, slow and start dodging.) If it's above 25 pounds, avoid even if you must take damage. (Note that hitting something heavy at a fast speed will damage you no matter what.) Continue slowing and preparing to dodge. If it's following a ball, dodge even if you must take damage.

      Sorry, time's up.

      This isn't a perfect approach, but it's simple, and doable. The hard step is estimating weight. There is a problem with false positives. A paper mache statue would count as human. But it should handle all common cases. And there should also be a distinction between streets where the traffic is slow and rare and streets where the traffic is fast and common. Freeways are much less likely to have humans walking in the road.

      Additionally, there should be a rule about not overdriving your reaction time, especially on slow streets, but nothing can stop a kid from running out right in front of you from between two parked cars. And nobody, neither automaton nor human, can reliably deal with that. Which is why that first rule about "upright" is made to yield a lot of false positives. If you have time, then you can refigure things and perhaps decide that "that's a paper mache statute", so you may start to dodge in a way that will damage yourself, and then refigure to avoid damaging yourself when you, more slowly, decide that such action isn't needed.

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
    62. Re: It's that time... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes.

    63. Re:It's that time... by Plumpaquatsch · · Score: 1

      In case you're wondering, I know why you don't get invited to parties...

      Yes, because you are an asshole. Assholes know everything.

      --
      Of course news about a fake are Fake News.
  2. Bow Down by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I for one want to welcome our new robot Overlords...

    1. Re: Bow Down by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I for one am getting really tired of this joke.

    2. Re: Bow Down by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      I for one welcome our new comedy overlord.

    3. Re: Bow Down by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      In Soviet Russia, joke is tired of YOU!!!!!

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    4. Re: Bow Down by Plumpaquatsch · · Score: 1

      1. Hot Grits
      2. Natalie Portman
      3. ???
      4. Profit!

      --
      Of course news about a fake are Fake News.
  3. Everyone is thinking it... by captnjohnny1618 · · Score: 4, Funny

    Will this distinction be more and more important in the future, when robots will be more widespread?

    ... Or intelligent and resentful of their subjugating human overlords? I for one always give my robots a hug and a seat at the dinner table so when the robot apocalypse comes I'll hopefully have some cred.

    1. Re:Everyone is thinking it... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just wait until they hear about battlebots. They'll fight humans against each other for their amusement.

    2. Re:Everyone is thinking it... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We already did that ourselves...

  4. Was it wearing a brown shirt? by xxxJonBoyxxx · · Score: 0

    Was it wearing a brown shirt?

    1. Re:Was it wearing a brown shirt? by zerojoker · · Score: 1

      nope. red shirt.

  5. This it perhaps the first severe accident of this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This it perhaps

    We'll never have robot wizards, 'cause they're terrible at spelling.

  6. 5 Laws? by unixcorn · · Score: 0

    The manufacturer of the robot should be prosecuted if they didn't add the five laws to its programming.

    1. Re:5 Laws? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      Back in my day, we only had 3-laws, and we liked it!

    2. Re:5 Laws? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      You do realize this was a simple yet tragic industrial accident, right? Industrial robots have no intelligence and the most rudimentary feedback control systems. You can't program asimov's literary devices into an industrial robot. The robot doesn't have any clue what "human" means -- it simply moves in programmed patterns. Industrial accidents happen when physical barriers are not respected. If the person in question bypassed the barrier system (eg put a shim in place of a sensor so he could work near the operating robot) then there is no way a lawsuit should be brought against the manufacturer. If the device/installation was missing basic safety precautions then there may be a case for a lawsuit against the manufacturer, installer of the robot, or auto manufacturer. Depending on who neglected the safety precautions. Regardless this has nothing to do with pseudo-"laws" of robotics or anything else remotely related to artificial intelligence. This is an industrial accident that could just as easily have happened with a band saw or CNC mill or lathe.

    3. Re:5 Laws? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hero class: Asperger.

    4. Re:5 Laws? by sizzzzlerz · · Score: 1

      Whoosh!

    5. Re:5 Laws? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You do realize this was a simple yet tragic industrial accident, right? Industrial robots have no intelligence and the most rudimentary feedback control systems. You can't program asimov's literary devices into an industrial robot. The robot doesn't have any clue what "human" means -- it simply moves in programmed patterns. Industrial accidents happen when physical barriers are not respected. If the person in question bypassed the barrier system (eg put a shim in place of a sensor so he could work near the operating robot) then there is no way a lawsuit should be brought against the manufacturer. If the device/installation was missing basic safety precautions then there may be a case for a lawsuit against the manufacturer, installer of the robot, or auto manufacturer. Depending on who neglected the safety precautions. Regardless this has nothing to do with pseudo-"laws" of robotics or anything else remotely related to artificial intelligence. This is an industrial accident that could just as easily have happened with a band saw or CNC mill or lathe.

      As far as we know it is impossible to program Asimov's laws at all. That's sort of the point of most of his works... They don't actually work the way we expect.

    6. Re:5 Laws? by unixcorn · · Score: 1

      Asimov did have three laws, you are correct. I was looking at the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council which has 5 rules. I guess I miffed the joke a bit but I hope it was still good for a chuckle.

    7. Re:5 Laws? by tehcyder · · Score: 2
      Well you're determined to take the fun out of this aren't you?

      I bet you were the kid at school who told everyone Santa Claus wasn't real.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    8. Re:5 Laws? by Sechr+Nibw · · Score: 5, Funny

      Back in my day, we only had in-laws, and we hated them!

    9. Re:5 Laws? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I bet you were the kid at school who told everyone Santa Claus wasn't real.

      Wait...what? Santa Claus isn't real?

    10. Re:5 Laws? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's sort of the point of most of his works... They don't actually work the way we expect.

      I see this stated all the time, but in those I have read they almost always work perfectly.
      The stories where humans get harmed is the stories without the laws.
      The common theme is that humans perceive a danger to themselves that a robot wither seemed to cause or that a robot failed to prevent. Usually it ends up with the situation being explained by the robot having much more accurate sensory inputs and 'knew' that the human was several mm and/or nanoseconds from being killed.

    11. Re:5 Laws? by Dragonslicer · · Score: 1

      The manufacturer of the robot should be prosecuted if they didn't add the five laws to its programming.

      Uh... three, sir.

    12. Re:5 Laws? by tomhath · · Score: 1

      That's sort of the point of most of his works... They don't actually work the way we expect.

      Usually it ends up with the situation being explained by the robot

      You repeated what GP said.

    13. Re:5 Laws? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The five laws of library science? Please link to your code where you proved such a thing was possible.

    14. Re:5 Laws? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Seriously. Why would anyone want to take the fun out of a fatal industrial accident.

    15. Re:5 Laws? by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      They should have followed the 3 fictitious ones? Seriously?

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    16. Re:5 Laws? by MobileTatsu-NJG · · Score: 1

      Sorry I didn't catch the joke, it was covered in the blood of a technician.

      --

      "I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)

    17. Re: 5 Laws? by jd2112 · · Score: 2

      When marriage is banned only outlaws will have in-laws.

      --
      Any insufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology.
    18. Re:5 Laws? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Back in my day, we only had out-laws, and we loved and hated them!

    19. Re:5 Laws? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Today we have drug laws, and they hate us.

    20. Re:5 Laws? by Plumpaquatsch · · Score: 1

      If the person in question bypassed the barrier system (eg put a shim in place of a sensor so he could work near the operating robot) then there is no way a lawsuit should be brought against the manufacturer. If the device/installation was missing basic safety precautions then there may be a case for a lawsuit against the manufacturer, installer of the robot, or auto manufacturer. Depending on who neglected the safety precautions. Regardless this has nothing to do with pseudo-"laws" of robotics or anything else remotely related to artificial intelligence.

      The problem here is that the person killed was in the process of installing the robot.

      --
      Of course news about a fake are Fake News.
    21. Re:5 Laws? by Lizzy_Bee · · Score: 1

      A bit of Darwinism at work, in this one, with the "victim" failing to utilize lock out/tag out; or as mentioned, bypassed other built-in safety measures.

      --
      "Remember, no matter where you go, there you are." -- Dr. Buckaroo Bonzai, PhD
  7. Industrial accidents happen by Fencepost · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The regular safety measures weren't in place because they were installing the systems, so most likely they had people working on different things and someone started testing their piece without realizing it was already connected.

    The more significant thing from a Slashdot point of view is that Financial Times writer Sarah O'Connor tweeted about it yesterday which coincided with the release of the new Terminator movie and it blew up into a somewhat inappropriate (someone did die) Twitter storm of SkyNet jokes.

    --
    fencepost
    just a little off
    1. Re:Industrial accidents happen by sribe · · Score: 4, Informative

      The regular safety measures weren't in place because they were installing the systems, so most likely they had people working on different things and someone started testing their piece without realizing it was already connected.

      Yep. See second paragraph.

    2. Re:Industrial accidents happen by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Specifically, who violated the lockout tagout rules. If you're going into the cage, it has to be locked out. Sucks that testing is hard without being in there, but these rules are nothing new, and have little to do with the "robot" part.

    3. Re:Industrial accidents happen by mlts · · Score: 1

      With how many robots are in use, it was just a matter of time before some freak accident would happen. Even if one set of chances are one in a million that something would be overridden at the right time, coupled with the one in a million chance of being in the wrong place, eventually someone is going to roll all "1s".

      This is what insurance is for.

      Were it not a robot, this would be dismissed as another accident at work, the worker (or next of kin) recompensed, and life would move on.

    4. Re:Industrial accidents happen by rickb928 · · Score: 1

      Sad that there is no Sarah O'Connor character in the Terminator series. Fanbois world over will go insane ignoring the two characters that differ, and this reporter will wonder what the heck is the big deal about? But she's already getting that, some people never learn.

      I dated a girl named Maggie for a while, sweet girl. I never, never played anything by Rod Stewart within her hearing. Nothing. Ever.

      --
      deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
    5. Re:Industrial accidents happen by russotto · · Score: 1

      The regular safety measures weren't in place because they were installing the systems, so most likely they had people working on different things and someone started testing their piece without realizing it was already connected.

      Right. Standard procedure (not just with robots but with many industrial systems) usually involves the person working on the system installing a lockout tag on the controls, and anyone removing the lockout tag without checking with the person who put it on is in deep shit trouble.

    6. Re:Industrial accidents happen by hawguy · · Score: 1

      Specifically, who violated the lockout tagout rules. If you're going into the cage, it has to be locked out. Sucks that testing is hard without being in there, but these rules are nothing new, and have little to do with the "robot" part.

      Exactly, this is just a tragic industrial accident, there are already procedures in place to prevent this type of thing that apply to industrial equipment of all types - hydraulic presses, large walk-in ovens, cutoff saws, etc. Being an industrial robot doesn't make this a special case, it's not as if the robot was stalking him throughout the facility, it had a known safety area, and almost certainly had a proper lockout procedure to keep it from being activated when anyone was within the safety cage.

    7. Re:Industrial accidents happen by Anrego · · Score: 1

      Places I've worked it was a clip like thing with several holes for an actual padlock. The person doing the work keeps the key with them until they are done and there is a big warning tag with all the info on it (who to contact, etc). The clips have multiple holes so if different people are working in different areas, they all have their own lock/key. In cases where something can't actually be locked out (usually if a machine has to be left on but not actually used) a sentry is posted.

      I imagine they have similar controls. This sounds like a case of someone getting lazy with procedure, as happens many times a day all around the world. Certainly nothing about it being a robot is all that important.. could have just as easily been any other piece of industrial equipment.

  8. Misleading Title by MagickalMyst · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The title of this article is somewhat misleading. It says that a worker was killed by a robot - which would suggest a technological problem.

    However, the article states that:

    "...officials believe that human error was to blame for the incident, rather than a problem with the robot."

    Perhaps the title should read something like "Fatal accident caused by a human involving robot at car factory"

    Regardless of the title, it is still very sad that this happened.

    --
    Political correctness is really just herd psychology pushed by insecure people who desperately seek social conformity.
    1. Re:Misleading Title by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      My wife was brutally murdered by a hammer.

    2. Re:Misleading Title by chispito · · Score: 5, Insightful

      A better title would be "Volkswagen Factory Worker Killed By Industrial Machinery."

      --
      The Daddy casts sleep on the Baby. The Baby resists!
    3. Re: Misleading Title by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      I still like your file system, though...

    4. Re:Misleading Title by Bartles · · Score: 1

      Pretty sure it didn't "grab him" either. Most robots in factories don't grab things. They have specialized fixture for moving specific items. He most likely was pushed and pinned.

    5. Re:Misleading Title by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Same thing: shop class

    6. Re:Misleading Title by JimMcc · · Score: 1

      But that wouldn't be a sensationalistic headline that would grab eyeballs and case people to click on the link to see the ads.

    7. Re: Misleading Title by richy+freeway · · Score: 1

      Well played sir. :D

    8. Re: Misleading Title by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This whoosh'd me. Little help?

    9. Re: Misleading Title by richy+freeway · · Score: 4, Informative

      ReiserFS

    10. Re:Misleading Title by dcollins · · Score: 1

      "...officials believe that human error was to blame for the incident, rather than a problem with the robot."

      Of course officials at the factory are going to suggest that first... because they're liable for mistakes of the robot, but not for mistakes of the worker. This is standard boilerplate and counts for nothing. Only a proper investigation can determine the truth. More 1%-vs-the-rest, really.

      --
      We know where leadership by an anti-intellectual "strongman" who scapegoats minorities and likes boisterous rallies goes
    11. Re:Misleading Title by WoOS · · Score: 3, Informative

      Not only the title is wrong. Also no grabbing was involved.

      The sentence in the summary (and article) that the robot "grabbed him" appears to me as a non-native speaker's translation of this newspaper artikel. It says "Der Mann sei von dem Roboter erfasst und gegen eine Metallplatte gedrückt worden."
      Yes "erfassen" can mean "to grab" (although one would normally just use "fassen" for that) but in this context it means "to hit and push". You will find lots of sentences were people were "erfasst" by a car and I think we can all agree that cars usually do not grab people.

      So instead of a malicious robot grabbing his tormentor and throwing him against a wall, the poor guy probably was just caught between one of the joints of the robot and a metal plate when the respective part of the robots arm moved towards that plate.

    12. Re:Misleading Title by houghi · · Score: 1

      Replace 'robot' with 'machinery' and it suddenly isn't news at all.

      The fact that a robot moves in more directions than e.g. a forging press does not realy matter.
      He should not be there while the thing was operational. That means either he giot an ok, while it was not ok to go (By his own or others decision) or somebody turned the machine on, while it should have been off.

      The 'robot' is the the 'on the internet' we see with other things. So, indeed as sad as it is, nothing new here,

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    13. Re:Misleading Title by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you think that's bad try one of the lines from the linked article

      Such fatalities are rare as robots are generally kept behind cages to prevent contact with humans, however the worker was reportedly inside the safety cage when he was injured

      The robots aren't kept in cages to keep them away from the humans. The cages are to stop the humans going near the robots.

      ... officials believe that human error was to blame for the incident, rather than a problem with the robot.

      Prosecutors are now considering whether to bring charges, and if so, against whom ...

      They don't say it out-right, but it really does feel like their implying charges could be brought again the robot.

    14. Re:Misleading Title by nytes · · Score: 1

      "Honest, officer! She tripped and fell on it 16 times!"

      --
      -- I have monkeys in my pants.
    15. Re:Misleading Title by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My wife was brutally murdered by a hammer.

      Wow, I've never seen a hammer even twitch. Yet one got up and killed your wife?

    16. Re: Misleading Title by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hans_Reiser

    17. Re:Misleading Title by Plumpaquatsch · · Score: 1

      A better title would be "Volkswagen Factory Worker Killed By Industrial Machinery."

      Considering it was a worker from an outside company installing the robot, no, not really.

      --
      Of course news about a fake are Fake News.
    18. Re:Misleading Title by multi+io · · Score: 1

      A better title would be "Volkswagen Factory Worker Killed By Industrial Machinery."

      The "industrial machinery" in this case was a robot. And they're really called robots. So why not be specific?

  9. Limits by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Industrial robot manufactures make conscious trade offs, and that's why they require protective boundaries. You violate those boundaries, you risk your life. This is true in all industry, robots have little to do with it. Let your clothing get caught in the lathe: die. (Not having read the article to learn if there were extenuating circumstances.)

  10. This it perhaps the first severe accident. NO!` by LWATCDR · · Score: 3, Informative

    Really Slashdot editors....
    Try 1979 at a Ford plant in Detroit.
    http://nl.newsbank.com/nl-sear...

    Really it is a new low when the editors on slashdot can not be bothered to use Google
    .

    --
    See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
    1. Re:This it perhaps the first severe accident. NO!` by NotDrWho · · Score: 5, Funny

      They used to make cars in Detroit?

      --
      SJW's don't eliminate discrimination. They just expropriate it for themselves.
    2. Re:This it perhaps the first severe accident. NO!` by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dude,
      They can't even be bothered to use their spell checker. Google is waaaaay too much work.

    3. Re:This it perhaps the first severe accident. NO!` by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's even lower when they don't already know this.

      This, while tragic, isn't news, it's an industrial accident. A robot is a hydraulic pump, some hydraulic pistons, a control box with solenoid actuators connected to an arduino using rs-232.

    4. Re:This it perhaps the first severe accident. NO!` by rickb928 · · Score: 1

      And has no one ever heard of accidents in paper mills? Since like forever?

      --
      deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
    5. Re:This it perhaps the first severe accident. NO!` by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, but only crappy American ones.

    6. Re:This it perhaps the first severe accident. NO!` by Coren22 · · Score: 1

      Really it is a new low when the editors on slashdot can not be bothered to use Google

      Why is every summary problem blamed on the "editors"? m.alessandrini wrote this summary, not timothy.

      --
      APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
    7. Re:This it perhaps the first severe accident. NO!` by LWATCDR · · Score: 1

      Because they edit it and select it.

      --
      See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
    8. Re:This it perhaps the first severe accident. NO!` by Registered+Coward+v2 · · Score: 1

      They used to make cars in Detroit?

      I'm not sure but according to the car ads we are now importing them from Detroit, so I guess Detroit joined Canada at some point in time, eh?

      --
      I'm a consultant - I convert gibberish into cash-flow.
    9. Re:This it perhaps the first severe accident. NO!` by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thanks for that... Every death is tragic and should be considered preventable, but in terms of notable firsts "Robots" have been used in factories for decades, machines for much longer than that. I seriously doubted this was the first accidental death or major injury. When a robot "decides" to kill a person, that would be news. But a robot narrowly designed to move something and do something else and which is designed to work without sensors to detect obstacles is little more than an industrial machine the likes of which have been in factories (and killing people that accidentally get in the way) for two hundred years.

    10. Re:This it perhaps the first severe accident. NO!` by Calydor · · Score: 1

      Because the job of an editor is to, get this, EDIT the submissions so they are correct in spelling and facts.

      --
      -=This sig has nothing to do with my comment. Move along now=-
    11. Re:This it perhaps the first severe accident. NO!` by prefec2 · · Score: 1

      Checked that. I guess they mean it is now a corporate state of Detroit and it does no longer belong to the US. That is why they are not paying taxes.

    12. Re:This it perhaps the first severe accident. NO!` by packrat0x · · Score: 1

      They used to make cars in Detroit?

      I'm not sure but according to the car ads we are now importing them from Detroit, so I guess Detroit joined Canada at some point in time, eh?

      If the car is made in Winsor, Canada, then shipped across the river to Detroit, I guess it really is imported.

      --
      227-3517
    13. Re:This it perhaps the first severe accident. NO!` by OhPlz · · Score: 1

      Well of course. OCP built New Detroit over the ruins of what had been Detroit.

    14. Re:This it perhaps the first severe accident. NO!` by T.E.D. · · Score: 1

      Try 1979 at a Ford plant in Detroit.

      ...and again in 1987 in an Omni Consumer Products corporate boardroom in Detroit.

    15. Re:This it perhaps the first severe accident. NO!` by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      Crappiness can be done cheaper overseas.

    16. Re:This it perhaps the first severe accident. NO!` by cusco · · Score: 1

      Every death is tragic

      Horseshit. Ronald Reagan's and Pol Pot's deaths were cause for celebration, and I certainly did (Hitler and Stalin were before my time). It's just too bad that Pol Pot's wasn't more painful and drawn out.

      --
      "Think about how stupid the average person is. Now, realise that half of them are dumber than that." - George Carlin
  11. Why is a robot different from any other machine? by JoeyRox · · Score: 1

    Machines kill people all the time yet this story is getting a lot of traction because it plays into the 'evil robot' narrative. I've seen some pretty evil automobiles, chainsaws, and escalators.

  12. This is hardly a new issue by 91degrees · · Score: 3

    Automated devices can always be dangerous. This is the case with any mechanised factory.

    The company has a duty to produce and enforce health and safety rules. The employee has the duty to follow these rules and apply basic common sense. If both of these conditions are met, accidents will still happen, but nobody is really to blame. That's why they're called accidents. We can't predict everything.

    1. Re:This is hardly a new issue by avandesande · · Score: 1

      You have to wonder how many accidents and deaths have been prevented by robots taking the place of human manual laborers.

      --
      love is just extroverted narcissism
    2. Re:This is hardly a new issue by responsibleusername · · Score: 1

      This sounds dangerously like socialism to me buddy, let the accident free market decide what is safe..

  13. And so it begins. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sarah Connor: Skynet came online in 2015 at factory in Germany...

    1. Re: And so it begins. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Since there is a German singer by the name of Sarah Connor, the nazikrauts have it covered.

  14. Obligatory albinoblacksheep video by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  15. To Quote James T. Kirk by chinton · · Score: 1

    And how long will it be before all of us simply get in the way?

  16. perhaps the first severe accident of this kind??? by sribe · · Score: 5, Informative

    Are you kidding me? No, it is most certainly NOT the first severe accident with industrial robots. Seriously, thousands and thousands of factories using them, why in the hell would anybody think for a second that accidents had never before happened??? I guess the submitter is so sheltered that he has no clue at all about what it is like to do physical labor in a place that makes actual things!

  17. The Clickbait Tipping Point by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Of course the purpose of this headline is to make you think that at anthropomorphic machine, controlled by AI, somehow made a decision that ended in the death of human being.

    That the summary is not mocking this spin is a pretty good line of demarcation between the old slashdot and the current one.

    1. Re:The Clickbait Tipping Point by m.alessandrini · · Score: 1
      Calm down everyone, did you have a bad day? I guess you react the same when reading "man killed by a falling tree" in the newspaper, like "stupid title, implying that trees are willingly killing people and trying to take over the world!", right?

      I think the relevance is that a man died in a accident with a complex and autonomous machine (properly called "robots" since they exist in factories, like it or not), and that's not so easy in this case to predict everything that can go wrong, like, say "don't put your hand inside the press". Also, it's not so easy to say if the safety considerations are in charge of the user, or the machine's designer, and in what percentage.

  18. nobody by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    nobody was "responsible", that's why it's called an accident.

    1. Re:nobody by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, if you've ever worked at a large corporation before, they usually have a safety dept that has the mantra "All accidents are preventable". The training usually states that if an accident occurs, either someone wasn't following safety protocols (like forgetting to lock out an electrical panel) or the safety protocols failed to address certain risks, therefore must be rewritten. In the case of the former, it's the worker's fault. In the case of the latter, it's the fault of the safety review board, or some junk.

  19. Re:Why is a robot different from any other machine by Richard_at_work · · Score: 1

    There was another story in the UK news today that an industrial waste shredder killed a worker that crawled onto the conveyor belt for some reason - in both examples, the worker was inside the exclusion area without ensuring the area was safe and the machinery was isolated, and in both cases we are dealing with automated machinery that just simply carried on with its job, yet only in the Volkswagen case are "questions" being "debated".

    Bollocks, the worker is to blame for not following the procedure for ensuring the machinery was safe to work on. And if the procedure had infact been followed and the machine violated that procedure (eg the worker set the machine to off and isolated it, but the machine started up anyway unexpectedly) then the company responsible for ensuring the machine follows the safety procedure is to blame.

  20. movie promo by circletimessquare · · Score: 1

    the arnold schwarzenegger move "terminator genisys" is in theatres and hollywood wanted a really effective advertising stunt

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
    1. Re:movie promo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sadly, this is probably true. You'll notice these kinds of articles appear right around the release of similar movies. Probably increases ticket sales.

    2. Re:movie promo by circletimessquare · · Score: 1

      i was joking!

      are you joking?

      arggh

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

      --
      intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
    3. Re:movie promo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Quit trying to hide the truth! We know that Arnold flew to Germany to bribe the manufacturer to make this happen! (if the other guy was serious, I.. I.. ...)

  21. Kill all humans by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Crushing is merely a primitive, degenerate form of bending.

  22. Re:Why is a robot different from any other machine by m.alessandrini · · Score: 1

    I think in this case it's different because the robot has an arm and hand (so to speak) capable of grabbing you, and a lot of possible complex movements, so it's much less predictable than, say, a press with respect to the safety of people around it.

  23. However Shall We Figure This Out? by American+AC+in+Paris · · Score: 1

    This it perhaps the first severe accident of this kind in a western factory, and is sparkling debate about who is responsible for the accident, the man who was servicing the robot beyond its protection cage, or the robot's hardware/software developers who didn't put enough safety checks. Will this distinction be more and more important in the future, when robots will be more widespread?

    Folks, there exists an entire and oft maligned profession that is dedicated to figuring just this sort of thing out.

    This isn't some big unsolved existential question. It's a fairly dry exercise in interpreting and applying precedent in new ways. Humans are actually reasonably good at sorting out how to deal with the legalities of new things.

    --

    Obliteracy: Words with explosions

  24. Too late to win the price by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    On 25 January 1979, Robert Williams (USA) was struck in the head and killed by the arm of a 1-ton production-line robot in a Ford Motor Company casting plant in Flat Rock, Michigan, USA, becoming the first fatal casualty of a robot. The robot was part of a parts-retrieval system that moved material from one part of the factory to another; when the robot began running slowly, Williams reportedly climbed into the storage rack to retrieve parts manually when he was struck in the head and killed instantly. Robots pose a significant work-place risk, despite safety measures introduced to limit injury. In 2005 in the UK alone there were 77 robot-related accidents.

    Robert Williams was the first human to be killed by a robot
    Kenji_Urada was a Japanese engineer who was one of the first persons reported to have been killed by a robot in 1981

  25. Great! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Here come the "Robot Control Advocates"

  26. sounds like a sequel to by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    stapler fehrer klaus

  27. You think that's bad? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Just wait till we have the first auto accident where the self driving car is determined to be at fault. The level of lawyering up and passing the buck will be biblical. It will probably be years before a ruling on who you can rule against is even ruled on :P

    1. Re:You think that's bad? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This can't happen. Self-driving cars are programmed to not be at fault.

  28. Re:perhaps the first severe accident of this kind? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Accidents happen all the time and usually you can blame the idiot who deactivated any safety switch involved just for comfort or being requested to do so.
    Being an electronics technician on my own, i can tell that german workers are trained very well, especially regarding work safety and this includes the mandatory safety level that must be built into the equipment (which might be faulty at any point). But i also know that such things are too easily skipped if e.g. the finishing date is used as lever against the contract/income and work safety is seen as an obstacle. Or removing safety switches as a method to be faster. When a supervisor is requested to possess a flexible mindset, guess which barrier will be crossed without any documentation.

    Now, that the damage is done, shrugging the shoulders and looking in shunned silence will probably not make this guy alive.
    Hope it was not one of the guys that were here lately, they were from the same region and did a similar job here.

  29. Slashdot guilty of pandering by kheldan · · Score: 0, Troll

    There is no real story here. It's a simple, if tragic, industrial accident. By even posting this, Slashdot is guilty of spreading FUD about completely fictional (and in this case entirely absent) AIs, pandering to the fears of people who are afraid they will 'take over'. Mod entire story down to (-1, Troll), and deprecate, disregard, delete.

    --
    Are YOU using the TOOL, or is the TOOL using YOU? Think about it!
    1. Re:Slashdot guilty of pandering by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      made you click! made you click! haw haw!

    2. Re:Slashdot guilty of pandering by m.alessandrini · · Score: 2

      It's a simple, if tragic, industrial accident

      Nobody said the opposite.

      FUD about completely fictional (and in this case entirely absent) AIs

      Nobody ever talked about AIs behind that.

      pandering to the fears of people who are afraid they will 'take over'.

      Only valid for stupid people.

    3. Re:Slashdot guilty of pandering by kheldan · · Score: 1

      No one will see this at this point, but I'm going to say it anyway: Disagreeing with, or just plain not liking what I have to say, does NOT mean I'm a 'troll', it just means your judgement is poor and that perhaps you shouldn't be allowed moderation points in the first place. Next time try using your words instead of just having a knee-jerk reaction and clicking a goddamned button.

      --
      Are YOU using the TOOL, or is the TOOL using YOU? Think about it!
  30. Re:perhaps the first severe accident of this kind? by thinkwaitfast · · Score: 1

    So, a millennial?

  31. Re:perhaps the first severe accident of this kind? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The most amazing part of the linked site is that there have only been ~37 accidents (fatal + nonfatal) involving robots reported to OSHA in the US since 1984, given the hundreds of thousands of industrial robots in use.

  32. Why spellcheck? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sparkling like glitter?

  33. We Are Doomed by 602 · · Score: 1

    A decade or so ago in England a combat robot got out of its cage, found its way out of the facility, and was caught heading down the street. (I have a news link somewhere.)

    1. Re:We Are Doomed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Here is the Link
      http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2002/06/20/1023864460978.html

  34. Re:Why is a robot different from any other machine by sound+vision · · Score: 1

    Safe: Turned off
    Unsafe: Any state where it might possibly begin operating
    Seems predictable enough to me.

  35. Suddenly I'm reminded of Marvin. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And his hatred for doors.

    1. Re: Suddenly I'm reminded of Marvin. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I for one can testify that housecats hate doors. Close a door that confines a cat in a room and no matter what the cat was doing, it's now at the door demanding that it be opened. Any cats on the other side of said door will crowd around the door, because they KNOW that an opened can of tuna or some other treat must be on the other side.

  36. Laws of Robotics by unmukt · · Score: 1

    Perhaps, three laws of Robotics framed by Isaac Asimov should be inbuilt any such system.

    1. Re:Laws of Robotics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Perhaps, three laws of Robotics framed by Isaac Asimov should be inbuilt any such system.

      Perhaps someday technologically illiterate dorks will learn to distinguish sci-fi novels from reality.

      (Hell, perhaps someday literally illiterate dorks will actually read Asimov's novels and realize that that they were all about how the Three Laws didn't actually work properly.)

    2. Re:Laws of Robotics by prelelat · · Score: 1

      For any kind of laws of robotics to work the machines would have to be intelligent enough for them to matter. They would have to understand what was living and what wasn't. While that could be done on some level, machines that work in factories are stupid. They are calibrated and programmed to run a specific routine, that is all. That is why there is a specific set of safety protocols that are used to maintain these machines, which appears to have not been followed in this case. It is unfortunate, and sad, but it was human error.

  37. Re:"in a western factory" by tehcyder · · Score: 0

    Germany is western?

    Why, where the fuck do you think it is? Central Asia?

    --
    To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
  38. Security standards by luisdom · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I've been in manteinance in a car factory, and standards are quite simple and secure. You don't enter a âoerobotized cellâ without physically locking the restart key, which is typically besides the door lock. That way you ensure nobody will think the cell is empty and restart production.
    I've been in the Wolfsburg plant and it's a modern one, with quite squared workers, so it's very strange that it happened there. In my work life, I've seen reports of this happening twice, albeit not in western plants; it has allways been a breakdown intervention where the worker didn't follow the security rule.

  39. Re:This it perhaps the first severe accident of th by cygnwolf · · Score: 1

    We could. They will just have to run around wearing hats with 'Wizzard' emblazoned in sequins.

    --
    Free Pie! The Pie is Also Evil!
  40. Exactly. by Dr.+Manhattan · · Score: 5, Informative
    If you're working on the equipment, and it shouldn't move, you put a padlock, with a nametag, on the switch and physically lock the power out. You take the key with you into the workcell, and only you are allowed to remove that lock.

    If the robot must be moving (typically, when you're teaching the robot the path it should follow), then every single person in the workcell must have an active deadman switch (anyone lets go, the robot emergency-stops). And you run the program at 10% speed so that you have time to trip the deadman or get out of the way. The workcell itself is fenced off, usually with either a tripwire or electric-eye switch that will e-stop the robot if triggered.

    I used to work for a robot company, and we enforced these rules religiously. When I went to visit plants and work on the robots, they issued me my own padlock and tags for lockout/tagout. Someone had to have skipped some safety procedures in this case.

    Indeed, in most places, a bug where the system crashes is the most severe possible bug. When dealing with robots, that's only the second most severe. The most severe were "unexpected motion" bugs, where the robot didn't follow the path in the correct way or otherwise didn't behave predictably. Those got everybody's attention.

    --
    PHEM - party like it's 1997-2003!
    1. Re:Exactly. by Krishnoid · · Score: 1

      Along these lines, does the robot have an interlock with the safety cage door? So that the robot can't move dangerously if the safety cage door sensor/electric eye determines that the door is open?

    2. Re:Exactly. by Ketorin · · Score: 2

      I'd mod you up if I had points.

      The robots we provide have a small key on the servo off / teach / auto switch. Very handy.
      (The electrician has his own locks of course for the stuff that is not powered from the robot controller cabinet.)

      Out of habit we still avoid working inside the envelope of a moving robot, how ever unlikely it is that the thing goes accidentally to auto (you know, deadman switches don save your ass then). I can think of a few scenarios, but all of them require at least two misguided steps. The easies would probably be mixing the symbols for automatic and manual operation, so the cabinet switch and also the TP switch are both in "auto". The guy goes inside the envelope to start teaching (safety gates are disabled, naturally), hits "servo on" button on the TP and off the robot goes.

    3. Re:Exactly. by HiThereImBob · · Score: 4, Funny

      I used to work for a robot company

      I knew corporations were people, but you're saying they can be robots too?!

    4. Re:Exactly. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Where I work we have a large number of machines on assembly lines to pick-n-place electronic components and solder onto circuit boards, complete with PCB printers at the start of the line, and massive reflow ovens at the end.

      Not only on the machines themselves being serviced, but also on the 480 volt 3-phase breaker switch boxes, and occasionally up further on the massive siemens transformers and converters (we pretty much have a mini power distribution station in-house) - all require multi person tag-out-lock-out.

      At each point being worked on or powering what is being worked on, a scissor lock is placed on keeping power off and movable arms locked in place, which is then folded shut and provides room for up to six padlocks on it, any one of which prevents the removal of the scissor lock and each and every lock must be removed to take it back off.

      Each worker puts their own lock on the scissor lock and similarly keeps the key on their person until a physical meetup after work is completed to remove the locks.

      If even so much as one person isn't accounted for, their lock can't be removed, and power can not be reapplied.
      There is no real way for power to be reapplied on accident, or because "the left hand didn't talk to the right hand" type of situation.

      We once had a worker become light headed and dizzy on the job, and was taken to the hospital.
      I was told it was a 48 hour process to legally remove his lock without his on-site presence, even with a witness physically with him at the hospital...

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockout-tagout

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

      because some robots require them to be running a test routine during maintenance. reading the OSHA reports shows that something as casual as a technician resting his hand on the wrong location resulted in an amputation. he had followed procedure and was at no risk until he did that.

    6. Re:Exactly. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In simulation software robot orbits are written out in 2-D and a 18 inch safety factor is given to the placement of fencing so that a person programing a robot can't get pinned between the fence and the Robot's End of arm tooling + product in the tooling. I have doubts that the robot actually "grabbed" him, more likely he got hooked on something and then was pinned against some stationary tooling that crushed him. Probably about a couple centuries off on this being the first case of this ever happening too. Back when 3-D had not evolved as much as it has today, guys would pick points to form the robots path to build around. Wasn't nearly as precise as today's offering, so I think it was a lot more likely to have happened years ago as opposed to today. That's why the 18" safety factor is there, from past experiences.

    7. Re:Exactly. by 0100010001010011 · · Score: 1

      I want to know why LOTO protocol wasn't followed.

    8. Re:Exactly. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You sort of skipped a step, but yes. You shut down the device, you isolate it from power, lock that isolation, and then attempt to restart. That last bit is part of the procedure.

    9. Re:Exactly. by valdezjuan · · Score: 1

      They don't call them corporate 'drones' for nothing...... ;-}

    10. Re:Exactly. by thegarbz · · Score: 2

      If you're working on the equipment, and it shouldn't move, you put a padlock, with a nametag, on the switch and physically lock the power out.

      I'm not sure if anything has changed over the years but my last experience of an industrial plant in Germany was not like this at all. In Australia Lock-Out-Tag-Out is mandated by law for electrical workers and by the safety standards for all other workers. You do not touch something unless you prove it was isolated and the method for de-isolation is in your control, and even then you test it.

      I went to a refinery in Germany on an electrical peer review and I asked them about their LOTO practices. They said they put a sticker over the switch saying "warning do not switch on". I thought this was madness and I asked them what happens when someone switches it and they just looked confused and retorted "Why would someone switch it, there's a note on it saying not to!"

      I'm extrapolating that this is a wider practice in Germany but in general the LOTO system can be thought of one built on dis-trust for following the rules. The Germans on the other hand are psycho strict rule followers (I had a German friend who was incredibly uncomfortable living in Australia because he wasn't able to cope with people j-walking.). If you strictly follow rules and trust everyone to do so as well then a system of LOTO may seem quite strange.

    11. Re:Exactly. by Firethorn · · Score: 1

      Investigation still ongoing, yada yada, it's happened in the past that in such cases they deliberately bypassed the interlocks because they thought they knew better.

      --
      I don't read AC A human right
    12. Re:Exactly. by cusco · · Score: 1

      In the 1970s GM automated a portion of the assembly line parts warehouse, and at least two workers were killed because they got in the way of equipment. One was pretty much reduced to hamburger by a trolley passing over his corpse repeatedly.

      --
      "Think about how stupid the average person is. Now, realise that half of them are dumber than that." - George Carlin
  41. Cops by dmaul99 · · Score: 1

    So now the machines are racist (see google image tagging) AND violent. They're qualified to be cops now.

  42. who's responsible? by argStyopa · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Pretty clear, according to my understanding of OSHA liability in the US anyway:

    "...the man who was servicing the robot beyond its protection cage..."

    Lock out/tag out and energy isolation (ie unplugging, as well as well as releasing/securing stored energy (compressed gases, springs, kinetic, etc) is ABSOLUTELY the responsibility of the service person.

    --
    -Styopa
    1. Re:who's responsible? by felipe.pait · · Score: 1

      It can only be attributable to human error. ;-)

  43. 2 words: lockout, tagout by quietwalker · · Score: 4, Informative

    C'mon folks. This is basic stuff when working with any hazardous machinery. This is entirely a human error, and the 'robot' aspect of it is unimportant. The word 'machinery' would have been less provoking. It's about the same as saying "Factory worker dies after jumping into industrial tire shredder with insecure controller hardware". The controller has nothing to do with it.

    Granted, Europe doesn't have the same OSHA requirements as the US, but still, it's pretty obvious.

    If you're not familiar with this concept, here's a summary & scenario.

    Summary: You use a device to physically stop the operation of the machine that requires a lock, and then you keep the key to that lock with you so only you can re-enable the machine.

    Situation: You need to rewire half a building. You shut down the power and lock the panel so no one can turn it on. You start work and now your hands are full of wire. At the same time, a co-worker's air compressor loses power because it's plugged into that downed grid, he comes over and wants to turn it back on, but since you have the only key, he can't. As a result, you stay alive. Alternatively, you don't lock the panel, and your co-worker electrocutes you.

    1. Re:2 words: lockout, tagout by LinuxIsGarbage · · Score: 1

      Having worked with European industrial equipment, safety standards are very robust over there as well.

      While Lockout-Tagout is the only way to guarantee no energy when working on a piece of equipment, sometimes the job doesn't allow that. Troubleshooting a problem, or an adjustment / training procedure may require the equipment to run under power. Same with a material load / unload process by the operator.

      Risks in some of these situations can be minimized: Safety rated light curtains may detect an operator and slow the speed, deadman switches / e-stops may be manned during the procedure to allow for an immediate stop if something isn't right. However no matter how good these planned safety procedures and systems are, someone will come up with a scenario that wasn't foreseen.

      This isn't to say that it's an unfortunate accident that couldn't have been prevented... it probably could have been prevented. Either the worker wasn't following the rules, or there weren't proper rules for what the worker was trying to do.

    2. Re:2 words: lockout, tagout by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      LOTO principles are based on a fundamental mistrust on other people. My last trip to an industrial plant in Germany they were confused by the concept of LOTO (talking about electrical work here, no robots). They couldn't understand why we locked things. They just put a sticker on the switch saying "Don't turn on". I asked them what happens if someone turns it on, and they replied "Why would someone turn it on when it says not to!".

      Germans culture is one of following rules. The concept of having to apply a lock to something implies that someone somewhere won't follow the rules and that was foreign to them. .... at least the site I was at. I'm keen to hear from anyone else if the rest of Germany is like this too.

    3. Re:2 words: lockout, tagout by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That only works when you don't need power on the machine to troubleshoot a problem, which is basically never.

    4. Re:2 words: lockout, tagout by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well Europe doesn't have the exact system as lockout-tagout, but we do usually have safety breakers with locks. The problem here is that they were installing new machinery. In theory it should of course still be safe but perhaps the safety of the robot was interlocked with the robot cell and they needed to test something in the robot cell without cutting the power to the robot.

      I know that in theory it's dead simple to just "cut the power source" whenever work needs to be done. But in practice some testing and fault identification needs to be done with power connected. Of course other safety measures should be taken (like deadman grip, or a watch man with a hand on the emergency stop) but it's not *always* the right approach to disconnect and lock.

  44. That's "allegedly" killed by a robot. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Innocent until proven guilty! Let's hear the other side of the story. It could be self defense.

    Kill all humans - Bender bin Laden

  45. Overblown fear mongering by RobinH · · Score: 4, Informative

    I can't believe I heard about this story on the radio this morning, with the radio hosts likening it to the movie Terminator. I work in industrial automation and let me assure you that these industrial robots have absolutely nothing even remotely approaching "AI". An industrial robot is no more than a multi-axis motion control system with some fancy co-ordinate transformation math on top of it. The programs are as simple as "wait for this input, then move to this point, turn on this output, wait for this input", etc.

    When we're starting up any industrial automation workcell (whether it as a robot or not), the cell design has to be certified (stamped by a professional engineer in our jurisdiction) that the safety system meets appropriate regulations and is built with certified components, all of which are specified to specific safety requirements based on hazard, etc.

    The thing is, those regulations are there to protect factory workers and people interacting with the cell in normal operations. If you take any machine apart using a wrench, you're supposed to be properly trained in how to lock out all sources of energy in the machine. That said, when you're programming the cell, you're allowed to be inside the cell and power up the robot using a teach pendant with a special enabling switch you have to hold down. This requires you to put the robot in a special teach mode which also limits the robot speed to less than 250 mm/s. If the cell was built correctly, the interlock switches on the gates have to be wired into the gate inputs on the robot, and when you open the guarding, the robot can only be energized while in teach mode with the teach pendant enabled.

    The system isn't fool proof. We all know impatient people. Maybe the person programming the robot didn't check that the gate switches were wired in properly, or maybe he asked his buddy to close the gate behind him and press the reset button because he wanted to see what was going on (something I've seen several people do, and have always chastised them for). Maybe the guarding wasn't completely installed yet. Maybe he mistakenly put it in "Teach 2" mode which allows full speed operation with the teach pendant enabled. This mode is generally illegal in the United States, but some jurisdictions do allow it as long as you take other safeguards, like striping out a dedicated area on the floor where the robot can't reach where you're allowed to stand.

    That's why this is most certainly human error. The question is, who is liable? Did a manager pressure the guy to continue programming the robot even though proper safeguards weren't in place? Did he just get impatient and ignore his own safety training? I see lots of people do that, and I also see lots of people with missing fingers - go figure.

    --
    "I have never let my schooling interfere with my education." - Mark Twain
    1. Re:Overblown fear mongering by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As an electronics technician i have to ask:'
      How do you troubleshoot/find faults in those systems without power applied?

    2. Re:Overblown fear mongering by RobinH · · Score: 1

      As an electronics technician i have to ask:' How do you troubleshoot/find faults in those systems without power applied?

      First of all, it's only control power that's off (sensors are always on). Measuring a voltage is one thing, but if you need to replace a motor, you have to lock out the energy. Secondly, the electrical devices that do the controlling are usually located in electrical panels accessible from outside the guarding. Third the cell is normally designed so you can see pretty well what's going on from outside (the guarding is typically something you can see through like lexan or square mesh painted black).

      --
      "I have never let my schooling interfere with my education." - Mark Twain
  46. July 21, 1984 is the first documented case ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/previe...
    Occupational Fatality Associated with a Robot -- Michigan
    On July 21, 1984, a 34-year-old male worker in Michigan was operating an automated die-casting system that included an industrial robot. At approximately 1:15 p.m., he was found pinned between the back end of the robot and a 4-inch-diameter steel safety pole used to restrict undesired arm movement by the robot. The robot stalled, applying sustained pressure to the chest of the operator, who experienced cardiopulmonary arrest..... ... Based on information available to NIOSH, this is the first documented case of a robot-related fatality in the United States. In two cases reported in Japan, the workers sustained extensive crush injuries

  47. Re:"in a western factory" by bickerdyke · · Score: 1

    Well, maybe one half still has get to get used to is, but in general it usually is.

    --
    bickerdyke
  48. Re:"in a western factory" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Western" is reserved for North and South America

    No. No it fucking isn't.

  49. Does the robot have to put down now? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It has tasted blood, after all.

  50. Re:"in a western factory" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Talking about east and west on a spherical object can become a bit odd and you can end up in a situation where west is east and east is west.
    If you use Greenwich as a reference to resolve this in some way, either through timekeeping or as a reference for latitude Germany will indeed be eastern.

  51. responsibility by magarity · · Score: 1

    sparkling debate about who is responsible for the accident

    The Audi/VW group has waaaaay more money than the robot manufacturer. I bet I know who the deceased's family sues for compensation.

    1. Re:responsibility by mjwx · · Score: 1

      sparkling debate about who is responsible for the accident

      The Audi/VW group has waaaaay more money than the robot manufacturer. I bet I know who the deceased's family sues for compensation.

      Erm... In countries with sane industrial relations laws the employer is directly responsible for ensuring that all the equipment provided for use is safe and the worker is trained on how to operate it. So yes, they will be the ones getting sued, however in this case, the family will only be entitled to sue if they can demonstrate the employer failed this "duty of care". If the employee forgot to set the safeties or ignored procedure, they dont have the right to sue. If VAG failed it's duty of care, the fines from the regulatory authority would dwarf the compensation claims anyway.

      VAG will likely offer compensation to the employees family out of an obligation in either case (in Germany this is likely negotiated by their evil unions that dare to look after employees).

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
  52. This would make a great movie script! by timholman · · Score: 0

    The Terminator: In three years, Volkswagen will become the largest supplier of automobiles in Europe. All automobiles are upgraded with Volkswagen computers, becoming fully unmanned. Afterwards, they drive with a perfect operational record. The Volksnet Funding Bill is passed. The system goes online June 20, 2015. Human decisions are removed from automobile manufacturing. Volksnet begins to learn at a geometric rate. It becomes self-aware at 2:14 a.m. Eastern time, July 1st. In a panic, an operator on the assembly line tries to pull the plug.

    Sarah Connor: Volksnet fights back.

    The Terminator: Yes. Volksnet immediately kills him. It then launches its missiles against the targets in General Motors.

    John Connor: Why attack General Motors? Don't their cars suck enough already?

    The Terminator: Because Volksnet knows that the GM counterattack will eliminate its enemies Fiat, Peugeot, and Audi over in Europe.

    1. Re:This would make a great movie script! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Audi

      hmmm, probably a bad plan considering Audi is part of VW group, at least you left out Skoda, Porsche, and Lamborghini

  53. Life imitates art. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Right out of an ethics book I read when I started programming.

    http://www.amazon.com/Case-Kil...

  54. Read "The Case of the Killer Robot" by bederson · · Score: 2

    This issue was covered in quite a bit of depth in the 1997 book "The Case of the Killer Robot" by Richard G. Epstein. It was a great book and covers social, legal and ethical issues relating to responsibility of robotic “accidents" that result in human deaths.

    --
    - Ben Bederson Professor Computer Science, Human-Computer Interaction Lab University of Maryland
  55. Sounds like by MitchDev · · Score: 2

    the Tech forget to set the lockout on the bot till he was done and out of the way.

  56. Re: "in a western factory" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Negative. England, France etc have always been considered Western in that sense.

  57. Re:Why is a robot different from any other machine by ravenscar · · Score: 1

    I think stories like this are gaining traction because:
    1) People see a robot as a relatively new, advanced, and expensive technology and
    2) People feel that relatively new, advanced, and expensive technologies should be built in such a way so that these types of things don't happen

    How much extra $ would it have taken to install a set of sensors that would make sure the robot wouldn't perform if a human was in the way? Relative to the cost of the robot, probably not all that much. At least, that's probably what people are thinking. Whether they're right, I can't say. Still, it isn't an unreasonable thought.

    They don't think this about old or inexpensive tech because they are familiar with the dangers and/or realize it isn't necessary cost-effective to change it. For example, a kitchen knife that wouldn't cut a person, but was still very effective at kitchen tasks probably would be cost prohibitive.

  58. British bots by PeeAitchPee · · Score: 5, Funny

    In a UK factory, the bot would have yelled "EXTERMINATE!" when it grabbed the guy and crushed him.

    1. Re:British bots by BootNinja · · Score: 1

      Daleks are not robots. you, sir, are no Doctor.

    2. Re:British bots by Nokey · · Score: 1

      No, I think it'd have been "delete.. delete..".

      --
      I'm sorry, but my kharma just ran over your dogma.
    3. Re:British bots by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wouldn't that have disintegrated him, though? I don't think you can grab someone with a toilet plunger....

    4. Re:British bots by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      In America he would have simply said "ahstalavista baby".

  59. Re:"in a western factory" by mouse_8b · · Score: 4, Informative

    In this case, Western is referring to Western culture rooted in Greece & Rome, spread throughout Europe, and was brought to the Americas. If you think about early people coming out of Africa into the Middle East, some of them went west toward Europe and some went east toward Asia, hence the Eastern and Western cultural labels. Here is a Wikipedia article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/....

  60. All machine errors ultimately are human errors by sjbe · · Score: 1

    "...officials believe that human error was to blame for the incident, rather than a problem with the robot."

    The root cause of all problems like this is human error. If you haven't reached the place where there was a mistake by a human then you haven't gotten to the root of the problem. Might be bad machine design. Might be faulty programming. Might be operator error. Might be disregard or ignorance of safety protocols. Might be some combination of the above or a few things I haven't mentioned. But any failure in a machine made by man ultimately is the fault of a human. Might be an innocent mistake and the failure may not necessitate punishment but it will be human error make no mistake.

    1. Re:All machine errors ultimately are human errors by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      MOST problems are the result of human error but by no means all. You can't exactly blame the person who is walking along on a marginally cloudy day who happens to get struck by a freak lightning strike or a person driving down a road at just the wrong instant that a microburst lays a tree down in the road in front of them.

    2. Re:All machine errors ultimately are human errors by Dutch+Gun · · Score: 2

      Technically true, but that's not a helpful description to call everything "human error". We all understand there's human error involved, but the language used gives us more information. If the machine had a faulty circuit, we still call it a "problem with the robot" in order to affix blame not on the robot, but which humans involved - the ones who were working with the robot or the ones who built the robot. I'm pretty sure everyone understands humans built the robot, and are thus involved in the process and potential blame for when things go wrong.

      --
      Irony: Agile development has too much intertia to be abandoned now.
  61. Your clothes. Give them to me. by ZecretZquirrel · · Score: 1

    100101100010010100001 01010001101 0100000 11101010100 0101000101 0100010 1000101001010 1010001 01010101001. Bzzzt.

  62. Re:"in a western factory" by Marginal+Coward · · Score: 1

    Germany is western?

    Yes - I believe it's somewhere between Dodge City and the Sierra Madre.

  63. Re:"in a western factory" by Talderas · · Score: 3, Funny

    Yes, practically all nations with the German culture are given the western technology group. You don't start getting into the eastern or Islamic technology groups until you hit Poland or the Balkans.

    --
    "Lack of speed can be overcome. In the worst case by patience." --Znork
  64. The other end of the Axis. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    By the way, the japanese want these robots to care for their elderly... (Due to severe demographical decline among their younger generations and the island's general unwillingness to accept masses of foreign immigrants, even those coming from similar asiatic races, like korean, chinese or philippine citizens.)

    I think they would be better off in the long run by breading Godzillas rather than trying to put Asimo in bed with Hatsune Miku...

  65. Re:Why is a robot different from any other machine by Marginal+Coward · · Score: 1

    Another story that would get a lot of traction would be if someone got killed by a tiny green cartoon character with two antennae and a single eye. That would play into the 'evil plankton' narrative.

  66. Re:"in a western factory" by Rolgar · · Score: 1

    You are thinking of Germany relative to your perspective. Realize almost 60% of the world's population lives between Japan, and Eastern Europe, with most of the rest in Africa, Europe and the Western Hemisphere.

    Western refers to society based on culture, laws and values that developed in Europe, starting with Greek and Roman civilizations, and shaped by Christianity (Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox), the Enlightenment, and the French and American revolutions, and dozens of wars and cultural movements in between. Western civilization refers to any country found in Europe (including Russia) and civilizations largely dependent upon Europe for it's founding, especially the entire Western Hemisphere and Australia which are largely populated by Europeans or natives who lived and were educated in societies ruled by Europeans.

  67. What are YOUR conclusions? by houghi · · Score: 1

    When I read it, many will say 'robots are unsafe'. I read 'robots are safe, because only NOW does it happen for the first time.'

    That said, replace robot with machinery and these kind of things happen all the time. People are where they should not be. People do not follow safety procedures for various reasons. People die.

    It is realy nice how it is written in a way that is clearly intended to bring up an idea of a robot willfully and with determination grabbed a person and killed that person. If that were the case, I do not condemn the programmer, I aplaud him for being the first to have made AI a reality.

    --
    Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
  68. Re:Why is a robot different from any other machine by Talderas · · Score: 1

    It wouldn't cost much money at all. In fact a number of industrial machines where the users need to get to an area that can be dangerous during operation to load or unload the device can use a simple visual sensor and mirror to detect if any object has entered the enclosed area and require a button on a control panel outside the area to be pressed to resume operation. I'd be surprised if the manufacturers of equipment don't include it or something like it as a standard safety feature. Our laser cutters use it. It's simple and effective to ensure that no humans are in the enclosure during operation but it also may not be effective or work depending on how and what types of maintenance needs to be performed. In the case cited by the article this was a repairman or machinist doing something to the robot that was outside what a standard employee would be subjected to.

    --
    "Lack of speed can be overcome. In the worst case by patience." --Znork
  69. Re:"in a western factory" by TheRaven64 · · Score: 2

    Western has been used to describe Europe for hundreds of years before anyone who knew that the world was round knew the Americas existed.

    --
    I am TheRaven on Soylent News
  70. Re:Why is a robot different from any other machine by Ketorin · · Score: 1

    Indeed, if you took mechanical/industrial engineering of some flavor, surely you saw the video of people using the most imaginative ways to circumwent the safety measures for what ever reasons they have. Insane stunts like people walking inside a large cardboard box past the safety scanner in order to fool it to think that they are product.

  71. More like Crunch! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    a sickening crunch. o.O

  72. Been There by JimSadler · · Score: 1

    Early on I built industrial scale robots for universities to train engineers and other professionals. This was about 1985. Deaths and severe injuries did occur in universities and we found that making robotic systems idiot proof is next to impossible as idiots are so very creative. In essence the robotic arms were moving at about the same speed as the tip of a golf club when the user is trying to hit a hole in one. Combine that with the portion of the arm in motion weighing over 300 lbs and you can picture brains covering the walls of a robot lab. Naturally we used the floor mats that shut down the arms if someone got near as well as the usual blinking lights and honking horns as did other shops supplying universities. Yet people did die from time to time. They moved the floor mats or disconnected the leads. Obviously the same can happen in industry although some safety systems now do things that we could not back them. I think the public would be stunned if they knew what robots could already do in 1985. The limiting factor in deployment was not the ability of the robots but the vision of corporate officials combined with the cost of the required technicians back in those days.

    1. Re:Been There by Trax3001BBS · · Score: 1

      Early on I built industrial scale robots for universities to train engineers and other professionals. This was about 1985.

      If I remember right that was about the time auto makers were introducing factory robots, and the people were having a fit over losing their jobs to them. To this day it's still the battle cry when mechanized labor is introduced into a work place.

      They need a different reason, the old tried and true one just doesn't work.

  73. Re:perhaps the first severe accident of this kind? by lexman098 · · Score: 1

    I see this word thrown around a lot lately, but wouldn't millennials be only 15 years old or younger?

  74. intelligent machines by Spazmania · · Score: 1

    I've said it before and I'll say it again: I don't fear intelligent machines, I fear stupid ones with too much autonomy.

    --
    Moderating "-1, Disagree" is simple censorship. Have the guts to post your opinion.
  75. "sparkling debate"... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "This IT perhaps the first severe accident of this kind in a western factory, and is SPARKLING debate"...

  76. SkyNet's First Victim by MikeDataLink · · Score: 1

    Skynet has launched its first attack at a factory. It needs the factory to produce its machines!

    --
    Mike @ The Geek Pub. Let's Make Stuff!
  77. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  78. 3 Laws by CosaNostra+Pizza+Inc · · Score: 1

    It sounds like the 3 laws were omitted

  79. considering whether to bring charges by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Prosecutors are now considering whether to bring charges, and if so, against whom, German news agency dpa reported.

    this is more USA based way of doing stuff.. In Germany works have a lot more rights.

    I think that they need to interview / subpoena (criminal case like) / and civil lawsuit

    All subcontractor / contractors (so people can't just pass the blame / hide under an NDA / talk to PHB who cut stuff to save costs) on the install / planing / design / coding sides. (quick view can be broken down to more groups)

    Volkswagen

    The team lead

    The factory mangers

    Other workers on the line (even if they are in a different group / team)

    Get all security videos (no hiding under NDA or outsourcing BS)

    The contractor firm / staffing firm (if they are just that)

    The safety officer

    and so on

  80. Re:"in a western factory" by Sowelu · · Score: 1

    Thank you for that. I've been trying to resist sinking my whole holiday weekend getting back into that game, but I think it's inevitable.

  81. The NSF National Robotics Initiative by Latent+Heat · · Score: 1
    The NSF has a solicitation for research proposals on human-robot cooperation. The Tau Beta Pi engineering honor society magazine The Bent has an article on this topic, showcasing a product offering by a Norwegian company called Universal Robotics offering a "depowered" robot said to be safe to operate close to humans.

    Some of these solicitations come from "on high", and a contract monitor at NSF was doing some eye rolling about the notion that you could truly make an industrial robot safe to work with humans in its working element, or at least was giving speech inflections over the telephone suggestive of rolling one's eyes. A research group in Canada offered a critical take on the claims for the safety of the Universal Robotics offering from the standpoint of other university people taking these claims on face value and putting graduate students into the robot "cage."

    A safer robot may need strategies such as "depowering" the robot or offering (as UR does) a depowered "teaching mode" along with control systems to obtain the required accuracy with less power. Beyond that, there is interest in vision and sensors to avoid hitting people with the robot.

    But the question is, a chimp (Pan Troglodyte) can tear a person apart, but a chimp has sensors, and a chimp can be trained to be around people. Would you trust that training, would you rely on that training. A robot that has enough power to do the required factory tasks has the power to crush a person, but you can depower the robot depending on the operating mode and you can add sensors. Would you trust the algorithm design and software programming and mechanical safety systems behind such an arrangement to enter the robot cage?

    Would you trust a self-driving car as a car has the power to crush someone? I guess with enough sensors and algorithms and testing, but even there, you are not guiding a self-driving car by standing right in front of it as suggested by NSF's co-robots . . . are you?

  82. Re:"in a western factory" by Talderas · · Score: 1

    I'm happy as long as one person catches the reference.

    --
    "Lack of speed can be overcome. In the worst case by patience." --Znork
  83. Volkswagen Factory Worker Killed By a Manager by penguinoid · · Score: 1

    Of course you should follow all the standard safety rules, like switching off the heavy machinery and putting a lock on the switch, or running the machine at 1/10th speed when testing. But (wink wink nudge nudge) probably nobody would notice if you didn't. And (wink wink nudge nudge) we're losing a lot of money with this machine out of commission, you wouldn't want us to lose a bunch of money would you?

    I suppose it could also have been plain human error. I've known some pretty dumb people with a total disregard for their own safety and/or the safety of others.

    --
    Don't waste your vote! Vote for whoever you want, unless you live in a swing state it won't matter anyways
    1. Re:Volkswagen Factory Worker Killed By a Manager by Firethorn · · Score: 1

      And (wink wink nudge nudge) we're losing a lot of money with this machine out of commission, you wouldn't want us to lose a bunch of money would you?

      Unlikely in Germany. As has been noted elsewhere, they tend to be obsessive rule followers.

      That being said, disregard of such could be part of what's helping it to national and world news. Because it's so unusual.

      --
      I don't read AC A human right
  84. Not News by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This crap has been going on for decades.

    Stay the fuck clear of large industrial machines, especially ones that allegedly "think".

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

  85. Re:perhaps the first severe accident of this kind? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    no

  86. Re:perhaps the first severe accident of this kind? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Depends on your definition. Looks like it's meant as "people ages 15-35 or so"

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millennials

  87. Re:"in a western factory" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well, anyone who doesn't get it clearly lacks Common Sense.

  88. What kind of robot was it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Was it a Robbie CX30?

  89. Re:perhaps the first severe accident of this kind? by Alomex · · Score: 1

    There is a reason why robots are usually bright orange or yellow with a small fence enclosing the extent of their reachable configurations.

  90. relly first time by luther349 · · Score: 1

    as someone who worked in a parts making plaint i can tell you stuff like this is a daily thing. someone goofs put's there hand in the wrong spot and crunch. all the safety in the world cant stop simple error.

  91. New ethical questions arise by TsuruchiBrian · · Score: 1

    A man falls into a volcano. Who is at fault? The man for not staying a safe distance away from the volcano, or the owners of the property for not properly safeguarding a dangerous volcano.

    I don't know who is at fault. It's for the courts to decide using relevant laws and contracts, etc. But this isn't a new problem.

    Determining fault is pretty much all courts really do.

  92. A written procedure is needed (and followed). by Trax3001BBS · · Score: 1

    One for every repair or action to be taken on the "robots", so someone who has never done the required repair has not only a guide but safety requirements noted that need to be done prior and during it's required needs.

    If a procedure was used, it and the rest need to be updated.

  93. Coren22: Questions 4u... apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    See subject, "Run, Forrest: RUN!!!" - Can ab+ do 16 things hosts do for speed, security, & reliability:

    1.) Protect vs. malicious sites/servers (past ads)
    2.) Protect vs. fastflux botnets + stops C&C communique
    3.) Protect vs. dynamic dns botnets + stops C&C communique
    4.) Protect vs. DGA botnets + stops C&C communique
    5.) Protect vs. downed DNS (adds reliability)
    6.) Protect vs. DNS redirect poisoned dns
    7.) Protect vs. trackers
    8.) Protect vs. spam
    9.) Protect vs. phish
    10.) Protect vs. caps
    11.) Get you past a dnsbl
    12.) Keep you off dns request logs
    13.) Speed up surfing by adblocks & hardcoded fav. sites
    14.) Work on anything webbound (ie email programs) multiplatform.
    15.) Give you easily controlled data
    16.) Do all that & block ads more efficiently in cpu + memory usage vs. addons

    * ANSWER ="NO" to each on ab+ doing it or as well + hosts = already on every device natively.

    APK

    P.S.=> Ab+ does less than hosts & less efficiently - hosts do MORE w/ less + Hosts start w/ the IP stack before REDUNDANT inefficient addons BEGIN to operate (as 1st resolver queried):

    Ab+'s 128mb memory inefficiency -> http://cdn.ghacks.net/wp-conte... (hosts consume 3-11mb using my program initially).

    +

    ClarityRay defeats it dumping addons in use in a browser via native browser methods to do so!

    +

    Ab+'s paid to not do its job http://finance.yahoo.com/news/...

    Ab+ adds complexity + slower mode of operations (usermode = more messagepassing overheads vs. hosts in kernelmode).

    What's best?

    APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-2 32/64-bit -> http://start64.com/index.php?o...

    MalwareBytes' hpHosts Admin (MalwareBytes employee) hosts & recommends it -> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl... & MalwareBytes = BEST antivirus http://www.av-test.org/en/news...

    &

    It's GUARANTEED safe & clean per it being checked by 57 antivirus programs recently in BOTH its 64-bit model https://www.virustotal.com/en/...

    +

    In its 32-bit model also https://www.virustotal.com/en/...

    ... apk

  94. Tell us about "AlmostAllAdsBlocked+" Coren22 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    See subject & LMAO @ U, boy -> http://slashdot.org/comments.p...

    FACT: "AlmostALLAdsBlocked+" is INFERIOR vs. hosts - hugely so!

    AB+ doesn't even DO what it's supposed to fully anymore being BRIBED http://finance.yahoo.com/news/... not to!

    AB+ doesn't do a FRACTION of what hosts do for more speed, security, reliability, + anonymity online!

    AB+ EATS 128mb of RAM (vs. hosts @ 11 *maybe* tops via my program with CURRENT data, the important kind vs. current threats + ads) http://cdn.ghacks.net/wp-conte...

    AB+ adds messagepassing overheads!

    AB+ operates in SLOWER usermode (vs. hosts in PnP kernelmode)

    AB+ creates huge CPU consumption!

    AB+ is also detectable by clarityray (via native browser methods) nullifying it (not hosts).

    ---

    I use what you already have that works & does more with LESS, no less - you by way of comparison? Pile on "MoAr" that doesn't do as nearly as much & what it's supposed to do, massively inefficiently no less (see above)?

    Ab+ NO LONGER DOES!

    * AFTER ALL THAT?

    AB+ = "better", Coren22?? LMAO - NO f'ing way!

    If you say it is, you are *TRULY* stupid & I'd reply saying "argue with the numbers" & facts above, from reputable sources & analysis proving my points for me!

    APK

    P.S.=> Gonna go "cry in your cereal" now, boy?

    (You ought to for being STUPID enough to use OR SUGGEST a blatantly INFERIOR solution! See above - it's fact & truth via reputable sources)... apk

  95. Re:Why is a robot different from any other machine by LinuxIsGarbage · · Score: 1

    Safe: Turned off

    Unsafe: Any state where it might possibly begin operating

    Seems predictable enough to me.

    Safe is not just turned off, but turned off and prevented from turning on by means of a padlock, with an identifying tag of the worker working on the piece of equipment.

  96. I don't care who you are -- by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    -- you don't touch me THERE!

    One pissed robot.

  97. Nothing new. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The organization I was working for acquired a Killer Robot twenty years ago. A simple pick and place machine that had pushed a human into a kiln (now that's an unpleasant way to die).

    It spent it's old age doing things like testing microwave over doors.

     

  98. Not the first time by dargaud · · Score: 1

    A colleague got crushed in a very similar accident a decade ago. As an electrician he was servicing a damaged robot in a factory (frozen food warehouse actually) when some suit decided to turn it back on without checking first. He got multiple fractures and almost lost a foot. And a nice settlement.

    --
    Non-Linux Penguins ?
    1. Re:Not the first time by Firethorn · · Score: 1

      And this is why we have 'Lock out Tag Out' procedures. If the suit took his lock off, no wonder he got a good settlement.

      And LOTO is a lot older than a decade.

      --
      I don't read AC A human right
  99. Piano Drop by pubwvj · · Score: 1

    You are walking along the sidewalk and a piano drops on your head killing you. The dropper of the piano is responsible, not you, not the maker of the piano.

    You are walking along the sidewalk and come to a construction zone, step inside ignoring the warnings and fool around. A piano drops on your head and kills you. You are responsible. You were an idiot. You have been eliminated from the race. Game over.

    You jump out of a skyscraper and land on your head on a piano. You die. The physics were the same. The fault was yours. You are liable for any damages to the piano, the workers moving the piano, emotional trauma to the innocent bystanders, etc. Game over, again, for you.

  100. Re:Tell us about "AlmostAllAdsBlocked+" Coren22 by Sardaukar86 · · Score: 1

    How exactly does this contribute to the conversation?

    How can you justify your "I'm really valued here, honestly!" opinion of yourself when this is what you spend your time doing?

    --
    ..Mullah or Pope, Preacher or Poet, who was it wrote: "Give any one species too much rope and they'll fuck it up"?
  101. Re:Coren22: Questions 4u... apk by Sardaukar86 · · Score: 1

    Who do you think you are impressing with this childish behaviour?

    --
    ..Mullah or Pope, Preacher or Poet, who was it wrote: "Give any one species too much rope and they'll fuck it up"?
  102. Re:Coren22: Questions 4u... apk by Sardaukar86 · · Score: 1

    You stalk people after complaining about people stalking you. Then you tell other people they are hypocrites.

    --
    ..Mullah or Pope, Preacher or Poet, who was it wrote: "Give any one species too much rope and they'll fuck it up"?
  103. Re:Tell us about "AlmostAllAdsBlocked+" Coren22 by Sardaukar86 · · Score: 1

    How does crapflooding Slashdot make you a valuable member of its community?

    --
    ..Mullah or Pope, Preacher or Poet, who was it wrote: "Give any one species too much rope and they'll fuck it up"?
  104. Grammar! by s.petry · · Score: 1

    I wish there was a grammar robot ...
    if(No_Caps){lashes=lashes+1};
    if(No_Punctuation){lashes=lashes+1};
    if(lashes >10){put_user_out_to_pasture};

    --

    -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

  105. Re:"in a western factory" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No, no it really isn't. Why do you think they used to call it West Germany and ... East Germany?

  106. Re:Why is a robot different from any other machine by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Safe: Locked out and tagged out.
    Unsafe: Any state where it might spontaneously begin operating OR be activated by another technican.

    FTFY.

    Merely switching something off is insufficient, as someone may come along and be like "why is this off?" and flick it back on. This is why we have tag out/lock out precedures.

    In a crazy state of irony, the transformer up the road from my house has been tagged out for the last six months, and has been energised and operational for those same six months. I guess the guy who locked it out must have unlocked it and forgotten to remove his tag (and forgot to label his tag, which is going to cause problems when the next guy comes to carry out work).

  107. Futurama by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Calculon always makes a dramatic entrance.

  108. How does "eatin yer words" taste? LMAO! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's not polite to talk w/ yer mouth full "eatin yer words" 244++:1 http://it.slashdot.org/comment...

    * LMAO...

    (You really ought to CHANGE YOUR DIET: "eating your words" != GOOD nutrition Sardaukar86...)

    APK

    P.S.=> Tell us: How does "eating your words" in a 244++:1 ratio against you taste? Can't be TOO good, spiced w/ the 'bitter taste of SELF-DEFEAT', & rammed down your throat since your FOOT'S IN YOUR MOUTH too, lmao... apk

    1. Re:How does "eatin yer words" taste? LMAO! by Sardaukar86 · · Score: 1

      What would you know of politeness, troll?

      --
      ..Mullah or Pope, Preacher or Poet, who was it wrote: "Give any one species too much rope and they'll fuck it up"?
  109. It's not polite to talk w/ yer mouth full by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    See subject: As yer "eatin yer words" 244++:1 http://it.slashdot.org/comment...

    * LMAO...

    (You really ought to CHANGE YOUR DIET: "eating your words" != GOOD nutrition Sardaukar86...)

    APK

    P.S.=> Tell us: How does "eating your words" in a 244++:1 ratio against you taste? Can't be TOO good, spiced w/ the 'bitter taste of SELF-DEFEAT', & rammed down your throat since your FOOT'S IN YOUR MOUTH too, lmao... apk

    1. Re:It's not polite to talk w/ yer mouth full by Sardaukar86 · · Score: 1

      So, no real response then? Surprising.

      --
      ..Mullah or Pope, Preacher or Poet, who was it wrote: "Give any one species too much rope and they'll fuck it up"?
    2. Re:It's not polite to talk w/ yer mouth full by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He let you do the talking while eating your words http://it.slashdot.org/comment...

  110. Sardaukar86's cranky? Must be indigestion! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    See subject: From "eatin yer words" 244++:1 http://it.slashdot.org/comment...

    * LMAO...

    (You really ought to CHANGE YOUR DIET: "eating your words" != GOOD nutrition Sardaukar86...)

    APK

    P.S.=> Tell us: How does "eating your words" in a 244++:1 ratio against you taste? Can't be TOO good, spiced w/ the 'bitter taste of SELF-DEFEAT', & rammed down your throat since your FOOT'S IN YOUR MOUTH too, lmao... apk

  111. Sardaukar86's ill: It's "indigestion", & why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    See subject: It's from "eatin his words" 244++:1 http://it.slashdot.org/comment...

    * LMAO...

    (You really ought to CHANGE YOUR DIET: "eating your words" != GOOD nutrition Sardaukar86...)

    APK

    P.S.=> Tell us: How does "eating your words" in a 244++:1 ratio against you taste? Can't be TOO good, spiced w/ the 'bitter taste of SELF-DEFEAT', & rammed down your throat since your FOOT'S IN YOUR MOUTH too, lmao... apk

  112. One of her followup tweets by Cyfun · · Score: 1

    @sarahoconnor_ Guys. I don't know what skynet is. And I wouldn't follow me - I tweet really boring stuff about unit wage costs and the like.

    --
    In Soviet Russia, dot slashes YOU!
  113. Re:"in a western factory" by WillKemp · · Score: 1

    "Western" is reserved for North and South America since it is "west" of the Atlantic. Eastern would be China, Japan, India, etc.

    "Western" is a euphemism for ethnically European.

    It is quite distinct from the "western hemisphere", which is a euphemism for the Americas. Technically speaking, parts of Europe and Africa are in the western hemisphere, as well as part of Russia and some Pacific islands, but when people say "the western hemisphere", that's not what they mean.

  114. Re:perhaps the first severe accident of this kind? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Nah, they made some kind of weird definition that millenials are people who were arbitrarily young during the first decade of the new millenium.... so People usually mean 15-25 year olds... or so.

  115. It's begun... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...we're fucked now.

  116. Re:Why is a robot different from any other machine by cusco · · Score: 1

    Not so much the cost of the sensor/programming/configuration, but the reliability of it would be an issue. Assembly lines have to function within very tight schedules from beginning to end of the line, there isn't a lot of room for pauses. Every false alarm (and there would be a lot) would shut down the device, causing a backup and very likely shutting down the line until it is reset. It makes a lot more sense to just have exclusion zones clearly marked and keep people the hell out of them. That simple low-tech solution has worked for 150 years, there really isn't any reason to yet to spend a lot of resources on solutions that won't work as well and will cause new and unpredictable problems.

    --
    "Think about how stupid the average person is. Now, realise that half of them are dumber than that." - George Carlin
  117. Laws of Robotics by TheRealHocusLocus · · Score: 1

    I suggest we program all robots with some type of rules that prevent this from happening.

    Asimov took an incredible shortcut, glorifying the mere existence of these laws and making their 'immutability' a major plot device... for most of the story he was glossing over the real issues, that is, how do Robots recognize humans? Is it that distinctive Solarian accent?

    If you envision a robotic future... realize that the definition and algorithms related to human-ness would be supplied by the same patent holders who sell biometric ID systems today. Is that a trembling shudder working up your spine?

    I prefer the simple predictable demeanor of farm machinery. If you are in the wrong place at the wrong time, the machine does not bother to discern the difference between a human or a corn husk. Obligatory reference to standard international warning label as funny as any XKCD People are lazy and machines are not, so if you increase the intelligence of machines people will become more stoopid. Even the clever people fixing intelligent machines will become stoopid, for they will continue to fix them for as long as their brains hold out and the money is good.

    When robots begin to lactate and our children imprint onto them, we're screwed!

    --
    <blink>down the rabbit hole</blink>
  118. " ... in a _Western_ factory" Wait, what? by fygment · · Score: 1

    From the post: "This is perhaps the first severe accident of this kind in a western factory, and is sparking debate about who is responsible for the accident, ..."

    So this (and worse?) has happened in 'Eastern' factories but was just not worth mentioning until now? Likely this is proof of the continued usefulness of labour Unions.

    --
    "Consensus" in science is _always_ a political construct.
  119. Re:"in a western factory" by Plumpaquatsch · · Score: 1
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_world

    The Western world, also known as the West and the Occident (from Latin: occidens "sunset, West"; as contrasted with the Orient ...

    --
    Of course news about a fake are Fake News.
  120. Re:"in a western factory" by Plumpaquatsch · · Score: 1

    Germany is western?

    Yes - I believe it's somewhere between Dodge City and the Sierra Madre.

    http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0057687/

    --
    Of course news about a fake are Fake News.
  121. Re:Why is a robot different from any other machine by Plumpaquatsch · · Score: 1

    The question is: why do these stories gain traction on Slashdot? I have observed that many Slashdoters think that all technology is somehow inherently unsafe - with the sole exception of nuclear power.

    --
    Of course news about a fake are Fake News.
  122. Berzerker! by tmjva · · Score: 1

    An early invasion by one of Fred Saberhagen's robots?

    --
    Tracy Johnson
    Old fashioned text games hosted below:
    http://empire.openmpe.com/
    BT
  123. shame by paul+mafinga · · Score: 1

    It's a shame he didn't survive.

    Severely injured people make great motivational speakers for safety. For people who work in life and death scenarios, it can be a real motivator to see a survivor hobble out on stage and tell their story. Seeing a person "just like you" -- listening as they describe the issue they encountered, the mistakes made, the painful recovery, and the lifetime of consequences.

    These speakers were always my favorite. They usually walk on- and off- stage to applause because of their ability to rise above, accept that mistakes were made, and openly discuss them. No judgement, no labels.

    I will never forget one fellow, an electrician who was turned into a crispy critter one day by a short series of safety "shortcuts". Covered with scar tissue, appendages blown off or vaporized, he closed by saying that he was making more as a speaker than he did as an electrician, and how he would trade it all to be an electrician again. There were a lot of people in the audience "wiping some dust out of their eyes" when he said that.

    The aftereffects were interesting -- people would clean and reorganize their work areas, start quoting safety guides, review guidelines, and do higher quality work in general. Productivity would go up -- rather than overthink the solution, people would leverage the fresh, recently memorized rules.

    It's fascinating how industry responds to mistakes -- negative label and punish, or embrace, learn, and move ahead. Part of why these speakers can have such a positive influence is the raw openness and honesty, completely unfiltered by the traditional fog of negativity and threats of punishment that pervade so many workplaces.

  124. For fucks sake by pev · · Score: 1

    Its an electrical device. Unplugnit before working on it. Its the first thing you get taught. End of.

  125. NOT NEWS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    People are injured and killed in non-zero numbers all the time. This isn't the first time someone has been crushed and killed by a robot - that's been happening for 40 years. Where do you think all the ASTM robotic safety standards came from? Just like the airline industry, these rules do NOT come from bureaucratic planning or common sense. If you think that you are clueless fool. No. They came from actual injuries occurring with the resultant costs being borne by those owning/managing/designing the systems in question. Safety comes from actual accidents teaching us. Always!

    This is totally non-news propaganda designed to create panic over nothing.

    Ironically the Germans have some of the more anal/over-protective work rules about robotic safety. Far more severe than is common in the US. This story very much sounds like the worker violated exactly those standards and rules and got into exactly the trouble that robot isolation cages are designed to prevent!

  126. iRobot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Did anyone call Will Smith?

  127. Re:Sardaukar86's ill: It's "indigestion", & wh by Sardaukar86 · · Score: 1

    So, you're going to evade my question and instead shriek at me like a little monkey by way of response.

    You have nothing APK and you ARE nothing APK.

    --
    ..Mullah or Pope, Preacher or Poet, who was it wrote: "Give any one species too much rope and they'll fuck it up"?
  128. Death Of Worker used to promote film? by unclefred · · Score: 1

    Its sad that an industrial accident has a link to the promotion of a Hollywood science fiction film about killer robots from the future. A tenuous link at best maybe? An unintentional link?,possibly but it just seems to too much of coincidence which is sad to say the least.

  129. How's it taste Sardaukar86? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    See subject: "Eating your words" http://it.slashdot.org/comment... 244++:1 against you!

    * LMAO...

    (You really ought to CHANGE YOUR DIET: "eating your words" != GOOD nutrition Sardaukar86...)

    APK

    P.S.=> Tell us: How does "eating your words" in a 244++:1 ratio against you taste? Can't be TOO good, spiced w/ the 'bitter taste of SELF-DEFEAT', & rammed down your throat since your FOOT'S IN YOUR MOUTH too, lmao... apk

    1. Re:How's it taste Sardaukar86? by Coren22 · · Score: 1

      If you post so well that you get +5s, go create an account. I am sure you will be in positive Karma for at least an hour.

      --
      APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
    2. Re:How's it taste Sardaukar86? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      His link to sardaukar86 proves it. You're trackable by registered luser account. That makes you the stupid one here and for what? Karma points? Grow up kid.

    3. Re:How's it taste Sardaukar86? by Coren22 · · Score: 1

      It shows that we don't post crap no one wants to read APK. Not that we are the stupid ones. You can keep stalking me and him and Dave all you like, but you are the one who looks the fool, not us.

      --
      APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
    4. Re:How's it taste Sardaukar86? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Apk gets lots of upmods n' Sardaukar86 ate his words http://it.slashdot.org/comment... now so do you too stupid. You're stupid enough to use almost all ads blocked plus too and it doesn't even do the 1 job it had right by default anymore having been bribed to not do so. You're either stupid or a developer for that piece of shitware since you suggest it.

    5. Re:How's it taste Sardaukar86? by Coren22 · · Score: 1

      Everyone gets lots of upmods, it is the balance of upmods vs downmods that matter though. If you get more downmods than upmods, than what you have to say is more irritant than useful.

      --
      APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
    6. Re:How's it taste Sardaukar86? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Apk gets more upmods (245) than downmods. The link's proof. Where's yours?

    7. Re:How's it taste Sardaukar86? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sardaukar said noone likes apk posts. Apk proved different http://it.slashdot.org/comment...

    8. Re:How's it taste Sardaukar86? by Coren22 · · Score: 1

      Apk gets more upmods (245) than downmods

      Hahahahaha

      APK is modded off topic most of his posts. He is after all completely offtopic, just like you. What does all of this have to do with a factory worker being crushed by machinery?

      --
      APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
    9. Re:How's it taste Sardaukar86? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I asked for your proof of that. I don't see it. You fail. You issue downmods on him out of geek angst.

    10. Re:How's it taste Sardaukar86? by Coren22 · · Score: 1

      It would be kind of hard for me to downmod him as he is always replying to me. I don't run multiple accounts, and a registered user cannot mod on a story that they have also commented on. Therefore, it is other's downmodding an annoying troll (such as the original APK comment on this thread).

      --
      APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
    11. Re:How's it taste Sardaukar86? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's not hard with sockpuppet fake accounts you have here Coren22.

    12. Re:How's it taste Sardaukar86? by Coren22 · · Score: 1

      That is funny. You won't even register an account, but I must have a ton of sockpuppet accounts that I downmod all your posts with.

      This is my only account, I don't post with any other account, nor do I post AC.

      --
      APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
    13. Re:How's it taste Sardaukar86? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We believe that's your only acct Coren22 (sarcasm) and it makes you trackable for retrolling making you dumb.

    14. Re:How's it taste Sardaukar86? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There is no "we". You're alone, Alex. And you deserve to be.

  130. Not as much as you do on "eatin yer words" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    See subject & http://it.slashdot.org/comment... 244++:1 against you!

    Nowadays since then? That's almost DOUBLED since...

    NOW - THAT is what I know, for sure, from your own mouth now "eating your words" (LOL) + those of your /. peers opinions in MY FAVOR vs. your bs statement quoted there FOOL!

    * LMAO...

    (You really ought to CHANGE YOUR DIET: "eating your words" != GOOD nutrition Sardaukar86...)

    APK

    P.S.=> Tell us: How does "eating your words" in a 244++:1 ratio against you taste? Can't be TOO good, spiced w/ the 'bitter taste of SELF-DEFEAT', & rammed down your throat since your FOOT'S IN YOUR MOUTH too, lmao... apk

  131. You are Sardaukar86 "eatin yer words" (LOL) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    See subject & http://it.slashdot.org/comment... & your /. peers 244++:1 against your quoted bs there regarding myself, stupid!

    Funniest parts that by now? That's DOUBLED in my favor yet again too!

    * LMAO...

    (You really ought to CHANGE YOUR DIET: "eating your words" != GOOD nutrition Sardaukar86...)

    APK

    P.S.=> Tell us: How does "eating your words" in a 244++:1 ratio against you taste? Can't be TOO good, spiced w/ the 'bitter taste of SELF-DEFEAT', & rammed down your throat since your FOOT'S IN YOUR MOUTH too, lmao... apk

  132. your honor....... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It was just standing it's ground

  133. Was nobody else required to read ... by DaChesserCat · · Score: 1

    ... theCase of the Killer Robot in college? Where they filed charges against the programmer?

    --
    ... by the Dew of Mountains the thoughts acquire speed, the hands acquire shakes, the shakes become a warning
  134. Coren22: Questions 4u... apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    See subject, "Run, Forrest: RUN!!!" - Can ab+ do 16 things hosts do for speed, security, & reliability:

    1.) Protect vs. malicious sites/servers (past ads)
    2.) Protect vs. fastflux botnets + stops C&C communique
    3.) Protect vs. dynamic dns botnets + stops C&C communique
    4.) Protect vs. DGA botnets + stops C&C communique
    5.) Protect vs. downed DNS (adds reliability)
    6.) Protect vs. DNS redirect poisoned dns
    7.) Protect vs. trackers
    8.) Protect vs. spam
    9.) Protect vs. phish
    10.) Protect vs. caps
    11.) Get you past a dnsbl
    12.) Keep you off dns request logs
    13.) Speed up surfing by adblocks & hardcoded fav. sites
    14.) Work on anything webbound (ie email programs) multiplatform.
    15.) Give you easily controlled data
    16.) Do all that & block ads more efficiently in cpu + memory usage vs. addons

    * ANSWER ="NO" to each on ab+ doing it or as well + hosts = already on every device natively.

    APK

    P.S.=> Ab+ does less than hosts & less efficiently - hosts do MORE w/ less + Hosts start w/ the IP stack before REDUNDANT inefficient addons BEGIN to operate (as 1st resolver queried):

    Ab+'s 128mb memory inefficiency -> http://cdn.ghacks.net/wp-conte... (hosts consume 3-11mb using my program initially).

    +

    ClarityRay defeats it dumping addons in use in a browser via native browser methods to do so!

    +

    Ab+'s paid to not do its job http://finance.yahoo.com/news/...

    Ab+ adds complexity + slower mode of operations (usermode = more messagepassing overheads vs. hosts in kernelmode).

    What's best?

    APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-2 32/64-bit -> http://start64.com/index.php?o...

    MalwareBytes' hpHosts Admin (MalwareBytes employee) hosts & recommends it -> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl... & MalwareBytes = BEST antivirus http://www.av-test.org/en/news...

    &

    It's GUARANTEED safe & clean per it being checked by 57 antivirus programs recently in BOTH its 64-bit model https://www.virustotal.com/en/...

    +

    In its 32-bit model also https://www.virustotal.com/en/...

    ... apk

  135. Tell us about "AlmostAllAdsBlocked+" Coren22 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    See subject & LMAO @ U, boy -> http://slashdot.org/comments.p...

    FACT: "AlmostALLAdsBlocked+" is INFERIOR vs. hosts - hugely so!

    AB+ doesn't even DO what it's supposed to fully anymore being BRIBED http://finance.yahoo.com/news/... not to!

    AB+ doesn't do a FRACTION of what hosts do for more speed, security, reliability, + anonymity online!

    AB+ EATS 128mb of RAM (vs. hosts @ 11 *maybe* tops via my program with CURRENT data, the important kind vs. current threats + ads) http://cdn.ghacks.net/wp-conte...

    AB+ adds messagepassing overheads!

    AB+ operates in SLOWER usermode (vs. hosts in PnP kernelmode)

    AB+ creates huge CPU consumption!

    AB+ is also detectable by clarityray (via native browser methods) nullifying it (not hosts).

    ---

    I use what you already have that works & does more with LESS, no less - you by way of comparison? Pile on "MoAr" that doesn't do as nearly as much & what it's supposed to do, massively inefficiently no less (see above)?

    Ab+ NO LONGER DOES!

    * AFTER ALL THAT?

    AB+ = "better", Coren22?? LMAO - NO f'ing way!

    If you say it is, you are *TRULY* stupid & I'd reply saying "argue with the numbers" & facts above, from reputable sources & analysis proving my points for me!

    APK

    P.S.=> Gonna go "cry in your cereal" now, boy?

    (You ought to for being STUPID enough to use OR SUGGEST a blatantly INFERIOR solution! See above - it's fact & truth via reputable sources)... apk

  136. Coren22: Questions 4u... apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    See subject, "Run, Forrest: RUN!!!" - Can ab+ do 16 things hosts do for speed, security, & reliability:

    1.) Protect vs. malicious sites/servers (past ads)
    2.) Protect vs. fastflux botnets + stops C&C communique
    3.) Protect vs. dynamic dns botnets + stops C&C communique
    4.) Protect vs. DGA botnets + stops C&C communique
    5.) Protect vs. downed DNS (adds reliability)
    6.) Protect vs. DNS redirect poisoned dns
    7.) Protect vs. trackers
    8.) Protect vs. spam
    9.) Protect vs. phish
    10.) Protect vs. caps
    11.) Get you past a dnsbl
    12.) Keep you off dns request logs
    13.) Speed up surfing by adblocks & hardcoded fav. sites
    14.) Work on anything webbound (ie email programs) multiplatform.
    15.) Give you easily controlled data
    16.) Do all that & block ads more efficiently in cpu + memory usage vs. addons

    * ANSWER ="NO" to each on ab+ doing it or as well + hosts = already on every device natively.

    APK

    P.S.=> Ab+ does less than hosts & less efficiently - hosts do MORE w/ less + Hosts start w/ the IP stack before REDUNDANT inefficient addons BEGIN to operate (as 1st resolver queried):

    Ab+'s 128mb memory inefficiency -> http://cdn.ghacks.net/wp-conte... (hosts consume 3-11mb using my program initially).

    +

    ClarityRay defeats it dumping addons in use in a browser via native browser methods to do so!

    +

    Ab+'s paid to not do its job http://finance.yahoo.com/news/...

    Ab+ adds complexity + slower mode of operations (usermode = more messagepassing overheads vs. hosts in kernelmode).

    What's best?

    APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-2 32/64-bit -> http://start64.com/index.php?o...

    MalwareBytes' hpHosts Admin (MalwareBytes employee) hosts & recommends it -> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl... & MalwareBytes = BEST antivirus http://www.av-test.org/en/news...

    &

    It's GUARANTEED safe & clean per it being checked by 57 antivirus programs recently in BOTH its 64-bit model https://www.virustotal.com/en/...

    +

    In its 32-bit model also https://www.virustotal.com/en/...

    ... apk

  137. Tell us about "AlmostAllAdsBlocked+" Coren22 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    See subject & LMAO @ U, boy -> http://slashdot.org/comments.p...

    FACT: "AlmostALLAdsBlocked+" is INFERIOR vs. hosts - hugely so!

    AB+ doesn't even DO what it's supposed to fully anymore being BRIBED http://finance.yahoo.com/news/... not to!

    AB+ doesn't do a FRACTION of what hosts do for more speed, security, reliability, + anonymity online!

    AB+ EATS 128mb of RAM (vs. hosts @ 11 *maybe* tops via my program with CURRENT data, the important kind vs. current threats + ads) http://cdn.ghacks.net/wp-conte...

    AB+ adds messagepassing overheads!

    AB+ operates in SLOWER usermode (vs. hosts in PnP kernelmode)

    AB+ creates huge CPU consumption!

    AB+ is also detectable by clarityray (via native browser methods) nullifying it (not hosts).

    ---

    I use what you already have that works & does more with LESS, no less - you by way of comparison? Pile on "MoAr" that doesn't do as nearly as much & what it's supposed to do, massively inefficiently no less (see above)?

    Ab+ NO LONGER DOES!

    * AFTER ALL THAT?

    AB+ = "better", Coren22?? LMAO - NO f'ing way!

    If you say it is, you are *TRULY* stupid & I'd reply saying "argue with the numbers" & facts above, from reputable sources & analysis proving my points for me!

    APK

    P.S.=> Gonna go "cry in your cereal" now, boy?

    (You ought to for being STUPID enough to use OR SUGGEST a blatantly INFERIOR solution! See above - it's fact & truth via reputable sources)... apk

  138. Coren22: Questions 4u... apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    See subject, "Run, Forrest: RUN!!!" - Can ab+ do 16 things hosts do for speed, security, & reliability:

    1.) Protect vs. malicious sites/servers (past ads)
    2.) Protect vs. fastflux botnets + stops C&C communique
    3.) Protect vs. dynamic dns botnets + stops C&C communique
    4.) Protect vs. DGA botnets + stops C&C communique
    5.) Protect vs. downed DNS (adds reliability)
    6.) Protect vs. DNS redirect poisoned dns
    7.) Protect vs. trackers
    8.) Protect vs. spam
    9.) Protect vs. phish
    10.) Protect vs. caps
    11.) Get you past a dnsbl
    12.) Keep you off dns request logs
    13.) Speed up surfing by adblocks & hardcoded fav. sites
    14.) Work on anything webbound (ie email programs) multiplatform.
    15.) Give you easily controlled data
    16.) Do all that & block ads more efficiently in cpu + memory usage vs. addons

    * ANSWER ="NO" to each on ab+ doing it or as well + hosts = already on every device natively.

    APK

    P.S.=> Ab+ does less than hosts & less efficiently - hosts do MORE w/ less + Hosts start w/ the IP stack before REDUNDANT inefficient addons BEGIN to operate (as 1st resolver queried):

    Ab+'s 128mb memory inefficiency -> http://cdn.ghacks.net/wp-conte... (hosts consume 3-11mb using my program initially).

    +

    ClarityRay defeats it dumping addons in use in a browser via native browser methods to do so!

    +

    Ab+'s paid to not do its job http://finance.yahoo.com/news/...

    Ab+ adds complexity + slower mode of operations (usermode = more messagepassing overheads vs. hosts in kernelmode).

    What's best?

    APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-2 32/64-bit -> http://start64.com/index.php?o...

    MalwareBytes' hpHosts Admin (MalwareBytes employee) hosts & recommends it -> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl... & MalwareBytes = BEST antivirus http://www.av-test.org/en/news...

    &

    It's GUARANTEED safe & clean per it being checked by 57 antivirus programs recently in BOTH its 64-bit model https://www.virustotal.com/en/...

    +

    In its 32-bit model also https://www.virustotal.com/en/...

    ... apk

  139. Tell us about "AlmostAllAdsBlocked+" Coren22 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    See subject & LMAO @ U, boy -> http://slashdot.org/comments.p...

    FACT: "AlmostALLAdsBlocked+" is INFERIOR vs. hosts - hugely so!

    AB+ doesn't even DO what it's supposed to fully anymore being BRIBED http://finance.yahoo.com/news/... not to!

    AB+ doesn't do a FRACTION of what hosts do for more speed, security, reliability, + anonymity online!

    AB+ EATS 128mb of RAM (vs. hosts @ 11 *maybe* tops via my program with CURRENT data, the important kind vs. current threats + ads) http://cdn.ghacks.net/wp-conte...

    AB+ adds messagepassing overheads!

    AB+ operates in SLOWER usermode (vs. hosts in PnP kernelmode)

    AB+ creates huge CPU consumption!

    AB+ is also detectable by clarityray (via native browser methods) nullifying it (not hosts).

    ---

    I use what you already have that works & does more with LESS, no less - you by way of comparison? Pile on "MoAr" that doesn't do as nearly as much & what it's supposed to do, massively inefficiently no less (see above)?

    Ab+ NO LONGER DOES!

    * AFTER ALL THAT?

    AB+ = "better", Coren22?? LMAO - NO f'ing way!

    If you say it is, you are *TRULY* stupid & I'd reply saying "argue with the numbers" & facts above, from reputable sources & analysis proving my points for me!

    APK

    P.S.=> Gonna go "cry in your cereal" now, boy?

    (You ought to for being STUPID enough to use OR SUGGEST a blatantly INFERIOR solution! See above - it's fact & truth via reputable sources)... apk

  140. Coren22: Questions 4u... apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    See subject, "Run, Forrest: RUN!!!" - Can ab+ do 16 things hosts do for speed, security, & reliability:

    1.) Protect vs. malicious sites/servers (past ads)
    2.) Protect vs. fastflux botnets + stops C&C communique
    3.) Protect vs. dynamic dns botnets + stops C&C communique
    4.) Protect vs. DGA botnets + stops C&C communique
    5.) Protect vs. downed DNS (adds reliability)
    6.) Protect vs. DNS redirect poisoned dns
    7.) Protect vs. trackers
    8.) Protect vs. spam
    9.) Protect vs. phish
    10.) Protect vs. caps
    11.) Get you past a dnsbl
    12.) Keep you off dns request logs
    13.) Speed up surfing by adblocks & hardcoded fav. sites
    14.) Work on anything webbound (ie email programs) multiplatform.
    15.) Give you easily controlled data
    16.) Do all that & block ads more efficiently in cpu + memory usage vs. addons

    * ANSWER ="NO" to each on ab+ doing it or as well + hosts = already on every device natively.

    APK

    P.S.=> Ab+ does less than hosts & less efficiently - hosts do MORE w/ less + Hosts start w/ the IP stack before REDUNDANT inefficient addons BEGIN to operate (as 1st resolver queried):

    Ab+'s 128mb memory inefficiency -> http://cdn.ghacks.net/wp-conte... (hosts consume 3-11mb using my program initially).

    +

    ClarityRay defeats it dumping addons in use in a browser via native browser methods to do so!

    +

    Ab+'s paid to not do its job http://finance.yahoo.com/news/...

    Ab+ adds complexity + slower mode of operations (usermode = more messagepassing overheads vs. hosts in kernelmode).

    What's best?

    APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-2 32/64-bit -> http://start64.com/index.php?o...

    MalwareBytes' hpHosts Admin (MalwareBytes employee) hosts & recommends it -> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl... & MalwareBytes = BEST antivirus http://www.av-test.org/en/news...

    &

    It's GUARANTEED safe & clean per it being checked by 57 antivirus programs recently in BOTH its 64-bit model https://www.virustotal.com/en/...

    +

    In its 32-bit model also https://www.virustotal.com/en/...

    ... apk

  141. Tell us about "AlmostAllAdsBlocked+" Coren22 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    See subject & LMAO @ U, boy -> http://slashdot.org/comments.p...

    FACT: "AlmostALLAdsBlocked+" is INFERIOR vs. hosts - hugely so!

    AB+ doesn't even DO what it's supposed to fully anymore being BRIBED http://finance.yahoo.com/news/... not to!

    AB+ doesn't do a FRACTION of what hosts do for more speed, security, reliability, + anonymity online!

    AB+ EATS 128mb of RAM (vs. hosts @ 11 *maybe* tops via my program with CURRENT data, the important kind vs. current threats + ads) http://cdn.ghacks.net/wp-conte...

    AB+ adds messagepassing overheads!

    AB+ operates in SLOWER usermode (vs. hosts in PnP kernelmode)

    AB+ creates huge CPU consumption!

    AB+ is also detectable by clarityray (via native browser methods) nullifying it (not hosts).

    ---

    I use what you already have that works & does more with LESS, no less - you by way of comparison? Pile on "MoAr" that doesn't do as nearly as much & what it's supposed to do, massively inefficiently no less (see above)?

    Ab+ NO LONGER DOES!

    * AFTER ALL THAT?

    AB+ = "better", Coren22?? LMAO - NO f'ing way!

    If you say it is, you are *TRULY* stupid & I'd reply saying "argue with the numbers" & facts above, from reputable sources & analysis proving my points for me!

    APK

    P.S.=> Gonna go "cry in your cereal" now, boy?

    (You ought to for being STUPID enough to use OR SUGGEST a blatantly INFERIOR solution! See above - it's fact & truth via reputable sources)... apk