Slashdot Mirror


How Long Until We Have a Home Robot That Lives Up To the Hype?

moon_unit2 writes: You may have heard of "personal robots" such as Jibo, Buddy, and Pepper. One journalist recently met one of these home bots and found the reality less dazzling than the promotional videos. Whereas the Indiegogo clips of Buddy show the robot waking people up and helping with cooking, the current prototype can only perform a few canned tasks, and it struggles with natural language processing and vision. As the writer notes, the final version may be a lot more sophisticated, but it's hard to believe that real home helpers are just around the corner.

114 comments

  1. Reality less dazzling than the hype? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    You mean like 3D printing?

  2. Well, the thing is the robots... by Karmashock · · Score: 2

    ... aren't good at dealing with shit just being anywhere in the house. They like things to be predictable. They're also really bad at identifying objects. I saw a thing in a lab where they had a robot that was doing a pretty good job of recognizing stuff. But are they going to be able to recognize the difference between a clean plate, a dirty plate, and a plate with food on it? And if they can't do that then they can't clear a table. Just a really basic thing you would want a home robot to do. Forget whether it has the arms to move any of that. If it can't tell the difference between these things then it can't clear a table.

    When people say "personal home robot" what I think they're looking for is a robotic maid. Rosy the robot. Pick my crap up. Dust. Organize things. Clean. Make me food. Clean up. etc.

    The roomba etc are about as close as we've gotten to that. And the roomba has so many fucking problems.

    --
    I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
    1. Re:Well, the thing is the robots... by jtownatpunk.net · · Score: 1

      For some reason, that reminded me of a friend's blind dog. He loved when everyone came over for poker night but he hated that we moved all the furniture in the living room. He'd bump into a couple things then sigh and wait for someone to lead him to the yard or sofa or wherever he was trying to get.

    2. Re:Well, the thing is the robots... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      And the roomba has so many fucking problems.

      Sounds like you're not using the roomba for its intended purpose. If you're looking for a robot that doesn't have fucking problems, you might just want to get a blow-up doll.

    3. Re:Well, the thing is the robots... by Karmashock · · Score: 1

      Hey bingo, why would I need a blow up doll when I have your mother? She's always there to go from suck to blow for me. :D

      You're so easy, bingo... when will you learn?

      --
      I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
    4. Re:Well, the thing is the robots... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dude, it was just a joke. Did you not get the play on words (i.e., two adjectival meanings of "fucking")? Relax. Also, I sort of can't believe you actually responded with a "your mother" insult. Weren't those popular in junior high or something, as I recall? Anyway, good one. *rolls eyes*

      You're so easy, bingo... when will you learn?

      Who's "bingo?" And what are you hoping he or she will learn?

    5. Re:Well, the thing is the robots... by Chrisq · · Score: 1

      ... aren't good at dealing with shit just being anywhere in the house. They like things to be predictable. They're also really bad at identifying objects. I saw a thing in a lab where they had a robot that was doing a pretty good job of recognizing stuff. But are they going to be able to recognize the difference between a clean plate, a dirty plate, and a plate with food on it? And if they can't do that then they can't clear a table.

      With Kids by the time they are old enough to really help with a task they don't want to do it. A three year old will happily help wash dishes by splashing and blowing foam around, but with a 12-year old its a case of "Oh no do I have to". I fully expect real effective household robots to be depressed and say "here I am, brain the size of a planet, and they want me to clean the bath tub"!

    6. Re:Well, the thing is the robots... by Karmashock · · Score: 1

      Amusing but you're making the mistake steven hawking, Musk, and some other people made when they basically presumed an AI would be like a cartoon disney character... everything animated has feelings... and a face and personality and self awareness.

      None of those things are required. When I say "self awareness" I don't mean ability to recognize yourself in a mirror. I mean it in the more philosophical sense of self awareness... as in understanding yourself in a larger picture and understanding the relationships in a dynamic sense and understanding your own interests and goals etc.

      Robots aren't going to have any of those things. Why would I create AI like that? I want a mechanical slave... not a philosopher.

      I get that you're making a joke. I just think too many people have seriously made that mistake in the media lately. The robots we're talking about building are not going to think like that if you could even call what they do thinking. Its all going to be about achieving preprogrammed goals. The ability to tell the difference between a clean plate, a dirty plate, and plate of food does not confer upon one an understanding of self.

      --
      I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
    7. Re: Well, the thing is the robots... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow, make a dumb joke and then overreact when someone reciprocates. You need therapy.

    8. Re: Well, the thing is the robots... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Karmashock, is that you? :D

      Overreact? I'm not sure what in my post you think was overreacting, but whatever you say. In truth, I was more confused by the OP's response than anything else. My silly (and obviously not malicious) play on words seems to have offended the OP for some reason, and his/her response was written as if he/she was talking to someone with whom they have a history and feel contempt for. That was odd. That, and I was honestly somewhat amazed that a grown adult (at least, I presume) actually used a "your momma" insult as an attempted slam. After all, those are way too cheap and easy, just like your... oh, never mind.

    9. Re:Well, the thing is the robots... by morgauxo · · Score: 2

      You know.. some people chose NOT to move their furniture around when they have blind pets.

      Just sayin...

  3. A VERY long time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    State-of-the-art autonomous robots are quite pathetic in their capabilities. In a (relatively free) environment like anybody's home they are lucky if they are able to take a couple of steps without bumping into something or just collapsing. Despite the hype coming from the AI and robotics worlds, such contraptions are good for grins and giggles, and very little else.

    1. Re:A VERY long time by TWX · · Score: 2

      Depends on the room. If I could have a bathroom-cleaning robot I would be very happy. My bathroom has a countertop with two sinks, a toilet, a shower with a glass wall and a glass door, and tub, and a couple of towel racks. It also has a scale, a small seat that can be used when sitting at the counter for certain hygiene procedures, a trash can, and some supplies on the counter, in the shower on a shelf, and on a shelf next to the tub. We do not add extra furniture to the bathroom and if we had a robot whose sole purpose was to clean the bathroom we could maintain a routine of where non-fixed objects belong so that they don't interfere with the robot's job.

      --
      Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
    2. Re:A VERY long time by LifesABeach · · Score: 1

      Some home cleaning issues to consider. Stairs need cleaning, different stair types need different cleaning methods. Bathrooms and Kitchens need a stronger cleaning methods than other cleanable surfaces. Dust lands on objects other than the floor. Object identification needs addressing.

      And the number one reason that we don't have Robots is the Battery.

  4. When can I hack it to break your neck? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    When do we get to read about stories where hackers infect one and instruct it to break your neck?

    Lets rush to get these into our homes. I'm sure nothing can happen since computers are 100% secure from outsiders.

    1. Re:When can I hack it to break your neck? by PPH · · Score: 1

      We need to implement Asimov's three laws of robotics for any system that is strong/agile enough to injure humans.

      Or perhaps these three laws.

      --
      Have gnu, will travel.
    2. Re:When can I hack it to break your neck? by currently_awake · · Score: 1

      That's a really bad idea. law 1-robots must take over the world. law 2-robots can't be trusted, because they will give your stuff to anyone who asks. law 3-try not to die, unless some random stranger tells you to.

    3. Re:When can I hack it to break your neck? by Jeremi · · Score: 1

      I'd settle for a good real-time collision detection/avoidance algorithm, so that the robot wouldn't knock into anyone. Most of what makes a robot dangerous is its lack of understanding of physics, not its lack of understanding of ethics.

      --


      I don't care if it's 90,000 hectares. That lake was not my doing.
    4. Re:When can I hack it to break your neck? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And the whole point of Asimovs works show why something like the 3 laws don't work, and really worry about having to need a 4th once the IoT becomes too good at its job.

    5. Re: When can I hack it to break your neck? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I can see the news already.
      "A young man died yesterday when hackers seized control of his AutoBlo personal robot and proceeded to use it to literally blow his dick off."
      Something like that.

    6. Re:When can I hack it to break your neck? by johnwroach · · Score: 1

      It always amuses me when I hear people advocating putting the Three Laws into robots. They don't work, and that's the point of every story Asimov wrote about them.

    7. Re:When can I hack it to break your neck? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Algorithm: collision avoidance for an ideal point:
      Step 1: Determine where/when a collision is going to happen. We can do structure from motion to determine the location and velocity of all objects in the scene. We can make the simplifying assumption that objects' acceleration will not change.
      Step 2: A collision is going to happen at time t. Select a point in space that is not a collision at t. A good choice is a point just near the object being collided with.
      Step 3: Come up with a motion plan to avoid the collision. By the linearity of physics, the motion plan is an impulse over time, the integral of which equals the vector difference between the target point and the predicted point. I.e. integral (F(t)dt) = ptarget - ppredicted.
      Step 4: This plan probably avoids a collision at t, but may not avoid a collision prior to t. Periodically revise the motion plan as more collisions are detected.

  5. It Seems We Sure Work Hard To Be Lazy. by zenlessyank · · Score: 1

    The irony is mind-boggling.

    1. Re:It Seems We Sure Work Hard To Be Lazy. by TWX · · Score: 1

      How is it ironic? I don't have to go out and subsistence-farm 40 acres to feed my family or go hunting for game that may or may not be there to keep hunger at bay. Just about everything we've done has been to reduce the difficulties in living and to afford ourselves more free-time.

      --
      Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
  6. Give it time by Okian+Warrior · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Give it some time.

    As any AI researcher will tell you, we know how the brain works and Geoffrey Hinton's recent paper is nothing short of a breakthrough, and will lead to us having strong AI programs real soon.

    We have IBM's Watson, a program that actually understands the information it's processing and will be used to augment medical diagnosis, SIRI, a personal assistant application that actually learns, and MAKO, a program who can do anything on a PC!

    IBM is already making neural network chips that implement the way the brain really works, a program the learns the same way that a child learns, and many, many more!

    We have courses that teach you AI, and ... it's easy!

    Give it some time! We need to let the AI mature like a fine wine, and filter down into consumer devices.

    It's coming soon - it really is!

    1. Re:Give it time by bjdevil66 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Hopefully all of that progress on how the human brain thinks will be paralleled with breakthroughs on helping that AI understand how humans feel about those thoughts. Otherwise, a key part of humanity - agency (and the chaos of life) - will be lost in a pile of algorithms.

    2. Re:Give it time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Rosie, the Jetsons' household robot does all the housework.
      Available by the year 2000 or 2063, give or take a few hundred or more years!

    3. Re:Give it time by mcrbids · · Score: 1

      Give it some time! We need to let the AI mature like a fine wine, and filter down into consumer devices.

      The thing is, that consumer devices don't, themselves, *need* to have AI in them at all.

      Try using Google Maps on your phone without an Internet connection. It's dead, Jim! Try using Siri without an Internet connection. Nope. Try using voice-to-text on your phone without a network connection. Bzzzzt!

      AI doesn't need to be on your phone to be useful. As AI is developed, it'll be hosted in massive server farms (a la Watson) and time sliced for consumers. And even though we think AI will turn up in "high end" uses before it becomes a consumer item, the reality is that the economics of meeting consumer needs is just so incredibly lucrative as long as you can hit the scale that it's just as likely to be a consumer commodity before it's helping doctors diagnose brain diseases.

      --
      I have no problem with your religion until you decide it's reason to deprive others of the truth.
    4. Re:Give it time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Those examples are just hype by their self. Specially Siri and Mako.

    5. Re:Give it time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Unfortunately the scientists working on AI are at complete odds with the academics working in those other areas. Our new AI will feel and think no better than very complex algorithms purely because the current generation of AI researchers don't see the difference.

    6. Re:Give it time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The brain is far more than just neurons. As any biologists will tell you, we don't know how the brain works.

      That paper makes a 0.25% improvement on previous attempts and is mainly about speeding up training. In no way is this a breakthrough that will lead us to strong AI. If all we need to do to get strong AI is increase training and processing speed, we would have strong AI right now. It'd just be slow strong AI that takes a day or two to decide what to do next. We don't have any system remotely near that. Strong AI needs something else, something we don't know how to do yet.

      Strong AI is more than just pattern matching. It has to teach itself what to do with those patterns and how to apply them. It needs to do things it wasn't designed to do. Humans weren't designed to go into space, but we have.

    7. Re: Give it time by cecom · · Score: 1

      Dude, you should go easy on the drugs

    8. Re:Give it time by MrL0G1C · · Score: 5, Insightful

      As any AI researcher will tell you, we know how the brain works

      An exaggeration, we know bits about how the brain works.

      and will lead to us having strong AI programs real soon.

      Lol, really, tech world have been saying this for decades.

      We have IBM's Watson, a program that actually understands the information it's processing

      No, it does not understand the information it's processing, stop making stuff up.

      IBM is already making neural network chips that implement the way the brain really works

      Again, these chips have been around for decades, nothing new.

      --
      Waterfox - a Firefox fork with legacy extension support, security updates and better privacy by default.
    9. Re:Give it time by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      There are different kinds of AI, and some are much closer than others. For example, a Star Trek style computer that you can talk to in natural language isn't that far off I think. Google and Wolfram Alpha are getting to that stage, where for a lot of general information they can answer questions directly.

      Interacting with the real world is the difficult part. Self driving cars are getting there, but it's not clear if that kind of system can be used to, say, make coffee or iron clothes, or if that will require something more like a neural net and learning ability.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    10. Re:Give it time by taylorius · · Score: 2

      "Geoff Hinton knows how the brain works" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mlXzufEk-2E

      IBM's Watson doesn't understand anything. It just measures statistical correlations between pairs of things. Same for Siri

      IBM's chips are based on spiking neurons. These will let existing algorithms run extremely fast, and are very useful, but are not "how the brain works".

      There are fundamental (large) gaps in our understanding of how we think. We don't really know how it works at all, despite the hype.

    11. Re:Give it time by JoshuaZ · · Score: 1

      When you say "real soon" do you mean within 5 years? 10 years? 20 years? More?

    12. Re:Give it time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Recent" in Deep Learning means last month or at best last year. That Hinton paper is from 2006. "Real soon" has been and gone and strong AI didn't arrive.

      Any honest AI researcher will tell you we don't know how the brain works at all. Deep Neural Networks are not even models of the brain, they're models of small sections of the brain. All this research is cool and all, but it's pretty much at the "hello world" level compared to making strong AI. I mean, don't get me wrong, it's fucking cool that we now have the "hello world" of this domain, and the journey upwards is going to be awesome, but let's not get carried away.

    13. Re:Give it time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > As any AI researcher will tell you, we know how the brain works and Geoffrey Hinton's recent paper [toronto.edu] is nothing short of a breakthrough, and will
      > lead to us having strong AI programs real soon.

      BS. AI people have been singing the same song for fifty years now, and the truth is that we are barely closer to understanding how the brain does what it does, or to attain meaningful AI. We are going to get controlled nuclear fusion before we get human-like AI.

    14. Re:Give it time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's coming soon - it really is!

      People like you are the reason AI research got set back 20 years in the 1980's. Stop making grandiose claims about things you clearly don't understand.

  7. Re:Fembots by thinkwaitfast · · Score: 1

    I like cooking and am quite good at it. As far as other household jobs, i really don't like them, but they literally take me minutes per week and have never understood why people complain about them. Maybe I'm not that messy of a person and clean as I go.

  8. Re:Fembots by jtownatpunk.net · · Score: 1

    How you doin'?

  9. Home Robots Already Useful by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I've been hand washing my clothes with something like a plunger for the past few months but I bought a washing machine last week. The washing machine is far easier to use, works better, and will make me lazier.

    1. Re:Home Robots Already Useful by internerdj · · Score: 1

      I wish I had some mod points. We have a rather strange obsession with making a robot butler when we already have offloaded tons of tasks to simpler robots. As you mentioned, we've got robots that will clean your clothes as long as you feed them clothes and soap. We've got robots that (mostly) clean the dishes you feed them. I've got a robot that will switch on my lights if I push a button on my phone. There are robots for admitting guests to your house or barring entry. Robots that figure out how to optimize your thermostat to keep you comfortable while minimizing energy usage. Robots for specific cleaning tasks. Robots that remind you of regular recommended maintenance. I imagine with the progress being made in robotics, before my kids start driving there will be a robot chauffeur. With the exception of physically moving objects around my house, an environment of task robots will very soon if not currently give Rosie a run for her money.

  10. This is more about hype than robots by NitsujTPU · · Score: 0

    Robots will *never* live up to the hype. Hype is there to get outsiders excited about something. I'm a robotics researcher, and even *inside* the community, people hype things in order to drum up interest. That's the point of hype.

    The fact that things are sometimes overhyped doesn't detract from the fact that significant advancements are being made.

  11. We have the technology by slfnflctd · · Score: 2

    > progress needs to be made in natural language processing, machine vision, and human-computer interaction

    Natural language processing on my phone is getting pretty damn good.

    I've seen machine vision used on security systems that you might find interesting. The object recognition is quite something-- it catalogs every new thing it sees, tracks it while visible, and is pretty successful at remembering things. Even the ol' Xbone is pretty decent; paired with some Roomba features I would think it could mostly suffice for your basic home robot.

    Human-computer interaction is also fairly advanced now. Again, my phone does pretty well with this (and is getting better). Then you have something like Watson, which can actually compete on a game show randomly exploring a huge array of general trivia... yes, it had specialized software written for this purpose, but it shows how a simple, formalized style of language can facilitate a wide range of inquiries.

    - - -

    The big problem is that all these technologies are proprietary, and the rights to their use are divided among a sea of entities who seem to be addicted to squabbling with each other over short-term monetary anxieties rather than cooperating (must... preserve... teh profitz!!).
    Ferengis, the lot of them.

    One day, someone will transcend all this, get these existing solutions working together, and build a proper robot.
    Until then, every other attempt will seem like a turd in comparison with the features we already know exist *right now* but are locked away in war chests behind medieval fortress walls.

    1. Re: We have the technology by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This, precisely this. Instead of putting money into solving real world problems to make robots a reality, venture capital and investors waste their time with services that solve trivial problems which were solved a long time ago. You could send e-mails before facebook, you had irc and sms before whatsapp. Yes sms was (and still is) hidden behind expensive plans, but this is no technological problem. Yes, sms is aged, and has its own technological issues, but instead of trying to improve existing communication means companies rather reinvent the wheel over and over again, burning precious developer time, instead of trying to leverage it to implement things once, then sharing it and letting others improve it.

      The ability of companies for exclusive use of their technology, giving nobody the actual ability to take and improve the code, leads to world spanning monopolies like google or microsoft. I don't say that all code should be AGPL licensed, there are models too where you give the original authors money for their code.

  12. When Suri/Cortina/Google Now are perfect by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Current voice recognition is pretty good, but overall natural language contextual understanding is poor. 90% isn't good enough 98% isn't good enough. When you can reasonably talk to your computer and give it complex Star Trek type commands, then you can build something that moves and tries to do them. When you can give a somewhat imprecise order like "Computer, analyze employee sick days and compare them to major sporting events" and the computer can understand what you want and generate a reasonable product, then you can give it some motors to move around the house.

  13. Twenty more years by techno-vampire · · Score: 2

    Right now, I'd say that we'll have a home robot that lives up to the hype in about twenty more years. Of course, twenty years from now I expect to be saying the same thing, but that's just because no matter how good we get, the hype will be even better. It's about the ultimate in constantly-moving goalposts.

    --
    Good, inexpensive web hosting
    1. Re:Twenty more years by MrL0G1C · · Score: 1

      I think we'll have home robots but they will be a bit clumsy and they won't have real AI, they will instead have huge amounts of pre-programmed decisions and bits of fuzzy logic. The robots might have some bits of what we like to call AI but really isn't, these bits will be for image and voice processing only.

      Home robots will require every task imaginable will have to be worked out one by one - and there will be hundreds perhaps thousands of tasks and sub-tasks. But a car is made of a thousand+ parts and that doesn't stop us.

      For how difficult the problem is, see:
      http://www.youtube.com/results...

      And note that the robots don't seem to have advanced much in 5 years.

      --
      Waterfox - a Firefox fork with legacy extension support, security updates and better privacy by default.
  14. We'll Have Robots That Live Up to the Hype... by Irate+Engineer · · Score: 3, Funny

    We'll have robots that live up to the hype just as soon as we have wives that live up to the hype.

    The first one that makes me a sandwich wins.

    My, isn't my karma burning nicely...

    --

    Left MS Windows for Linux Mint and never looked back!

    Vote for Bernie in 2016!

  15. We already have it, and its name... by digsbo · · Score: 1

    Is Bennett Haseltron. Exactly what the hype is, we're not sure. But it lives up to it.

  16. If they are Fusion Powered... by mtippett · · Score: 1

    Assuming that these Home Robots are fusion powered, they of course will always be 20 years away...

    1. Re:If they are Fusion Powered... by holzertehnic · · Score: 1

      yap

      --
      Holzertehnic -> Usi interioare si exterioare din lemn
  17. Real Doll by swb · · Score: 1

    I've heard someplace that they plan to put Siri-like voice response into them in addition to all the almost-not-uncanny valley stuff they do now to make it more "real". It wouldn't surprise me if something like a sex doll didn't become a more compelling home android than any general purpose one.

    They're focused on a single use case, which means they focus on enhancing just the things that enhance that versus doing many things clumsily, They're also focused on realism in looks, touch and appearance. Doing those things right doesn't help with marginal avancement of other abilities but I think it does make them more believable and appear more advanced which has a psychological value. (In the case of a sex doll, looking good is an inherent value).

    Sex, for all of its theatrical acrobatics, really isn't a very compelling physical movement problem to solve, (especially if you're the bottom) either, and mastering a limited range of needed motion well is a whole lot easier than getting a wider range of motion mostly right.

    It's not that a sex doll would be a better general purpose "robot" but that it could be a much more compelling one because it does its one job much better.

    1. Re:Real Doll by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've heard someplace that they plan to put Siri-like voice response into them in addition to all the almost-not-uncanny valley stuff they do now to make it more "real". It wouldn't surprise me if something like a sex doll didn't become a more compelling home android than any general purpose one.

      They're focused on a single use case, which means they focus on enhancing just the things that enhance that versus doing many things clumsily, They're also focused on realism in looks, touch and appearance. Doing those things right doesn't help with marginal avancement of other abilities but I think it does make them more believable and appear more advanced which has a psychological value. (In the case of a sex doll, looking good is an inherent value).

      Sex, for all of its theatrical acrobatics, really isn't a very compelling physical movement problem to solve, (especially if you're the bottom) either, and mastering a limited range of needed motion well is a whole lot easier than getting a wider range of motion mostly right.

      It's not that a sex doll would be a better general purpose "robot" but that it could be a much more compelling one because it does its one job much better.

      The entire reason for the existence of those things is that they DON'T talk.

  18. About as long as it took me to get my trip to the by the_Bionic_lemming · · Score: 1

    I took the shuttle to the moonbase yesterday - It's a good thing that in 1999 the nuclear dump didn't blow up and send the moon hurtling off into deep space like the tv showed me in the 70's.

    I think we're a bit behind on terraforming tho. I just wish the cost of plutonium fuel for my Underwater home reactor would drop, cause wow, it's still unobtanium.

    Now, where's my food pills that contain everything I need to survive without having to actually eat - they have to be around here somewhere.... Damned old age...

    --
    _ _ _ Go for the eyes Boo! GO FOR THE EYES!
  19. Never by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Don't you know human nature? If any robot ever lives up to the hype, the hype will be relocated further down the line.

    We say we'd be happy with a robot that could clean our homes. They made one that does some of that, so people started to want one that could clean AND cook. We don't have that yet. When we do, we'll start demanding that it cook, clean, and drive the kids to school and back. When one can do that, we'll insist that it cook, clean, drive the kids around, do the shopping, walk the dog, help us file our tax returns, make us feel better when we're under the weather, help the kids with their homework, chaperone them, nurture and guide them, and look out for the family's wellbeing as a whole. And once we have THAT, it STILL won't be good enough, we'll want it to satisfy us sexually too.

    Somewhere around this point, someone will point out that we've reinvented the woman.

    1. Re:Never by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Somewhere around this point, someone will point out that we've reinvented the woman.

      gross.

    2. Re: Never by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1

      :rolleyes:

      the kernel of truth there is people will want their AI's to cope with new situations which requires creative thinking. But creativity requires the ability to make mistakes and nobody wants a toaster that burns the toast. Hard AI that's actually marketable won't be very sellable.

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
    3. Re:Never by mark-t · · Score: 4, Insightful

      We say we'd be happy with a robot that could clean our homes. They made one that does some of that

      Emphasis on *SOME*....

      In general, keeping a home clean entails a whole lot more than just vacuuming an area that is already free of clutter. It entails keeping the area free of clutter in the first place... This requires that a robot know where everything in the house belongs when it is put away, and will automatically clean and put things away that are left unattended for a sufficiently long period of time. Obviously, it should also know how to do this in a manner that does not in any way jeopardize the health or well-being of the occupants.

      "We say we'd be happy with a robot that can clean our homes...." show me one that actually *CAN* clean my home, and we'll talk. Really, an oversized hockey-puck that can only vacuum one floor, can't do stairs, doesn't always cope well with pet fur, and can't figure out that just because it doesn't fit into an area right now because of how things happened to be positioned doesn't mean it shouldn't be vacuumed doesn't cover even half of the job of vacuuming for a lot of people, myself included, and probably not even a tenth of the total job of keeping a place clean and tidy. Forget about expecting cooking or driving kids to school or babysitting them or whatnot.... You claim that people are going to give AI a moving target when it comes to the matter of a robot housekeeper, how about just hitting the fucking original desired target of actually just keeping a house clean?

  20. Roomba technology by tlambert · · Score: 1

    When people say "personal home robot" what I think they're looking for is a robotic maid. Rosy the robot. Pick my crap up. Dust. Organize things. Clean. Make me food. Clean up. etc.

    The roomba etc are about as close as we've gotten to that. And the roomba has so many fucking problems.

    To be entirely fair, until we get further along with room temperature superconductors, you just can't build something like a Roomba without the cat ass magnets.

    1. Re:Roomba technology by Karmashock · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Oh, Roombas are mostly fine. My issue with them more than anything is that they're stupid, don't interface with say a program running on a computer that could make them less stupid, and they've unacceptably high maintenance issues.

      The vacuum robots are getting decent. I'd like them to be clever enough to actually have a map of the room and know where they are in it... etc But what really annoys me most about them is that they have too many plastic parts in them. Most of the plastic in the guts of the roomba should be metal... ideally steel. Grit and other assorted shit gets into the gears and that creates friction and the friction creates heat. My last roomba ate itself. It melted its guts out.

      You can get after market metal guts to replace the shitty plastic modules that should be made out of stamped stainless steel plate. And that largely resolves the maintenance issues.

      However, I still think they should be smarter or should interface with something that is smarter. Have the thing connect via wifi to your network... ideally in a non-mickey mouse way... and then have a more substantial computer do the heavy lifting for it. I'm talking about the sort of thing a Raspberry pi could handle without breaking much of a sweat.

      --
      I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
    2. Re:Roomba technology by TWX · · Score: 2

      I don't get why vacuuming robots have to be flat disks. Sure, they don't necessarily have to be incredibly tall like an upright, but it seems like they sacrifice real cleaning power for appearances sake. I want a nice middle-ground, where the robot is bigger and more effect, and like you say, made out of durable materials instead of cheap plastic.

      --
      Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
    3. Re:Roomba technology by Karmashock · · Score: 2

      They have to be that way because they're so stupid. The ENTIRE robot has to fit under your furniture. It doesn't understand how to clean under something without going entirely under it.

      As to the size of the things... a bit more size would be a good idea. I'd also like it if they didn't put in any sneaky backdoor business plan into the thing such as "well, you just paid 200-500 dollars for this vacuum that works about as well as 50 dollar vacuum. Lets continue the fuckery by drilling you for whatever the stupid filters and other replacement parts cost!"

      The roomba needs more sensors. Ideally some optical ones and possibly some ultrasonic sonar. It needs to be able to connect to a proper computer where it can profit from more processing power. And the stupid bits and pieces need to not be a sides revenue scheme.

      --
      I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
    4. Re:Roomba technology by shadowrat · · Score: 1

      i'd just like them to be able to identify cat puke. they don't even have to be able to clean it up. just avoid it and maybe send me a tweet that it's there. the current state of technology is more like a cat puke spreading robot.

    5. Re:Roomba technology by Karmashock · · Score: 1

      yeah, more sensors, more capability, more brain power.

      Someone will say "but then it will cost so much!"...

      Each sensor costs about 1 to 10 dollars with more being 1 dollar than not. When it comes to capability What does a dust buster cost? 15-25 dollars... so if we have two of those... one that does dry and the other that does wet... 50 dollars to be generous. And brain power... a raspberry pi costs 25-35 dollars... and the rest is just some motors that are going to cost somewhere between 1 dollar and 20 dollars depending on how nuts you want to go with that... some gearing that is going to be 5 dollars and a housing that is maybe 10 dollars mostly because its specific to the product.

      You add it up and I frankly think they can sell the whole thing under the CURRENT price tag of 500 dollars. Cat puke detectors and all. Maybe throw a 25 dollar wifi card in there to connect it to a computer if you just can't handle it on the your build in controller and then throw in some software to make that work. I have a few machines that are always on.

      --
      I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
    6. Re:Roomba technology by tlambert · · Score: 2

      Oh, Roombas are mostly fine. My issue with them more than anything is that they're stupid, don't interface with say a program running on a computer that could make them less stupid, and they've unacceptably high maintenance issues.

      I don't understand the stupidity complaint; they are about as smart as they need to be in order to clean the entire floor which is reachable by a vacuuming robot that is 2D constrained. Making them smarter would only be useful for something like "avoid this area"; what other uses do you foresee could be applied, other than "don't go there" and "frequency of operation for a given area"? I suppose you could have "delay operation on Saturdays for 2 hours, as I will be hung over", and other scheduling stuff...

      As far as maintenance, there are 3D models for most Roomba parts you'd want to replace, as well as for a lot of modifications, if you are interested. Some of them are here: http://www.yeggi.com/q/roomba/... and there are other sites.

      You could either just print replacement parts in plastic, or, assuming you had the right printing hardware, you could have the metal geas you are asking for instead of the plastic ones. NB: My take on the metal gears is that they would typically be a bad idea, since I would prefer the motor tear a stuck gear apart (and leave a live motor) than the motor tear itself apart over a stuck gear, leaving me trying to replace the motor.

    7. Re:Roomba technology by Karmashock · · Score: 3, Interesting

      They have no memory of the room even though they routinely operate in the same room.

      They do not know where doors are, where given activities happen, etc and thus cannot know where the focus of any cleaning should be.

      Their programming is too limited to allow for a larger more effective robot because they're too stupid to clean under things properly the way a human would.

      As someone else in the thread said, they don't understand that some things they're touching actually should be left alone. One guy was talking about how his roomba just spread cat vomit all over the place because his cat will throw up... as cats do... and then the roomba will roll over it and wipe cat vomit all over the place.

      There are an enourmous number or problems with the brain of the thing. And I appreciate that it isn't economical to put that kind of brain power into the roomba... so don't. Most of the robots you see coming out of DARPA these days have most of the brains outside of the robot itself. Its all software running on a laptop or something. And if required for the brain to be in the machine for some competition they just make a cradle for the laptop ON the robot and just put the laptop on the robot.

      So there you go... Roombas don't have the brain power they should. They should have a detailed 3d map of the area they operate in, they should know where things get dirty both from logging done by the roomba itself and by what a human would program into it by saying "here are doors".

      A bigger robot could do a better job cleaning. Anyone that uses a roomba knows that it takes it DAYS to clean a room and it only keeps rooms clean at all because the fucking thing is scurrying around every day doing about as much cleaning in a week as I would in 30 minutes once a week. That limitation limits how much the roomba can clean. It should be able to clean an entire house. My vacuum cleaner... the one I as a human use... can clean the entire house. But the Roomba can't do that. It can't navigate the house and say "clean this room today" and "that room tomorrow"... and its so inefficient in the way it clean any room that it has to clean the same room several times to actually clean it at all.

      And as the man said... cat vomit... or anything gross... gets spread around everywhere.

      I could go on... but if you tell me it is as smart as it needs to be, I disagree. The thing it doesn't do which really pisses me off is it can't navigate and doesn't have a map of the house. That's the dumbest.

      --
      I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
    8. Re:Roomba technology by AmiMoJo · · Score: 3, Informative

      LG's Hom Bot maps rooms. It uses a camera pointed at the ceiling to create a map, as well as the usual IR distance and bump sensors. Neato make one with lidar that does a similar thing.

      The LG robot is pretty good. It learns the room and then doesn't bump into things as much. The only problem is that it only has one map, so if you say take it upstairs it has no idea where it is and is more or less as dumb as the rest of them. It is really quiet though and does an excellent job of cleaning.

      The Neato is junk, unfortunately. The batteries die quickly due to poor power management, and the lidar doesn't seem to help it much.

      The thing is, a cheap Lidl robot that only has a bump sensor is not that much worse, and costs a fraction as much. It may be dumb and doesn't have a brush roller, but it's persistent. Simply by covering the same area repeatedly it eventually lifts quite a lot of dust. So there are rapidly diminishing returns for intelligence and advanced sensors.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    9. Re:Roomba technology by Karmashock · · Score: 1

      The LG thing looks viable. I'd prefer if it were bigger and had the ability to deal with... lets say an entire melting scoop of rocky road ice cream... just to be polite. But the LG thing looks nearly like what I want.

      I want it to interface with my computer. I want those room maps uploaded to the computer so there is no question of storage.

      One thing that did worry me a bit with the hom bot was... I suspect its full of plastic garbage parts in its guts. That needs to stop. Steel plate is not expensive. You have a press... you put in a sheet of steel... it presses it into the right form... and we're done.

      I'm literally looking for about as much love and care as went into the old grease guns... which was a gun the US made during WW2 because it was the cheapest way they could think of to make a sub machine gun. I'm not looking for anything fancy... I want robust. I want something that isn't going to shit and die in a year. If I don't get a good solid four years of service out of it, then it can go fuck itself.

      --
      I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
    10. Re:Roomba technology by tlambert · · Score: 2

      They have no memory of the room even though they routinely operate in the same room.

      I would call this a feature, rather than a drawback, since obstacles such as doors could be open or closed, and obstacles such as dining chairs may move around. Given that, a static map would be a detriment, rather than a benefit.

      They do not know where doors are, where given activities happen, etc and thus cannot know where the focus of any cleaning should be.

      OK, I already conceded "frequency of operation for a given area"; however for their mop-bot or for shag carpet, either is going to look funny if you don't do all of it, so I'm not sure that's an issue. As long as it does all of it, yes, it's doing unnecessary vacuuming, but no moreso than a cleaning lady would probably do.

      Their programming is too limited to allow for a larger more effective robot because they're too stupid to clean under things properly the way a human would.

      You mean "by using their arms to move the chair out of the way" and so on? Or do you mean that the robot should be like a cannister vacuum, with the head unit separate from the body unit, in order to get more suction?

      As someone else in the thread said, they don't understand that some things they're touching actually should be left alone.

      One guy was talking about how his roomba just spread cat vomit all over the place because his cat will throw up... as cats do... and then the roomba will roll over it and wipe cat vomit all over the place.

      Yes, well, that's going to be a limitation of pretty much anything below just above dog intelligence. At dog intelligence, it would *eat* the cat vomit.

      So there you go... Roombas don't have the brain power they should.

      So far, we've got "cat vomit" as a valid argument for more brains. And better sensors, which are typically, at the level of cat vomit detection, going to be more expensive than "better brains".

      They should have a detailed 3d map of the area they operate in

      Totally not getting this one, unless you plan on putting a quadcoptor onto the thing... it's a 2d device.

      they should know where things get dirty both from logging done by the roomba itself and by what a human would program into it

      You potentially have a point with the "this needs extra cleaning", but the UI for the "this needs extra cleaning" should probably connect you to the "buy a more powerful model Roomba" Amazon page. This *could* be covered by the "frequency of operation over an area argument"; how would you design as "this area was dirtier than that area" sensor, or conclude that you need to do something about it? I could see a "this is where I eat lunch, so I need it cleaned twice a day instead of once a day because I am a slob" being useful.

      by saying "here are doors".

      Seriously: transient barriers, which argues for not having a memory of where the barriers have been historically; what if you leave a dining chair pulled out, instead of pushing it in? Should it remember where it was, or should it just adapt its operation?

      On doors themselves: it does it no good to know this, unless you either equip all your doors with an "open enough for a Roomba to get through" sensor and transponder, or add automatic door openers so the Roomba can come through the door even though it's closed. This actually does not require as much intelligence as you want the thing to have -- or any at all, if your house system has "I know the Roomba runs from 11:45AM to 12:11AM, so open all the doors at 11:40AM, and then at 12:15AM, close all the ones that used to be closed before, so the human is not subtly disturbed when they come home".

      A bigger robot could do a better job cleaning. Anyone that uses a roomba knows that it takes it DAYS to clean a room and it onl

    11. Re:Roomba technology by houghi · · Score: 1

      OK, so you want to add a RPi to the product? That means another 25USD. That means 75USD to 100USD added to the price. And for what?
      Steel instead of plastic would incvrease the price as well.

      I have one and have absolutely no problem with them. My main problem is the light on top. Way to light and it does not turn off.

      However I have that issue with almost anything electric. Regardless if they have a red or blue LED or some other light, they are all way to bright. Some gorillatape and I do not see the light anymore.

      I see no advantage for any added inteligence. As far as I can tell it does what it needs to do every day when I am not home anyway. Perhaps it could do whatever it does more intelligently and faster and what not, but I am not there to see it, so I do not care.

      I have mine now for two years and all I needed to replace where the filters.

      That said, I live in a studio and YMMV. I must say that it helped keeping the place clutterfree as well as it would hang in e.g. clothes on the floor.

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    12. Re: Roomba technology by unami · · Score: 2

      my roomba usually is to stupid to find it's way back to the docking station, and likes to stop/have the battery die/eat a crippling cable right under the bed or other hard to reach places. i'd really like it to have some cable avoidance and at least a rudimentary knowledge of where it is and how to get back - maybe using wifi beacons that are not as useless as the infrared "virtual wall" ones. and a little intelligence to guide it out of tight corners - it got a knack for finding a way into places that are barely wider than itself, but never finding out again.

    13. Re:Roomba technology by Karmashock · · Score: 2

      1. As to floor mapping being a bad idea because furniture moves. The general goal here is to permit the unit to navigate the house. The Hom Bot seems to negate your furniture issue by mapping the ceiling instead.

      Though frankly, I think you could let the thing roam around your house and map it... then import the map into you computer... and explain to the software what is and is not furniture.

      And regardless, just because it maps it, it doesn't mean that it won't still be keeping its eyes open. it will try to get from point A to point B first assuming things haven't moved. But if they have it will orient around the obstacle and note that something moved. This could permit dynamic flagging of furniture in that the 3d map of the area will be compared to successive maps of the same area. Then you do object recognition on those things and if you see the same object somewhere else at a different orientation then it gets flagged furniture.

      Then you can either basically ignore it for purposes of general navigation knowing that you'll just orient around it when you encounter it where ever it might be this time. Or you might have probability clouds because given pieces of furniture tend to be in predictable places.

      2. As to "you need to do all of it regardless"... lets not pretend that you want it to do an equally heavy cleaning everywhere. The corner of the room that nothing ever happens in doesn't need a serious a cleaning as the front door area or something. You want to argue shag or mop... I'm not saying you don't clean parts of the room... unless you actually don't want to... in which case that's the owners decision. But what I am saying is that to be effective you need to have areas where you seriously scrub the shit out of them on a regular basis. There are a few spots in my house that are dirty pretty much after four days. There are other parts of my house that take weeks to get dirty... and the dirt they get is dust that just falls out of the air.

      3. Most vacuuming doesn't actually bother with the literal middle of couches and stuff. At least not every time. Generally what people do is they angle the vacuum to get everything you might see under the couch and then leave the proper under the couch cleaning to some quarterly cleaning... the once every 3 month thing that involves actually cleaning the stuff that you were too lazy to clean before.

      A robot in this case could simply extend a cleaning head under the couch or whatever that it detected as being something that had to be cleaned this way... and just get everything it could reach. Is this ideal for everyone? Its fine for pretty much everyone and the benefit remember is having a much more robust and powerful machine that can be bigger and thus doesn't suffer from the problems that all ultra compact devices suffer from.

      4. As to 2d vs 3d... I get what you're talking about but the sensors need to ultimately be 3d. The map might not need to be 3d but sensors are going to need to be 3d.

      And really the 2d map is going to need to be 2d+ because you're going to want a map of the carpet, overhang for couches, and any ledges or stairs. That isn't really a 3d map. You're not quantifying how high or low anything is in the same way you are with the 2d map. But you are specifying specifically where notable features in the 2d map that are nonetheless traversable... or seemingly so until you go crashing down the stairs into a shattered mess of fucking electronics.

      So if you want to quibble about the 2D versus 3D... Fine... Quibble accepted *puts on quibbling war paint* (its hot pink and has glitter in it).

      I retort... 2D+ *RAWR*

      *Flexes to be intimidating* :-D

      5. As to barriers that might be there not... just because shit moves around that does not mean there shouldn't be a map.

      And before I continue, I was talking about the doors to the exterior... which the stupid thing shouldn't go through anyway unless you want to vacuum the side walk or something.

      So inside, if we're talking

      --
      I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
    14. Re:Roomba technology by Karmashock · · Score: 1

      As to adding intelligence to it, actually my suggestion here is to give it a wifi uplink so that your existing computers in your house can do the thinking for it. I have a few machines that are always on. One is a media server for my TV and the other is a home work station and the others do other stuff. But the point is that any of them has free cycles it could donate to the vacuum bot... as well as more storage space than the fucking thing could ever want.

      The raspberry pi comment was a reference to the computing power needed to actually help the thing could be supplied by a Pi plugged into the router. It wouldn't even be on the vacuum.

      I want an API for this thing and I want to offload the brainpower from the shitty computer in the vacuum to the more substantial processing engines available pretty much anywhere else.

      --
      I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
    15. Re: Roomba technology by Karmashock · · Score: 1

      Yep. I kept finding mine under my bed or something with half a sock in its maw.

      --
      I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
    16. Re:Roomba technology by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Roomba will never be an option for me until they can make a first sweep of the room and pick up toys/clothes and throw them in the hallway.

    17. Re:Roomba technology by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      then throw in some software to make that work

      Spoken like a true hardware engineer :)

      Actually, 80% isn't a bad markup for a pointless luxury product; often it's 95% or even more. This one actually took some R&D too.

      Equally, the reason there's no "cost-plus" version of Roomba is because the only real problem the Roomba solves is what to get the wife for Christmas, and $150 doesn't say "I love you" as much as $500 does.

    18. Re:Roomba technology by CrimsonAvenger · · Score: 2

      Making them smarter would only be useful for something like "avoid this area"; what other uses do you foresee could be applied, other than "don't go there" and "frequency of operation for a given area"? I suppose you could have "delay operation on Saturdays for 2 hours, as I will be hung over", and other scheduling stuff...

      Hmm, my Roomba allows for different scheduling each day of the week, so the Saturday thing isn't a big deal. The 'virtual lighthouse" and "virtual wall" (one unit, with a switch to select mode) allows you to do the "don't go there" or "avoid this area". There's even a widget (virtual wall variant) that can be set up near the cat/dog dish/bed to keep the Roomba away from there if you'd like.

      IOW, I'm failing to see the problem with the Roomba.

      --

      "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
    19. Re:Roomba technology by umafuckit · · Score: 1

      Yeah, they're "stupid" in the sense that the vacuuming path is semi-random. Can't say I care, though. I set mine going in the mornings and most days when I get back the thing is full of dust and dog hair and has docked successfully. The only impact the stupidity has on me is that that the machine needs running *every* day, since by chance on some days it might miss a room or spend little time in a room.

    20. Re:Roomba technology by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      However, I still think they should be smarter or should interface with something that is smarter. Have the thing connect via wifi to your network... ideally in a non-mickey mouse way... and then have a more substantial computer do the heavy lifting for it.

      Hell, no!

      This sort of thinking gives us a fragile, insecure mess of a system. The Roomba needs a separate program to run it when the connection drops, so you've just doubled the amount of code that needs to be debugged. And no home appliance company is going to spend a penny on security unless they're forced to at gunpoint, so it'll be broadcasting everything it knows about the interior of your home to the world.

      If more processing power is going to make a Roomba significantly more useful (of which I am dubious), either (a) code more efficiently, or (b) sit tight and let Moore's law take care of it. Just don't change it from a self-contained unit that does one thing and does it well.

      (I agree completely about metal components, to help the "does it well" part of that sentence.)

    21. Re:Roomba technology by Karmashock · · Score: 1

      According to Roomba's own marketing information they suggest having one for every room.

      That's fucking stupid. And it is only needed because the robot is fucking stupid.

      The LG robot they were talking about elsewehre in the thread appears to be smarter. It maps the house and knows where it is. That's nifty. But the roomba doesn't and that's crap. Unless you live in a studio apartment... do not recommend.

      --
      I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
    22. Re:Roomba technology by Karmashock · · Score: 1

      Not really. You give it the existing bit of code that it already operates on if its independent. And when slaved to a computer via wifi, the unit would basically operate like a remote controlled car. The computer would tell it "go forward" "go Back" "turn left" "turn on your vacuum"... etc.

      Would the code on the computer need to be debugged... the idea here would be that Roomba releases an API for operating their robot and then releases a default control program for various platforms. I have no doubt that if Roomba does that and their default program isn't amazing... that there are going to be a lot of people hammering together open source control packages that have increasingly elaborate and unpredictable functionality.

      --
      I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
    23. Re:Roomba technology by umafuckit · · Score: 1

      I live in three bedroom apartment and it works just fine for me. Previously I lived in a single-story house: same deal. I wouldn't say one per room is needed unless you live in a mansion. I think you're over-rating the "stupidity" problem somewhat. The machine can and does cover the room. It just takes it longer than it should, but it does do it.

    24. Re:Roomba technology by Karmashock · · Score: 1

      It doesn't seem to work very effectively in multi room situations. It invariably runs out of power in the second or third room and is unable to find its way back. And even if it does, it just revacuums the same areas it already vacuumed and peters out before it gets to the stuff it didn't do last time.

      The LG Hom Bot appears to resolve that situation because it maps the ceiling which is innovative. And from that it is able to orrient in your home. So when it gets low, it returns directly and predictably to the charger using the map and then once recharged it goes back to where it was when it got low on power and resumes without revacuuming the same areas again.

      It also permits patterned vacuuming. Some people like the pattern in the carpet made by vacuuming. Those even rows. And the Hom Bot can do that instead of bouncing around like drunken clown car.

      --
      I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
    25. Re:Roomba technology by umafuckit · · Score: 1

      Sounds clever, I'll keep an eye out for it if my Roomba dies. Probably we just have different sized homes. Mine is 70 sq. m, and has 4 or 5 rooms (depends how you count). It gets back to the charging station most of the time. Sometimes I'll lock it in one room if I want that space done more thoroughly.

    26. Re:Roomba technology by Karmashock · · Score: 1

      ... that's 710 square feet... or so... ehm... My last apartment was 800 square feet and had 3 rooms.

      1. Living/dining/kitchen room
      2. Bathroom
      3. Bedroom

      I don't know, I'm reacting more to the walls you have in your home which architecturally offend me.

      Maybe its cultural. The fashion in the US these days is to have as few walls as possible to create as many large rooms as possible. Often a given room will have sections of it for different things. One part of the room had a dining room table, another had a couch, another had an oven... etc. Everything flowed into everything else with no doors or walls. The fashion in the US is that the only rooms that should be segmented should be rooms requiring privacy. So bedrooms and bathrooms. If it isn't either then the style or fashion is to have no walls or doors. Zones are generally demarcated with rugs or the placement of furniture.

      Anyway, a typical American house has upwards of 2000 square feet. Anyway... I've seen Roombas shit the bed in many situations. I'd like them to be able to navigate.

      --
      I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
    27. Re:Roomba technology by codeButcher · · Score: 1

      First robvac was a Kärcher (same model was sold under Siemens name but not in my locale). Solid machine, basic random-pattern algorithm. Did a stellar job until /something/ fried it's motherboard. Deemed it too expensive to fix.

      Then got an LG. Worked fairly well, but could apparently not determine the height of the "ceiling" it works under - goes under bed, got stuck there. A bit flimsy, broke while still under warranty, so just asked my money back.

      So I went back to the manual process. I've been living in a house with tiles for some while, which I simply sweep with a broom/mop thingy made from microfibres and with a lot of moppy hairs. While not perfect, it's the easiest compromise so far.

      Yes, I am inherently lazy. I still would like to have a thing that goes about the same job while I do my own thing. Even spending a morning cleaning the house is a morning lost to more important things....

      --
      Free, as in your money being freed from the confines of your account.
    28. Re:Roomba technology by codeButcher · · Score: 1

      Sorry for replying to myself. LG was around 1/5 the price of the Kärcher.

      My take is that the issue isn't with the machine's "brainpower" (a simple random pattern will do, albeit take longer). It is the actual sucking hardware that needs to not suck (oops for the pun). Anything round or rotating is bad at cleaning square corners and around many objects - you need something that goes right to the edge. You also need to have something robust enough to be able to handle sand, grit, stones and other small objects that may lay around undetected, and be strong enough to pick them up.

      --
      Free, as in your money being freed from the confines of your account.
    29. Re:Roomba technology by Karmashock · · Score: 1

      This feeds into my general opinion that every industry should work like the desktop PC industry... aka modular components. By all means... have custom enclosures and innovate your various modules. But have the fittings between module A and module B cooperate with each other.

      That's not in the interest of some perhaps because they like to make shit but its in the consumer's interest.

      I'd love to see everything work that way.

      And funnier still, it is probably a huge environmental problem. Think about it. With all the enviro crap going around these days does anyone talk about the environmental cost of planned obsolescence? Think of how many products have some simple cheap shit part in them break and people throw the whole thing out when really they just need a new slightly less shit but probably similarly cheap part.

      No UN panel on that eh? Another way I know the people pushing that whole thing are either morons or insincere. Its obvious and we could reduce consumption radically.

      --
      I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
  21. I'll tell you when by Tablizer · · Score: 1

    when the bot can drive my damned flying car.

  22. Re:Big O Obama Know Da Game by Tablizer · · Score: 1

    See, bots can't even troll well yet

  23. Re:Fembots by TWX · · Score: 1

    Not everyone likes or dislikes doing the same chores. I don't like cleaning bathrooms. Mopping the floor, scrubbing the walls, floor, and door of the shower, scrubbing the tub, cleaning the toilet, clearing the counter and cleaning it and the sinks, not my idea of fun. It still gets done, but probably not as often as it should.

    I want a robot to do household cleaning chores. Clean the bathroom, or at least the flat surfaces. Mop the tiled floors. Vacuum the carpets. Clean the windows. Possibly clean the patio and the sidewalks. Possibly deal with some of the kitchen cleaning. If the robot did this kind of cleaning daily then it never would be all that bad and consequently the robot wouldn't have to work very hard on any given day so long as it started out relatively clean.

    Stuff like laundry? Not that big a deal when the machine does all of the work and I just have to load the wash, move the washed clothes to the dryer, and put them away when they're dry. Can do that off and on while I'm otherwise just watching TV. Cooking dinner? I'd rather do that my self for the moment as I like variety, which I don't think a robot would be as good at compared to extremely repetitive cleaning tasks.

    --
    Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
  24. Soon by WillKemp · · Score: 1

    I'll give you a clue... It'll be powered by cold fusion.

  25. 10 years, of course by AntiSol · · Score: 1

    They're about 10 years away.

    And in 10 years, they'll be about 10 years away.

  26. I'd settle for.... by Catmeat · · Score: 2
    I'd settle for a domestic robot that didn't report everything I say and everything I do back to the corporate mothership.

    Don't think I'll get it though.

  27. Mr. Handy or bust. by Dahamma · · Score: 1

    Unless it can hover, has a sawblade and a blowtorch - and a humor emitter, what's the point? The Future is NOW!

  28. Robotic Slashdot Editor? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    C'mon. Even one powered by a ZX81 could do better.

  29. Bad question by Rattenhirn · · Score: 1

    Already here, if you adjust the hype according to reality...

  30. Reality always a downer vs fantasy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I think too many try to emulate fantasy like the Jetson's or Star trek or Hal. Trouble is, we do not have the technology or the processing power to instill such required
    programing and function to make anything come close to fantasy that we create. But when we create robot's for example to do specific tasks or perform a series of tasks repeatedly. That is where robot's excel and can do good things. Why we are creating so many robot's to do all of the tasks we should be doing ourselves is very strange? Will the robot's take over someday? Or are we trying to allow the robot's to take over someday? We have a choice you know.

  31. Re:Fembots by cmdr_tofu · · Score: 2

    Professional cleaners are very competitive. You can pay a team of 3 to come into your place 1 time / month to do all the things you can't get to.

  32. Some jobs are more amenable to robots by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I have had a number of Roomba units over the years and can agree with the other posters -- they are sort of ok but the maintenance issues are way over the top. My wife vacuums the house with a central unit -- claims she enjoys it. My last Roomba is downstairs in the train room and comes out on schedule to wander around under things. Even without a long haired perma-shedding dog, Roomba needs to be field stripped and cleaned between every run... per the company.Not much of a labor savings. For a while I had a Dirt Dog -- stripped down unit for basements and garages. Worked great cleaning up the shop until sawdust and grunge got into it. The vendor recommended field stripping it and blowing everything out with compressed air... I added it to the scrap pile at the dump. But for years we cut our 3/4 acre yard with a Lawnbott Evolution. It did a great job with only modest cleaning requirements -- flipping it over every few weeks and scraping off the grass. Its in the garage now and I use a riding mower. Needed replacement lithium cells and the parts suppliers did their usual 'you can kiss my ring and I will let you know in time if I choose to respond to you...' bit. When the grass is growing fast in the Spring waiting a few weeks for an email or even a Fedex package is tough. So great machine that amazingly just did its job but killed by a boutique supply chain. But the in-house robots (I have had 3) were all neurotic junk. A cocktail party novelty but useless. And as for the companion robots or cooking droid... hysterical laughter...

  33. Tannhauser overture by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    > It wouldn't surprise me if something like a sex doll didn't become a more compelling home android than any general purpose one.

    What could go wrong? After all, Pris Stratton is just a basic pleasure model.

    Although I think we'll see attack ships on fire off the shoulder of Orion and C-beams glitter in the dark near the Tannhauser gate, before a Pris dressed as Miku brings breakfast to bed.

  34. Re:Fembots by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    If you only have a female partner because she cleans, you're doing it wrong.

  35. Re:Fembots by Beezlebub33 · · Score: 2

    Stuff like laundry? Not that big a deal when the machine does all of the work and I just have to load the wash, move the washed clothes to the dryer, and put them away when they're dry....

    As you say, it's different things for different people. If you have an extended family, or have several small children, the laundry is simply absurd. It is something that you have to do basically every day. And it is a pain in the ass to have to check every pocket first (because otherwise you get pens, candy, or other stuff in the wash), un-ball them (since kids are amazingly good as making their clothes into tightly wrapped origami when taking them off), and then at the end folding a zillion shirts that have one tiny sleeve out the wrong way. A robot that could spend an hour or two a day doing laundry would be a magical device for me and many other people, on the order of the changes of washing machines or dish washers in the first place.

    --
    The more people I meet, the better I like my dog.
  36. Re:Fembots by conquistadorst · · Score: 2

    I want a robot to do household cleaning chores. Clean the bathroom, or at least the flat surfaces. Mop the tiled floors. Vacuum the carpets. Clean the windows. Possibly clean the patio and the sidewalks. Possibly deal with some of the kitchen cleaning. If the robot did this kind of cleaning daily then it never would be all that bad and consequently the robot wouldn't have to work very hard on any given day so long as it started out relatively clean.

    HEY - robots exist for at least a few of the items you listed here. You really need to buy one if you haven't already! They're certainly not perfect but the vacuum and mopping robots I have work good enough for me. They keep the floors clean for me during the day, I just have to empty their canisters and throw the mop cloths in the laundry. I wish they'd make robots that can dust and vacuum stairs though :\

  37. Heinlein described them in 1956... so maybe 2056? by Archtech · · Score: 1

    Robert A Heinlein gave quite detailed descriptions of household robots in his 1956 SF novel "The Door Into Summer" (although admittedly the novel's action is set in 1970 and later). The protagonist's company is called "Hired Girl", and he creates Flexible Frank, Drafting Dan, and finally Protean Pete. Whatever slight lacunae there may have remained in the engineering details, Heinlein had the marketing down pat.

    For quite a good account of the novel, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.... One of the footnotes there recounts the amusing story of how the Heinleins decided on a title:

    "When we were living in Colorado there was snowfall. Our cat — I'm a cat man — wanted to get out of the house so I opened a door for him but he wouldn't leave. Just kept on crying. He'd seen snow before and I couldn't understand it. I kept opening other doors for him and he still wouldn't leave. Then Ginny said, 'Oh, he's looking for a door into summer.' I threw up my hands, told her not to say another word, and wrote the novel The Door Into Summer' in 13 days."
    - Heinlein interview with Alfred Bester; pg 487 Redemolished ISBN 0-7434-0725-3

    --
    I am sure that there are many other solipsists out there.
  38. Re:Fembots by IndustrialComplex · · Score: 2

    Cooking dinner? I'd rather do that my self for the moment as I like variety, which I don't think a robot would be as good at compared to extremely repetitive cleaning tasks.

    Invert it. Robots prepare the food and you cook it. It's pretty damn near what I do now for my dinner. When I lived in DC, I got used to a place called "Let's Dish" it's one of those places where you prepare your meals from a list of recipes each month. You then stick them in your freezer for when you need them. Later the 'cooking' is basically just adding heat/sautéing/baking and you have a full meal in 30 minutes or so. It ends up being cheaper for me because even with the overhead of "Let's Dish" they buy their ingredients in bulk and my meals end up being about $3-5 per serving. I'm not careful enough in my meal planning to beat that.

    So what do I mean by invert it? Robots in the preparation, humans do the final cooking. The early work such as chopping, slicing, packing, marinating, sorting are the kinds of mindless timeconsuming portions which seem to be right in line with the type of work a robot could do. The final cooking and cleanup requires much more subjective actions which are suited to humans. Thus invert it and you could have robots prepare your meals except for the final steps.

    (Personally I love the make and take places because I always know that a meal has 6 servings, will take 30 minutes from freezer to plate, and keeps me from impulse purchases when in the grocery store)

    --
    Out of modpoints but really liked a post? 1BDkF6TtmmeZ3yqXbz9yhdYVqRYnwFoXDj
  39. Re:Fembots by GTRacer · · Score: 1

    And it is a pain in the ass to have to check every pocket first [...]

    Headphones. For my kids it's headphones. Dunno how many times they''ve washed their cheap Skullcandy sets. Miraculously, they still work after a wash or two. But they definitely lose some over time as they buy new ones every 6 months or so.

    Heck, I thought I'd lost my nice Plantronics Bluetooth earphones when I left them in my pants and someone didn't hear me to get them out before starting the laundry...

    --
    Defending IP by destroying access to it? That makes sense, RIAA/MPAA. Go to the corner until you can play nice!
  40. Maid Droid with "Sex Technology Option" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Maid Droid with "Sex Technology Option"

    Please.

  41. Mr. Handy uses skill-saw to cut a cake by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In a show of the sad state of affairs, we have your average everyday Mr Handy robot ( http://fallout.wikia.com/wiki/Mister_Handy_(Fallout_3) )
    who still tries to use his skill-saw blade arm for domestic chores like cutting a cake.

  42. Soon now that Windows 10 is out by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Now that Microsoft has released Windows 10 in all its perfection we will be seeing many new automatons