Slashdot Mirror
Humans Are Already Harassing Security Robots (cnn.com)
An anonymous reader quotes CNN:
As robots begin to appear on sidewalks and streets, they're being hazed and bullied. Last week, a drunken man allegedly tipped over a 300-pound security robot in Mountain View, California... Knightscope, which makes the robot that was targeted in Mountain View, said it's had three bullying incidents since launching its first prototype robot three years ago. In 2014, a person attempted to tackle a Knightscope robot. Last year in Los Angeles, people attempted to spray paint a Knightscope robot. The robot sensed the paint and sounded an alarm, alerting local security and the company's engineers... the robot's cameras filmed the pranksters' license plate, making it easy to track them down.
The company's security robots are deployed with 17 clients in five states, according to the article, which notes that at best the robots' cameras allow them to "rat out the bullies." But with delivery robots now also hitting the streets in San Francisco and Washington D.C., "the makers of these machines will have to figure out how to protect them from ill-intentioned humans."
The company's security robots are deployed with 17 clients in five states, according to the article, which notes that at best the robots' cameras allow them to "rat out the bullies." But with delivery robots now also hitting the streets in San Francisco and Washington D.C., "the makers of these machines will have to figure out how to protect them from ill-intentioned humans."
Is it even possible to "bully" a machine?
You can't bully a robot. If you call it bullying to pushing over a robot then you would have to call it the same when you push over a trash can. It is vandalism when you are dealing with objects. I think the company is trying to anthropomorphise their products.
First, it's a machine so the word to use would be vandalism and not bullying.
Second, three incidents in several years doesn't exactly sound like a real problem to me, especially considering they seem to have more than one unit deployed.
And third, who thinks it's a good idea to vandalize something that has cameras, honestly!
From TFS:
"the makers of these machines will have to figure out how to protect them from ill-intentioned humans."
This seems to open the door to a more Robocop like type of robot.
Everything I write is lies, read between the lines.
So when will a consumer liability lawsuit be filed when one of these security robots cause human harm?
I bullied a lump of coal by showing it a solar panel
Prepping and practicing.
Magnus, Robot fighter.
Things like robots and self driving cars are represent new opportunities for griefing. Of course they're going to be attacked, keyed, have boxes tossed in front of them, gum stuck on their cameras etc. If devices had better be designed to prevent/mitigate these attacks or they're not going to last long.
They are not "security robots", whatever that might mean... They are machines of hate, and oppression.
I'd fuck with security robots if I saw them on my street, and fuck auto play videos. And, as always, fuck Apple.
Those robots don't have any means of defense, so they obviously will be attacked.
But as soon they get a laser cannon that looks suspiciously like a plunger, and some close range weapons that looks suspiciously like whiskers, everything will be solved.
Perhaps the reason the bots have attracted such negative attention is that they are felt to be transgressing privacy. People are used to security cameras as fixed emplacements. They're not used to wandering cameras. Not to mention the scummy data-harvesting of anyone who drives in.
Did the security companies learn nothing from the travails of hitchbot?
http://mir1.hitchbot.me/
Apparently, the Robo-phobes moved on from the city of brotherly love, Somebody tell Bender!
Why would we expect humans to treat robots better than they treat immigrants who take their jobs?
COE
.. in this world, to start harassing the machines!
Now there's a shining example!
Ezekiel 23:20
They will lobby to have bullying and assault laws cover "robots," humanizing them. They are already laying the groundwork with words. Corrupt and incompetent legislators are capable of anything. Don't be surprise when it happens.
E Proelio Veritas.
Yes it is a good thing. Send them all to the crusher (the robots that is)
Just wait for the masses to become unemployed due to these machines. Ned Lud will be cheering from his grave.
I'd rather be riding my '63 Triumph T120.
Here's an idea for a repercussion, at least for people driving cars. Send a video of the driver's behaviour to their insurance company. The insurance company can then raise the driver's insurance rates appropriately based on their driving habits displayed.
Simpler would be to send the video to the police, but they're probably less likely to do something.
Most importantly, the vandalized security robots would otherwise have bullied people.
Nothing will protect these things from determined vandals or a 7.62mm round. Or a lasso and a pickup truck. Yee haw, it's round-up time!
(And by the way, I don't think you can "bully" a robot, technically speaking. That's a living-being to living-being interaction. If I slam the door on my microwave repeatedly while cursing at it, am I "bullying" it? Err, no.)
Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
Reminds me of Robin Williams (as Mork) talking about tipping the waiter.
Make it so that if anyone tries to touch the robot, they get a taser like shock. Hey, I don't like robotic security guards any more than the next guy but I don't condone vandalism.
You obviously don't understand what the word "microagressions" means.
A microaggresion is one thousandth of a milliaggression, which in turn is one thousandth of an aggression, or "aggro," which is the SI base unit.
So 10^6 microaggresions is equal to 1 aggro.
I'm kidding. A microaggression is when one microbe bullies another, even indirectly, such as using the word "phagocyte".
Or perhaps as profit motivated makers of these machines try to take existing public spaces
From TFA:
The robots operate in shopping centers, hospitals and corporate campuses.
Not public spaces. Private property owners have the right to provide security and surveillance. Either by robot or a 300 lb minimum wage mall cop with an attitude and a can of mace.
Also, I, law enforcement and practically every three letter agency have the right to photograph/film in public spaces. Don't like it? Stay home.
Have gnu, will travel.
#robotlivesmatter
Cows that need tipping are few and far between for most people. This is also a version of cow tipping that the folks at PETA cold approve.
Another thought... Any idea what size Hefty Bag would be needed? Safety requires wearing a condom.
... the robot's cameras filmed the pranksters' license plate, making it easy to track them down.
Lesson #1. Spray paint over the camera lens first.
Lesson #2: (Advanced) Do NOT joke about having hair products in your backpack when talking with the security robot.
It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
None of this has anything to do with the gp's criticism of the article: that it uses socjus style social shaming about 'bullying' to encourage public deference to robots.
a mere machine can't be bullied or harassed or receive cruelty, they are lower than animals in that regard.
they can be sabotaged, interfered with, destroyed, vandalized, hacked....but not bullied
socjus style social shaming about 'bullying'
Anthropomorphize much? Because it's just a security camera on wheels. If that intimidates people then they aren't much smarter than my cat confronting my Roomba. That aside, I'm in favor of using social shaming against all sorts of vandals. Whether their target looks like R2D2 or not.
Have gnu, will travel.
Just add this soundtrack with a fake mini guns , it would spook most rather well. https://youtu.be/Hzlt7IbTp6M?t...
We cannot stand aside while our robot overlords get harassed. Lawsuits must be filed! #robotlivesmatter
Reread the article and summary. I'm not the one anthropomorphizing. I'm not interested in being subservient to a machine or being forced treat it as though it's human.
"the makers of these machines will have to figure out how to protect them from ill-intentioned humans."
"You have 5 seconds to put down the spray can."
"You have 4 seconds to put down the spray can."
.
.
.
Reread the article and summary.
I did. Several times.
I'm not interested in being subservient to a machine or being forced treat it as though it's human.
There was no mention of the machines doing anything demanding interaction with, or a response from the people that ended up vandalizing them. I suspect that people who are "not interested in being subservient" to a box with a camera that is just rolling around are having some serious reality perception problems. It's a machine. Thinking that it's presence somehow "forces treatment as a human" is pretty much the definition of anthropomorphism. The drunk (in TFA) at least has an excuse.
Have gnu, will travel.
A lot of people are not going to take it kindly when a machine comes to them and starts giving them shit, or simply stand there and watch them