I've always been skeptical of kit robotics. I'm a robotics post-grad student so perhaps I'm spoiled by some of the gear I get to play with, but I've always found that robot kits seem kinda wimpy and limited. I'm so tired of seeing line followers and edge follower robots. Lego mindstorms was a step in the right direction - giving you a platform that can be used to make some truly interesting applications, but I still bemoan the underpowered motors they provide.
One day I'd like to make and sell a robot kit with simple optical vision (say 32x32 pixels), some serious motors (50 W or so) and a linux based embedded system, with an RC radio jack and all of the interfacing worked out and a nice development environment. That would be a kit worth having and it would have rocked as a kid.
I wonder how many Facebook users compulsively follow the lives of celebrities in the tabloid media. Is turn-about fairplay? I wouldn't like to be subjected to that sort of scrutiny - I doubt many people would.
I spell it like an Australian would - that Australian being me, specifically.
Seriously, arguing over the spelling of a neologism is pretty pathetic.
You idiot.
I'd say this is worse than getting a job application rebuffed by a form letter. With a job application, they don't know you and you really are little more than a name (at best) and a number (at worst) to them. For termination of employment somebody really ought to know who you are and what service you have provided the company. It's inexcusible - and a good indication of what those up the ladder really think about their workers.
"Your job is very important to us... please hold."
I'm doing a PhD in robotics solely because when I left my undergrad degree there were no jobs for someone with my skillset and qualifications. Sure, I made the mistake of not looking for work before I actually completed, but I was driven to spend all my time studying to get that last high distinction.
I'm using my post-grad as a form of on the job training in UAV design and control - the kind of work that's impossible to get as a graduate unless you've got years of experience. It's thrown me in the deep end and I've had to swim, lest I sink. Now I'm planning to use my experience, ideas and a bit of technology I've made along the way to begin a startup making flying things - it's exciting.
I receommend a PhD to anyone with the marks who's hopeleslly driven to succeed but doesn't know the next step after their degree. Whatever you do, though, don't start a degree without some idea of where you want to go. I said "flying robots" and that was barely specific enough. If you can't say "I want to do X, Y, and Z", then keep thinking about it. Oh, and you'll only ever accomplish W, btw, so make sure it's enough to write up with!
I'm a post-grad student working on a robot helicopter. It has extremely fast rotor blades and is a very real threat to humans if mishandled, so I can speak from personal experience in working on robot safety critical systems. To me, robot safety is more of the same problem faced by machine safety in general and more of the same problems faced by robots in particular.
Firstly all potentially dangerous machines require correct operation to avoid injury. No one can stop an idiot from ignoring a safety railing of a machine, automatic or robotic. To expect safety after defeating barriers and interlocks is stupid for microwave ovens and toasters, let alone high energy robotic systems. To expect robots to be safe outside of their defined operating parameters is like expecting a car to be made of sponge so no matter how much you ignore the speed limit, you can't kill anyone.
Secondly, robots seem to suffer a higher demand for intrinsic safety because of the expectation of robot cognition. The reality is, this is the place in robotics where the technology least developed. How do people possibly expect a robot to implement the three laws if the robot cannot flawlessly recognise a human as human? Furthermore, the three laws make no sense for a system that generally works far removed from humans. Putting the sensors and intelligence into a factory robot that should never encounter a human in its powered up state is just stupid. A simple barrier or laser curtain is more than adequate as an interlock, but as we've seen, that doesn't keep humans out all the time. The best the industrial roboticist can practically do is build robot systems that are reliable and stay within their work envelopes.
For mobile systems like my helicopter, it becomes more difficult since you can't control its workspace - cognition bites you in the arse once again. However, the reality of robot-human safety is that dangerous robots working around humans simply should not be autonomous without direct supervision. We are decades away from machines that are autonomously safe around humans. Software is brittle and easy to confuse no matter how well coded it is - you just can't capture all of the edge cases in the real world when you have millions of possible states. Don't imagine robot helicopters flying around people without a monkey in control - it just won't happen.
It seems to me that people need to change their idea of robots away from R2-D2 and towards reality. Treat industrial robots like an piece of industrial equipment - with respect. The same idiots who jump the fence of a robot workcell are probably the same idiots who misuse power tools and ignore safety directives. You just can't stop idiots from earning darwin awards. Seriously, it's not hard to stay outside the yellow tape.
Take your three laws and return them to science fiction, from which they came - they belong to the same realm of fantasy as FTL travel - which is to say, maybe one day but not for a long time.
I've been reading about the M400 since it appeared in Popular Mechanics in 1991. I think I'll enjoy the fuel savings while my grandkids play Duke Forever in the backseat and a Comanche zips past in the skylane next to me...
-Kell
It seems the obvious solution to me is for the console developers to sell modchips of their own, patent the technology and then sell them at a cost that they feel will offset their losses due to piracy.
That way, anyone else trying to sell modchips for their new console gets done for patent infringement, they make the same revenue and people who really 'need' modchips for whatever can have them for a small outlay.
Does that mean they can't rape their users on import games? Well... yess... but that cost will be defered by the cost of the modchip.
Slashdot Mirror
I've always been skeptical of kit robotics. I'm a robotics post-grad student so perhaps I'm spoiled by some of the gear I get to play with, but I've always found that robot kits seem kinda wimpy and limited. I'm so tired of seeing line followers and edge follower robots. Lego mindstorms was a step in the right direction - giving you a platform that can be used to make some truly interesting applications, but I still bemoan the underpowered motors they provide. One day I'd like to make and sell a robot kit with simple optical vision (say 32x32 pixels), some serious motors (50 W or so) and a linux based embedded system, with an RC radio jack and all of the interfacing worked out and a nice development environment. That would be a kit worth having and it would have rocked as a kid.
I wonder how many Facebook users compulsively follow the lives of celebrities in the tabloid media. Is turn-about fairplay? I wouldn't like to be subjected to that sort of scrutiny - I doubt many people would.
I spell it like an Australian would - that Australian being me, specifically. Seriously, arguing over the spelling of a neologism is pretty pathetic. You idiot.
Crickey!
The only way to win is not to play
I'd say this is worse than getting a job application rebuffed by a form letter. With a job application, they don't know you and you really are little more than a name (at best) and a number (at worst) to them. For termination of employment somebody really ought to know who you are and what service you have provided the company. It's inexcusible - and a good indication of what those up the ladder really think about their workers. "Your job is very important to us... please hold."
I'm doing a PhD in robotics solely because when I left my undergrad degree there were no jobs for someone with my skillset and qualifications. Sure, I made the mistake of not looking for work before I actually completed, but I was driven to spend all my time studying to get that last high distinction. I'm using my post-grad as a form of on the job training in UAV design and control - the kind of work that's impossible to get as a graduate unless you've got years of experience. It's thrown me in the deep end and I've had to swim, lest I sink. Now I'm planning to use my experience, ideas and a bit of technology I've made along the way to begin a startup making flying things - it's exciting. I receommend a PhD to anyone with the marks who's hopeleslly driven to succeed but doesn't know the next step after their degree. Whatever you do, though, don't start a degree without some idea of where you want to go. I said "flying robots" and that was barely specific enough. If you can't say "I want to do X, Y, and Z", then keep thinking about it. Oh, and you'll only ever accomplish W, btw, so make sure it's enough to write up with!
Better work and a sore back? I dunno about you,but I can't stand around typing all day without some serious pain.
"there's only one thing you can do...." Check their pockets for loose change?
I'm a post-grad student working on a robot helicopter. It has extremely fast rotor blades and is a very real threat to humans if mishandled, so I can speak from personal experience in working on robot safety critical systems. To me, robot safety is more of the same problem faced by machine safety in general and more of the same problems faced by robots in particular.
Firstly all potentially dangerous machines require correct operation to avoid injury. No one can stop an idiot from ignoring a safety railing of a machine, automatic or robotic. To expect safety after defeating barriers and interlocks is stupid for microwave ovens and toasters, let alone high energy robotic systems. To expect robots to be safe outside of their defined operating parameters is like expecting a car to be made of sponge so no matter how much you ignore the speed limit, you can't kill anyone.
Secondly, robots seem to suffer a higher demand for intrinsic safety because of the expectation of robot cognition. The reality is, this is the place in robotics where the technology least developed. How do people possibly expect a robot to implement the three laws if the robot cannot flawlessly recognise a human as human? Furthermore, the three laws make no sense for a system that generally works far removed from humans. Putting the sensors and intelligence into a factory robot that should never encounter a human in its powered up state is just stupid. A simple barrier or laser curtain is more than adequate as an interlock, but as we've seen, that doesn't keep humans out all the time. The best the industrial roboticist can practically do is build robot systems that are reliable and stay within their work envelopes.
For mobile systems like my helicopter, it becomes more difficult since you can't control its workspace - cognition bites you in the arse once again. However, the reality of robot-human safety is that dangerous robots working around humans simply should not be autonomous without direct supervision. We are decades away from machines that are autonomously safe around humans. Software is brittle and easy to confuse no matter how well coded it is - you just can't capture all of the edge cases in the real world when you have millions of possible states. Don't imagine robot helicopters flying around people without a monkey in control - it just won't happen.
It seems to me that people need to change their idea of robots away from R2-D2 and towards reality. Treat industrial robots like an piece of industrial equipment - with respect. The same idiots who jump the fence of a robot workcell are probably the same idiots who misuse power tools and ignore safety directives. You just can't stop idiots from earning darwin awards. Seriously, it's not hard to stay outside the yellow tape.
Take your three laws and return them to science fiction, from which they came - they belong to the same realm of fantasy as FTL travel - which is to say, maybe one day but not for a long time.
I'm just waiting for releases 'roady roadhog', 'grimey groundhog', and "boundy hog-tied-hog".
I've been reading about the M400 since it appeared in Popular Mechanics in 1991. I think I'll enjoy the fuel savings while my grandkids play Duke Forever in the backseat and a Comanche zips past in the skylane next to me... -Kell
It seems the obvious solution to me is for the console developers to sell modchips of their own, patent the technology and then sell them at a cost that they feel will offset their losses due to piracy.
That way, anyone else trying to sell modchips for their new console gets done for patent infringement, they make the same revenue and people who really 'need' modchips for whatever can have them for a small outlay.
Does that mean they can't rape their users on import games? Well... yess... but that cost will be defered by the cost of the modchip.
Thoughts?
-Kell
I wonder what lucky actor will find the role that will make (or break?) their career. How will that effect the series itself? Interesting potential.