Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments
Search

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

LivingCreatures- The Beginning Of 'I, Robot?'

Posted by timothy on Sun Jul 18, 2004 03:49 PM
from the little-freaky-there-now dept.
Robotics Technology
An Anonymous Reader writes "LivingCreatures.com has released several new photos of the humanoid robot platform that it developed for the USC Interaction Lab. The yet to be named robot is about the same size as an 18-month-old child and will serve as a human-robot interaction (HRI) testbed for studies involving imitation, learning, and the effects that interaction with humanoid robots has on children."
+ -
story
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

LivingCreatures- The Beginning Of 'I, Robot?' 50 Comments More /

 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.

  • one question about functionality (Score:5, Funny)

    by peculiarmethod (301094) on Sunday July 18 2004, @03:51PM (#9733106) Journal
    .. umm, do they come with a routine to retrieve beer from the fridge?

    God, i hope so.

  • Housemaid Robots (Score:5, Insightful)

    by superpulpsicle (533373) on Sunday July 18 2004, @03:51PM (#9733107)
    If they can figure out how to build an affordable robot that's smart enough and capable of cleaning any house effectively, it'll send the robotics industry to new heights. Until then, all these research are a sleeper.

    • Re:Housemaid Robots (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Lispy (136512) on Sunday July 18 2004, @03:57PM (#9733142) Homepage
      This might sound harsh but a human maid would be so much cheaper that I could employ him/her for many years while giving him/her work.
      • Nonsense! If the robot can perform the task more efficiently then it will eventually become cheaper. That's basic economics.

        "I could employ him/her for many years while giving him/her work."

        This is the same as saying that open source kills jobs.
      • One human maid might be cheaper how about the 4 needed for 24/7 staffing without ovetime? What if the robot could do other things like say drive your car? Perform maitnence around the house? What happens when there are hacks for the robot so it gets new abilities added free? What happens when the robots become 1/10 as expensive does your math still work out? Humans cost more and more to employ technology becomes cheaper and cheaper. Granted there might be usefull sociatal things that employing a human

      • Re:Housemaid Robots (Score:5, Funny)

        by 3vi1 (544505) <evil_NO@SPAMhotmail.com> on Sunday July 18 2004, @08:45PM (#9734668) Homepage Journal
        But what's your average geek going to choose?

        1) Interact with another human being.

        or

        2) A robot maid that doesn't go through his porn.

    • I don't know.

      I used to have the neighbors named the Jetsons, and they had a robot maid. Not only did it look like it was designed in the 60s or 70s, but it made all sorts of "beep" and "boop" noises. The thing just wasn't very quite.

      Not only that, I seem to remember that it would make wise-cracks at its owners from time to time.

      I think I'll wait on the robot maid. Maybe a new roomba to hold me over.

  • Humanoid Robots (Score:5, Insightful)

    by The_Mystic_For_Real (766020) on Sunday July 18 2004, @03:53PM (#9733117)
    I'm not convinced of the usefulness of humanoid robots, except for providing disabled humans with prothetic limbs and maybe organs eventually.

    It would seem more useful to build robots that are designed with the task they must perform in mind. Therefore, they could perform it far better than any human.

    • Re:Humanoid Robots (Score:5, Insightful)

      by bersl2 (689221) on Sunday July 18 2004, @03:56PM (#9733141) Journal
      It would seem more useful to build robots that are designed with the task they must perform in mind. Therefore, they could perform it far better than any human.

      What if their task is human relations? Granted the AI to support such a task is a long way off, but the humanoid form would surely fit the function there.

      • Re:Humanoid Robots (Score:5, Insightful)

        by Anonymous Coward on Sunday July 18 2004, @03:59PM (#9733167)
        Hence C3PO's form: he was a diplomatic translator droid. R2D2 was, in contrast, designed to fix spaceships designed to be fixed by R2 units...

        The later star wars sucked, but that was one of the really insightful things in the first movies.
        • I was thinking the line "I am C3PO, human-cyborg relations..." But I didn't want to be cliche and use a Star Wars quote as my main support. OTOH, it does fit the point well.
    • Ah, that's why they are humaniod! In today's world, everything we design, we design for humans. Doorhandls, Cars, Switches, Dishwashers, Phones, Pens, Steps, Ladders, ... all designed for humans. If you want ONE robot to use all the things that allready exist, then that robot will look very similar to us.

    • Re:Humanoid Robots (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Dark Lord Seth (584963) on Sunday July 18 2004, @03:59PM (#9733165) Journal

      However, if you model a robot after an average human, you can easily give away boring human tasks. Even public ones. For example, you could design a special excavator robot, a special pipeline construction robot, etc. However, you can also make 5 standard humanoid robots and put one in a normal excavtor, have one fit the piping, etc. Remember that everything so far has been designed for human use.

      Also, I think it would be easier to deal with humanoid robots in public space then lumbering machines.

      • Re:Humanoid Robots (Score:4, Funny)

        by StateOfTheUnion (762194) on Sunday July 18 2004, @04:56PM (#9733507) Homepage
        Also, I think it would be easier to deal with humanoid robots in public space then lumbering machines.

        That sounds naive . . . instead of "cow tipping", teenagers would go "robot tipping" . . . knocking over poor defenseless janitorial custodial and landscaping robots with extreme prejudice.

        Lumbering machines are meant to withstand abuse from vandals and pranksters . . .

      • We already have oil-rig drilling pipeline construction robots. After the Piper Alpha disaster, the oil companies looked at ways of reducing their insurance costs. One way was to automate the construction of drilling pipes. Instead of having entire crews of men handling drill pipes on a platform 100 miles off the coast, they funded research into using machines. Essentially, they got the process down to a single guy operating a crane to pick up and move drilling pipes and a control system to accurately place
    • I'm not convinced of the usefulness of humanoid robots, except for providing disabled humans with prothetic limbs and maybe organs eventually.It would seem more useful to build robots that are designed with the task they must perform in mind. Therefore, they could perform it far better than any human.

      There are in fact *many* advantages to humanoid style robots. Thusly enumerated, they are:

      • Our world and its technologies are currently optimized for human usage. Doors, sidewalks, cars, sinks, tools, etc are all designed specifically to be used by a humanoid. That's not to say that we cannot design new things for use by robots, however it may simply be easier to get robots to adapt to our world rather than vice versa.
      • Most people do not like interacting with machines. Human interaction is what we have evolved to be optimized for. Our brain has special structures for face tracking/recognition that are far faster than similar generalized systems in the brain. Many people are uncomfortable with and intimidated by high technology, but would not be with friendly, humanlike robots.
      • Many people are lonely. For the same reason that these people keep pets, having a humanoid robot would provide companionship. This is a bit dangerous however for elderly without relatives, or someone who's constantly travelling, this isn't such a bad idea.
      • Humanoid robots, given enough intelligence and physical strength, could stand in for humans for a variety of activities, as needed. For instance, a restaurant low on staff may off robotic waiting at a reduced price (plus no need to tip!) during busy times for those who don't mind it. Also, through telepresence, you could use a humanoid robot as an "avatar" representing you physically rather than virtually at a remote location. It may even have your face, or one somewhat similar that mimics your expressions in real time. A bit scary, but so was television when it came out (you can *SEE* people in other cities, in your own living room!)
      • Last but not least, there is the coolness factor. I think many people would find a humanoid robot to be much cooler than, say, a platform with some arms.


      Yes, for industrial purposes, there's good reason to optimize the shape and form of a robot for specific tasks, however nature has provided us with an extremely adaptable physique, and we have so many reasons to emulate it.

      Cheers,
      Justin

      Here at a JPL, a group that shares our workspace recently got AIBOs, and I was shocked to find myself treating it just like a real dog, and enjoying petting it. It's.... just a machine, I know, but it acts a lot like a dog.

      • Re:Humanoid Robots (Score:5, Insightful)

        by FleaPlus (6935) on Sunday July 18 2004, @05:20PM (#9733667) Homepage Journal
        > Most people do not like interacting with machines. Human interaction is what we have evolved to be optimized for. Our brain has special structures for face tracking/recognition that are far faster than similar generalized systems in the brain. Many people are uncomfortable with and intimidated by high technology, but would not be with friendly, humanlike robots.

        You have to be careful about the Uncanny Valley [wikipedia.org], though, at least according to a particular Japanese roboticist. Apparently once you get within a certain closeness of anthropomorphism, small things which aren't "quite right" can really freak people out.
          • get a robot to look atonishingly human, but noooooot quite, and it'll wind up looking like a fresh corpse; very human, but not lifelike. that's not exactly comforting.

            approximating would be fine by me, though. I think I'd actually prefer one with chromed metal, anyways.

  • Bow Down! (Score:5, Funny)

    by edrams (778721) on Sunday July 18 2004, @03:55PM (#9733127) Homepage
    I, for one, welcome our new 18-month-old child-sized robot overlords.

  • Hopefully... (Score:5, Funny)

    by cloudkj (685320) on Sunday July 18 2004, @03:55PM (#9733129)
    Hopefully the robot will be able to handle the tantrums of the terrible twos. But I predict the average robot will be disassembled and/or devoured by the child within a short period of time.

  • Codependant people (Score:5, Funny)

    by MisanthropicProgram (763655) on Sunday July 18 2004, @03:56PM (#9733140)
    ...the robot appears to be displaying quite different emotions.

    I can just see it now, "It looks angry. Oh no! I wonder what I did to make it mad?"
    Robot changes positions. "It's happy! Now if I can only keep it happy."
    "Oh oh, it's looking mad again."

    Ok, it's been a slow day.

  • Not named? Hardly. (Score:5, Funny)

    by Tony (765) on Sunday July 18 2004, @03:58PM (#9733160) Homepage Journal
    The yet to be named robot is about the same size as an 18-month-old child . . .

    It *does* have a name:Twikki.

    Duh.

  • Doing Right Things and Doing Things Right (Score:5, Interesting)

    by powerpuffgirls (758362) on Sunday July 18 2004, @04:00PM (#9733171)
    Why are we trying to create robots that are smart, interactive and intellingent like human? We can't even create a human the way we wanted it, why do we think we can on a machine?

    Shouldn't we concentrate on making robots doing the things right, i.e. doing the assigned tasks right, instead of trying to design robots that can decide what are the right things to do.
    • The immediate use of these "primitive" humanoid robots is probably going to be limited to entertainment and novelty, but you touch on a point that is at the very heart of why we attempt to create humanoid robots: We want artificial "friends" to do what we can't persuade actual humans to do for us.

      Essentially, it's giving people the ability to say, "Hey, you won't scratch my back? Fine. I'll just go out and buy a robot, and then I won't need you at all!"

      It's the social equivalent to masterbation, and yet

    • Shouldn't we concentrate on making robots doing the things right, i.e. doing the assigned tasks right, instead of trying to design robots that can decide what are the right things to do.

      No? Why must robotics development be limited to robots that can only complete simple tasks?

      Sure, specialized robots can be immensely useful, but why can't we simultaneously follow another path and research the possibility of artificial life?

      More than mere slave laborers, these thinking, intelligent robots would be somet

  • Imagine a.... (Score:5, Funny)

    by cr0y (670718) on Sunday July 18 2004, @04:03PM (#9733189) Homepage
    Talking armadillo...

    What did you think I was gonna say?

  • Antimatter thoughts (Score:5, Funny)

    by Decaff (42676) on Sunday July 18 2004, @04:03PM (#9733190)
    Well, I hope it's not getting us closer to 'I, Robot'. Remember, the Azimov robots used positronic brains. Even a simple headache could result in the destruction of a city block.
    • Anyone got any suggestions how a positronic brain works exactly? The Star Trek TNG writers gave Data one too, probably as a nod to Asimov (spelled with an 's' BTW). I've never seen even a vague excuse for a description of how one works. However we can do some maths to try and see how much energy is involved.

      A single positron/electron has a rest mass of about 0.511 MeV (million electron volts). A proton is in the region of 938 MeV. Converting electon volts to Joules (with Google) tells me "one electron volt

    • For a brief synopsis of the positronic meme, see here [asimovonline.com].

  • face only a mother could love (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Pilferer (311795) on Sunday July 18 2004, @04:11PM (#9733218)
    Jesus Christ that's creepy!

    A good read for anyone making "robots" : the uncanny valley [arclight.net]

    This is just a little TOO "deformed child" for my taste.

  • Eh. (Score:5, Funny)

    by sockonafish (228678) on Sunday July 18 2004, @04:35PM (#9733367)
    I'm not buying a robot until they produce one that runs on beer, insults my friends, and steals from people.

  • um .... (Score:3, Interesting)

    by jdkane (588293) on Sunday July 18 2004, @04:39PM (#9733394)
    effects that interaction with humanoid robots has on children

    I saw the pictures ... it looks like a "Chucky" [imdb.com] robot for kids. I don't know what effect it will have on kids, but I know the thing scares me shitless.

    Ya, way to go USC ... Great interface! Keep 'em coming.

  • The economic effects of humanoid Robots. (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Moderation abuser (184013) on Sunday July 18 2004, @04:40PM (#9733402)
    Truly economy shaking. AI will have to advance significantly in order to handle our environment, I can't think of a reason it couldn't advance to the point where it can outperform most humans. This means that 90%, 95% unemployment (euphemistically called leisure time) will be the order of the day. The world economy will have to change.

      • Nope, that's not likely to happen. Most likely there will be a few people that control the robots and live prosperous, while the other 95% is dying because of malnutrition (no job, no money etc).

        It does scare me a bit I must admit. I can think of a lot of jobs in our company that are already within reach of this robots capabilities...

  • Robotic capability is accelerating (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Saeger (456549) <farrellj&gmail,com> on Sunday July 18 2004, @04:45PM (#9733441) Homepage
    There's a crossover point for each kind of job where robotic labor outperforms human labor in terms of efficiency and cost. Soon to be out of the job are millions of burger flippers, truckers, pilots, and others, who suddenly find themselves technologically unemployed (and waiting for the economy to suddenly 'create' millions of new jobs that can be better filled by humans - yeah right).

    This automation trend will continue to accelerate, but what *could* be a paradise is increasingly looking like a corporate dystopia because the productivity gains, even today, are being hoarded by the wealthy few at the highest rate in history. [blogspot.com]

    When welfare/livingwage is still a dirty word, stuff like this isn't funny: "Go away or I will replace you with a very small shell script."

    --

      • In 2001, I was working in Chicago. Many of the McDonalds there were using a robot drink dispenser. As soon as an order was keyed in, a rotating platform would have a cup dropped onto it, where the thing would rotate the cup underneath the correct fountain and dispense the drink, to be rotated again for a lid to be popped onto it. Was interesting how it would react to multiple drinks when they weren't all the same flavor. It would put all 4 cups down, then rotate back and forth so that the flavors were in the order keyed in, presumably so that stupid wageslaves wouldn't get them mixed up when handing to customers. Seemed like it would be rather reliable to me.

        And practically all of the stores I've been to have the french fry basket dispensers. Seems a small step to have the thing drop the baskets into the fryers.

        I do agree about the burgers, which seem more difficult, but what about the rest of a fast food joint? Many of the tasks, including "building" the sandwiches seem easily within the realm of automation.

  • Everyone can relax.... (Score:5, Funny)

    by Artifakt (700173) on Sunday July 18 2004, @05:09PM (#9733591)
    ...I RTFA'ed (yes, I'm odd that way), and the thing has no red LEDs what-so-ever. Since red LED's are required to set the evil bit in humanoid robots, we are all safe.

  • Robot? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by TechniMyoko (670009) on Sunday July 18 2004, @05:15PM (#9733625) Homepage
    Robots are single function machines like the ones ford uses. The multipurpous ones shaped like a humanoid are called androids

    • Re:Robot? (Score:5, Informative)

      by freshmkr (132808) on Sunday July 18 2004, @10:53PM (#9735301) Homepage
      Robots are single function machines like the ones ford uses. The multipurpous ones shaped like a humanoid are called androids

      I disagree.

      I'm getting a graduate degree in robotics. My school has a few humanoids. We call them robots. We've got arms. We call those robots too. Same with the trashcan-shaped research robots, the Segway-platform robots, the AIBOs, the helicopters, the farm equipment, the cars, the blimp, and so on. All robots. Nobody here thinks the term "robot" refers to "single function machines", huge arms, industrial robots, or anything you find in an ordinary automated factory. It's a much more general category.

      "Androids" are, I guess, a subset of "robots", but nobody here uses that term very much. I suspect it won't be very popular until we have robots that are more like Data.

      Until then,
      --Tom

  • Remember Ananova? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Animats (122034) on Sunday July 18 2004, @05:56PM (#9733876) Homepage
    This business of "faking emotions" is what robotics people do after they've failed to deal with the physical world. It gets great press, but doesn't do much. Cog at MIT is the most noteable example.

    If you want to see fake talking heads, try Ananova video reports. [ananova.com]

    The Honda walking robot, though, is for real. They have a clue.

  • That thing isn't going in MY home! (Score:4, Funny)

    by cfuse (657523) on Sunday July 18 2004, @06:08PM (#9733942) Homepage

    That's got to be one of the most wimpy robots ever. Why can't I get the T-800 from Terminator? I would happily have either the fleshed up Austrian look or the skinless metal skeleton with the glowing red eyes. Why do these robot researchers think that I want the pansy-bot?

  • gee, anthropomorphize much? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by jd142 (129673) on Sunday July 18 2004, @06:32PM (#9734085) Homepage
    It is interesting to note that the facial expressions are not changed from picture to picture, but the robot appears to be displaying quite different emotions.

    Um, no. I didn't see any difference in the face at all in the pictures. The only slight difference I noticed was in the last one where the lighting was better and I could see the full eyes. I hope the science that comes out of this is objective and useful.

  • WTF? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by glwtta (532858) on Sunday July 18 2004, @07:37PM (#9734392) Homepage
    Ok, that is going to rize up against us and establish and new perfect society of our mechanical superiors? I don't think so. It's one of the creepiest things I've ever seen, I'll grant you that, but if they want to fulfill that multitude of hysterical science fiction prediction they are going to have to try a little harder.

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest © 1997-2009 Geeknet, Inc.